SLI-LIE Supervision Relations (ISTp and ENTj)

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I'd be interested to hear peoples thoughts on ISTp's supervising ENTj's.

Here's what I find when dealing with ENTj's; they basically don't know what they're doing.

Allow me to elaborate; there is an ENTj at work who I think, seems to be instinctively, that they are always missing the point or unable to execute things. Infact at times I've thought they are trying to deliberately deceive.

For instance, we are both focused on productivity ( Te) but they seem largely unaware of the details to execute something in the here and now, it can be simple as thinking on ones feet to solve a work related problem which requires immediate attention to organising something off the cuff like where things are on their desk, things people have said that is up to date information to factor into the problem. Analysing the tools we have at hand. I think this stresses them out.

There is one I know who seems to me to be really rather scatty and doesn't know where things are or leaves actual objects in places they can't remember which are required at hand.

So when this happens it puzzles me, and i'm like, do you remember this, where is that, I think to myself, 'why don't you know that information so that we can proceed'.

On the other hand though, when they start talking about long term plans, they can actually sound quite impressive. But it is when they try to speak with confidence about actually solving things that I find myself at first wondering if they are maybe deliberately missing the point or I try to work out what's going on in their heads to be coming to conclusions missing things out. They often do this while assuming a way of interacting which is with confidence, and I wonder if that confidence is an act or a deception; it probably isn't, they are just unaware they aren't aware of what the details are and indeed correct and necessary factual information in order to correctly establish the best action.

How do you guys find supervision of ENTj's? I'd be interested in ENTj's and other types as well as Delta responding too if you don't mind.

Thanks.

[DirectorAbbie]

Brilliand's boss is an ENTj. My mom is an ISTp. He seems like a pretty sensible guy. But when my mom talks about him, he seems incompetent.

[FDG]

I don't know. I've never had too many problems with ISTps, but I also have never worked at jobs which required extreme attention to details, which I know it is probably not my comparative advantage. As far as friendship goes, I'm friends with a good number of ISTps, and I never had problems with them, but I don't know how do they feel about me.

As far as not knowing what I'm doing: that's true if it's a task I've never executed before, but not generally true if it's a task I have executed before. Which, well, I assume is true for most people.

[Lobo]

Allow me to elaborate; there is an ENTj at work who I think, seems to be instinctively, that they are always missing the point or unable to execute things. Infact at times I've thought they are trying to deliberately deceive.

Well, the case I know is different. I'm in a study group with an ENTj and ISTp actually. The ENTj is usually on top of things, and takes the initiative in organizing when we'll meet. When he doesn't know something, he has no problem admitting it, so he really doesn't try to deceive us. He is very much on top of technology, and always has some kind way of solving a problem that involves technology, either some kind of program in the computer, graphing calculator, or knows how to fix problems we might have with a particular software.

I think that if there is any "supervision" based on what I've seen is that the ENTj usually comes off as uptight, not really "laid back," to which the ISTp tells him to loosen up.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Brilliand's boss is an ENTj. My mom is an ISTp. He seems like a pretty sensible guy. But when my mom talks about him, he seems incompetent.

Yeah I can understand this, it can seem this way, although I have been thinking it could well not be the case, at least for some i've worked with. Socionics helping us to understand each other to make things more..chill? ya de ya

I don't know. I've never had too many problems with ISTps, but I also have never worked at jobs which required extreme attention to details, which I know it is probably not my comparative advantage. As far as friendship goes, I'm friends with a good number of ISTps, and I never had problems with them, but I don't know how do they feel about me.

As far as not knowing what I'm doing: that's true if it's a task I've never executed before, but not generally true if it's a task I have executed before. Which, well, I assume is true for most people.

Well, fwiw, I think you seem like a cool guy. You seem to have an adventuresome spirit, and with you what I see on forum, I typically can relate to your posts. Probably your, at least what I see, kinda approach to life is appealing to ISTp's, but you probably have a good range of friends, I would imagine, fwiw.

Well, the case I know is different. I'm in a study group with an ENTj and ISTp actually. The ENTj is usually on top of things, and takes the initiative in organizing when we'll meet. When he doesn't know something, he has no problem admitting it, so he really doesn't try to deceive us. He is very much on top of technology, and always has some kind way of solving a problem that involves technology, either some kind of program in the computer, graphing calculator, or knows how to fix problems we might have with a particular software.

I think that if there is any "supervision" based on what I've seen is that the ENTj usually comes off as uptight, not really "laid back," to which the ISTp tells him to loosen up.

