The pathetic hidden agenda

[Bertrand]

aushra had this to say which I think is relevant

These same standards refer to the well-being of a person. Sensorik trusts his feelings and does not doubt when he is healthy, when he is ill: he is "feeling". This doctor must obey his concrete, real sensations, and not he unreasonable diagnoses of the doctor. If one doctor "did not find anything", he achieves his and goes to another. Intuitive, their own feelings seem less objective than diagnosis of a doctor. The diagnosis is a "normative", and it behaves accordingly to the diagnosis, and not according to the state of health.

[Multiply]

.

[Rebelondeck]

@Doggy ILEs tend to place things and others at the centre of perspective; their values and personal needs seem to be an afterthought to their primary interests although they do seem to have lots of wants. When ILEs consider their own needs, their perspectives can often have deep rooted concerns about how others would react. ILEs tend to realize a need for caregivers or people that will provide personal support because they don't want to be bothered themselves. Therefore, they occasionally tear themselves away from their own thoughts and make feeble attempts to woo supporters to their side, and it is this that is construed as needing “to be loved”.

a.k.a. I/O

[Multiply]

.

[theum nathair]

a brick wall of morality where nothing gets through.

On balance, this should be Ji. Dynamic Ip are fundamentally more flexible than static Ij.

There could be something here at function six.. An SLE, not wishing to be seen as an evil person, might have learnt to say the sensitive thing; an ILI, foreseeing drama, might have learnt to do the right thing. Still, in neither case can it be termed moral, foundational, nor customary, because a cool-headed process has preceded it. There are people in the world who are actually good, and kind, and there may be a philosophical component at work such as in the case of INFx types, yet their behaviours are still unforced, perhaps even innate.

Note the frequency; it's hardly the typical mode...

The focus on one's hidden agenda is also manifested in a "patting yourself on the back" way, when you are reassuring others
...
So if you see someone behaving in a pathetic way, just remember -- on other occasions, it's you doing it.

So while the original post was cheeky and amusing, I think the HA notion has been extrapolated too far, to the point where forumites have thought a hands-on, wilful, improvisational approach might be Se agenda, forgetting that Ni/Ne in LIE constantly runs eventuality scenarios and prepares itself by having already mentally run through long if/then chains. A number of older 'LIE' forumites are probably SLE, just for instance (the ones typing LIE 8; believing in systems which weren’t designed to fit together 'modifying' the essential components of one another requires too many unnecessary assumptions)

Alternatively it's conceivable for HA behaviour to manifest in omissions (omitting demand for diligence and consistency (Fi>Ti) in ILI can protect Ti polr), absences (absence of recrimination (Ti>Fi) in IEI can protect Fi polr), negative behaviours of various types which encourage the dual's creative function to flourish, thus supplying the system with the needed element indirectly. Understandably negative behaviours are a bit complex and more difficult to trace

Still, awkward + socially compelled/required can be role function; very strong pattern behaviour can be base or unhealthy programme (8th function)... how people who read this post early on untangled these three from HA is anyone's guess, though it seems they weren't necessarily clear on things themselves

[Expansion]

On balance, this should be Ji. Dynamic Ip are fundamentally more flexible than static Ij.

There could be something here at function six.. An SLE, not wishing to be seen as an evil person, might have learnt to say the sensitive thing; an ILI, foreseeing drama, might have learnt to do the right thing. Still, in neither case can it be termed moral, foundational, nor customary, because a cool-headed process has preceded it. There are people in the world who are actually good, and kind, and there may be a philosophical component at work such as in the case of INFx types, yet their behaviours are still unforced, perhaps even innate.

Note the frequency; it's hardly the typical mode...


So while the original post was cheeky and amusing, I think the HA notion has been extrapolated too far, to the point where forumites have thought a hands-on, wilful, improvisational approach might be Se agenda, forgetting that Ni/Ne in LIE constantly runs eventuality scenarios and prepares itself by having already mentally run through long if/then chains. A number of older 'LIE' forumites are probably SLE, just for instance (the ones typing LIE 8; believing in systems which weren’t designed to fit together 'modifying' the essential components of one another requires too many unnecessary assumptions)

Alternatively it's conceivable for HA behaviour to manifest in omissions (omitting demand for diligence and consistency (Fi>Ti) in ILI can protect Ti polr), absences (absence of recrimination (Ti>Fi) in IEI can protect Fi polr), negative behaviours of various types which encourage the dual's creative function to flourish, thus supplying the system with the needed element indirectly. Understandably negative behaviours are a bit complex and more difficult to trace

Still, awkward + socially compelled/required can be role function; very strong pattern behaviour can be base or unhealthy programme (8th function)... how people who read this post early on untangled these three from HA is anyone's guess, though it seems they weren't necessarily clear on things themselves

But ask yourself 611 if this LIE fits SLE from other angles. Is he abstract overall?

Typing by snap shots like in finding holes in a types thinking, and positing a sensing type should have cross checks to see if the ego even lines up. He is relationship seeking for one. It's the overall behavior that types someone. Fe HA is about using and making relationships in utility fashion, it's the fun in it objectively. Fi in here is substituted for Ti reasons. No reasons it doesn't work.

SLE and LIE can look alike. They are drawn into being business types. One conquers on the surface, to acquire in acquisition - Se, and another is deeply systematic in finding their own niche from Ni and Fi. Alonzo typed himself as one, and was typed as SLE by a typing service.