I can understand this. At the moment i'm thinking of one in particular that i'm working with. To elaborate, the environment is rather high pressured, with results and production high on the agenda. There seems to be redundancies every so often as well, what with the economic climate, but typically we have probably too much work, but budget constraints on staff. Such an environment leads to different pressures I imagine.

Something perhaps a bit more related to the environment you describe, is I recall a previous job where things where more 'chill'. There was an ENTj who worked there who had a bit of a motor mouth. He seemed to me pretty high strung, which in turn could again be a disconnection from his immediate environment.

He dressed to me somewhat bizarely. I remember he asked me to help carry things from his car, he'd got designer clothes I presume on the cheap, but it was things like bright orange tops with something like 'Prada' written on it. I declined the offer of purchasing one lol.

In the end his motormouth cost him his job, he said something, which perhaps he didn't actually mean, but he said it anyway to someone which really resulted in no other course of action than to result in his sacking.

I've been friends with an ENTj in the past. Different environments and indeed different levels of 'competition' seem to result in different things.

Thank you for your reply Sereno, it was interesting to me.

And thanks to all so far :-). I don't really create too many threads and I appreciate the input I've had from folks.

Different perspectives, situations and all that.

Anyway, I ramble now perhaps, off to have something to eat this evening and no doubt collapse on couch for a while. Late night last evening, early start today..

[Lobo]

No problem Cyclops. Well, I think this is going to be my last post anyway before going into another extended absence from the forum. I'm waiting for the conditions to be just right... Right now it seems too hostile and confusing. Peace.

[marooned]

Places where I'm expected to have my desk organized a certain way or know the location of every object at every point in time.... that would be an overwhelming nightmare to me. It doesn't matter where objects are as long as it all gets done on time! :tongue:

[FDG]

I think pretty much every ENTj with some self-awareness will recognize that attention to details in everyday life, or in moments in which we do not know beforehand that we have to pay attention to details, is not his strongest suit. The other question is, is this a fault? I think it's a fault when they (we) start talking about plans, or new ideas, without having an at least decent awareness of what it takes to execute them - and that's when an ISTp imho even should tell the ENTj to shut the fuck up; I think it's not a "fault" when we miss something during a rushed session of work, in which maybe we're trying to be on top of things. To be honest though, I've seen so many very Ni ENTj recurringly fall in the first of the two errors outlined above, that I suppose Cyclops is right in what he says.

[Grek0]

I'd be interested to hear peoples thoughts on ISTp's supervising ENTj's.

Here's what I find when dealing with ENTj's; they basically don't know what they're doing.

Allow me to elaborate; there is an ENTj at work who I think, seems to be instinctively, that they are always missing the point or unable to execute things. Infact at times I've thought they are trying to deliberately deceive.

For instance, we are both focused on productivity ( Te) but they seem largely unaware of the details to execute something in the here and now, it can be simple as thinking on ones feet to solve a work related problem which requires immediate attention to organising something off the cuff like where things are on their desk, things people have said that is up to date information to factor into the problem. Analysing the tools we have at hand. I think this stresses them out.

There is one I know who seems to me to be really rather scatty and doesn't know where things are or leaves actual objects in places they can't remember which are required at hand.

So when this happens it puzzles me, and i'm like, do you remember this, where is that, I think to myself, 'why don't you know that information so that we can proceed'.

On the other hand though, when they start talking about long term plans, they can actually sound quite impressive. But it is when they try to speak with confidence about actually solving things that I find myself at first wondering if they are maybe deliberately missing the point or I try to work out what's going on in their heads to be coming to conclusions missing things out. They often do this while assuming a way of interacting which is with confidence, and I wonder if that confidence is an act or a deception; it probably isn't, they are just unaware they aren't aware of what the details are and indeed correct and necessary factual information in order to correctly establish the best action.

How do you guys find supervision of ENTj's? I'd be interested in ENTj's and other types as well as Delta responding too if you don't mind.

Thanks.

Am not a ENTj's supervisor, but I know them well. Their confidence is, indeed, sometimes a deception. ENTj's attach a lot of importance to appearing "credible" to their interlocutors, at ALL times. Hence when they find themselves in a position where they are "cornered" into discussing an issue that they realise they don't actually grasp very well, and the other party just might have a better understanding, they will sort of panick internally and project that confidence outwardly, insisting in their position. The usual forcefulness with which they argue a point, even if they don;t actually know it well enough and they realise their position is most likely wrong, lets them get away with being semi-ignorant (the other side will probably quit the debate before the ENTj is fully exposed as being wrong).

This is the thing that I find most dissapointing about them for they are, in general, extremely competent and fluent intellects. Their sense of self-worth (or shuld I say, ego) is weaker than most are lead to believe

[duality is cringe]

This sounds more like ENFj to me.

Why?

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[duality is cringe]

Realizing you don't understand a subject as well as you thought you did and being either too proud or just not wanting to admitt to that has nothing to do with lacking confidence in Te IMO. I'm not even sure how you reached that conclusion.

Resistance to admitt to lack of knowledge during heated, on-the-spot intellectual discourse, especially if said person previously considered themselves quite knowledgeable on a particular subject, is exactly the type of behavior one would expect from EJ/Se-super id IME.

Some Si-EJs could just as easily compentently respond when being confronted on "Se" (though I'm not sure what you mean by that without specifics) without appearing to be cornered or as if they are projecting a fake image.

[duality is cringe]

When someone cannot take correction, and is unwilling to accept input into something, getting very defensive, it's more likely that it's something that they only WANT to look good at, rather than something they actually are good at. You obviously won't take input into something that you are good at, when you know that you're right, and the other person is wrong. But to get super-defensive and need to look right, even though you know that you're not, that's something else. And what Greko describes sounds like someone who is NOT strong in Te, but wants to appear as though they are, which is why they are so protective of themselves, and defensive, lest anyone see through the false image.

When challenged on the spot about something someone previously considered themselves to be knowledgeable about, ppl can feel insecure and get stubborn. I think you're misattributing typical human bevaviors as having something to do with Te and misreading intentions.

[Grek0]

Resistance to admitt to lack of knowledge during heated, on-the-spot intellectual discourse, especially if said person previously considered themselves quite knowledgeable on a particular subject, is exactly the type of behavior one would expect from EJ/Se-super id IME.

This is exactly when the reaction I described surfaces: when the ENTjs have entered the debate as most knowledgeable on the subject at hand and their credibillity (to which they attach huge importance as it is one of their means of assuming leadership) is threatened as ignorance or gross misconceptions from their part starts becoming apparent during a debate

I have observed this is in three ENTjs, all three of whom I know very well and for several years. They are not ENFjs; not even close

[UDP]

I can understand Cyclops' opening post

Am not a ENTj's supervisor, but I know them well. Their confidence is, indeed, sometimes a deception. ENTj's attach a lot of importance to appearing "credible" to their interlocutors, at ALL times. Hence when they find themselves in a position where they are "cornered" into discussing an issue that they realise they don't actually grasp very well, and the other party just might have a better understanding, they will sort of panick internally and project that confidence outwardly, insisting in their position. The usual forcefulness with which they argue a point, even if they don;t actually know it well enough and they realise their position is most likely wrong, lets them get away with being semi-ignorant (the other side will probably quit the debate before the ENTj is fully exposed as being wrong).

This is the thing that I find most dissapointing about them for they are, in general, extremely competent and fluent intellects. Their sense of self-worth (or shuld I say, ego) is weaker than most are lead to believe

This sounds more like ENFj to me.

Does it?
LIE's can be that way as well. I ran into one of these ... the thing is, it's an LIE E3. We had some serious clashes.

Not all LIEs are that way, particularly the E8s or the non-E3s. But the E3 LIEs are absolutely as described there.

LIEs are ime not prone to fake knowing something, but say what they do know/think, and say "I don't know" if they don't. Also Greko as an ILI, shouldn't imo see LIEs as very different from him, yes, a different emphasis, but not an entirely different set of values. The kind of reaction that he describes, comes from imo a lack of confidence in their Te, that they have to build up a protective image around it as to not get "found out." An LIE shouldn't be lacking confidence in their leading function.

It's not really like that, it'snot about Te. It's about opportunities - it's all very mercenary. The LIE E3's try very hard to put on an image of success, but it's all by way of Te - the Fe they use is extremely rigid, although if they work hard enough they can be more polished.... which could be something an E3 LIE would do.

It's similar to how a Se-leading person doesn't have to "act Se" and doesn't get their panties in a bunch when someone challenges them in that element, but someone who wants to project that kind of image does get frantic and panicky, feeling cornered, and accentuates how much confidence they have in it. I'm assuming that the most likely to "seem ENTj" while not actually being ENTj and having low-Te would be an ENFj.

There is a huge difference between an ENFj trying to be Te and an ENTj trying to be Fe.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Grek0, I fully agree with what you've wrote, and have experienced it also. Without elaborating fully here, I think it comes about from an unhealthy focus on their HA Se function. In contrast I know an LIE just now IRL who is more 'humble', for want of a word. I suspect this LIE is a healthy one. I'm not sure it's too good to get overly focused on seeking functions (or PoLR for that matter), it's one of the reasons we've got duals, to assist in these things for us. We're not supermen but maybe Se 6th function when overly focused on such as in the LIE's you describe sort of makes them try to appear to be, and yes, it does seem to taint a persona/type with a lot of natural talent.

Of course with these sort of LIE's, it's just an illusion of power they create and as such they are living in a world of worrying that their bubble will burst.

[Expat]

Some model A basics.

Everyone's insecure about something, but different people are insecure about different things.

People who are very secure in those areas in which you yourself are insecure can affect you in several ways: from appearing "arrogant" if they rub you the wrong way when being very secure in those areas (such as being overly critical or patronizing), to being very helpful and reassuring and pleasant to be around, if they use their confidence in those areas by helping you with them in a way you welcome.

Model A is precisely about putting in a model the above phenomenon.

Your base function is what you're most confident in. "Confident" doesn't mean "being right all the time" or even thinking you are right all the time; it means that even when you realize you were wrong in that area, you shrug it off with "oh well never mind, I know I'm usually right in those areas".

In the ENTj/ENFj thing: Te and Fe are mutually incompatible. The more you use Te, the less you use Fe and vice-versa. If you are looking at the dynamics of objects from a external perspective - "reading the lines" so to speak - you do it at the cost of looking at them from an internal perspective - "reading between the lines". You can shift back and forth between them, even very quickly, but you can't do them at the same time.

ENTjs will at the end of the day always go for Te as more important and "real": it's their basic way of looking at reality. But they are at the same time aware of Fe, and that other people are comparatively blind to Te but more susceptible to Fe. They may not understand or like it, but they are aware of it.

For ENFjs it's exactly the same thing, just with Te and Fe flipped around.

Both ENTjs and ENFjs are often at the situation of giving, say, a technical presentation to customers/investors/colleagues/etc. Such situations involve both giving the information "as is" in a technically accurate way, and giving it in a way to get the audience interested, even enthusiastic about it.

An ENTj will be more confident about his effectiveness in the former aspect than the latter. An ENFj, the other way around.

Typical comments about ENTjs (or any other Te ego type, actually) after a presentation/discussion are of the sort, "he knows his stuff, but he talks too long, he's boring, and not everyone will feel motivated as he's too dry. Also, he made an unlikeable impression".

Typical comments about ENFjs (or any other Fe ego type) in the same situation are more of the sort, "he's a very good speaker and a very likeable guy, but he didn't always seem to really know what he was talking about".

If, against what I said above, an ENTj hears comments like "you don't really know this and that", the ENTj is more likely to acknowledge it (or refute it if that's the case), as that is his own area of confidence. If, however, he hears what I called "typical" comments of the sort, "nobody paid attention because you're so boring", the ENTj is likely to feel rather helpless and/or annoyed.

And, again, the opposite goes for the ENFj.

Some examples:

If you watch the movie Pirates of Silicon Valley on YouTube, you see a perfect description of an ENFj not caring for his Te role at first, then focusing on it artificially, then giving up all pretense and becoming himself again. Steve Jobs changed from a sort of hippie into a suit-wearing, professional-seeming and knowledgeable-sounding executive - "Te role" - until, secure in his position, he did not feel the need to focus on Te anymore and became himself, a "visionary messiah motivator ENFj".

I don't recall now precise examples of ENTj, butTony Blair, an ENTj in my opinion, sort of "learned" to use Fe as a sort of tool, but his "call me Tony" and permenent-grin personality was perceived by many true Fe ego types as fake, and he sort of went into "help me improve my image" mode with his underlings (such as Alastair Campbell) whenever he felt that his efforts were unsuccessful.

[Logos]

Typical comments about ENFjs (or any other Fe ego type) in the same situation are more of the sort, "he's a very good speaker and a very likeable guy, but he didn't always seem to really know what he was talking about".

Of course I have said the same about some LIEs I have known.

[Expat]

Of course I have said the same about some LIEs I have known.

Which means? You disagree with the broad point I was making, you think it's a matter of subjective impression, or you think there are exceptions?

[Logos]

Which means? You disagree with the broad point I was making, you think it's a matter of subjective impression, or you think there are exceptions?

Merely that not all LIEs so easily admit when they are wrong, and they can, in fact, be quite reluctant in admitting as much when their credibility is on the line. It does not change the larger point. It is merely a point of commentary.

[UDP]

What Expat said is not wrong, but I don't believe Grek0s description (the one I quoted at least) or Cyclops opening post is off the mark.

I don't recall now precise examples of ENTj, butTony Blair, an ENTj in my opinion, sort of "learned" to use Fe as a sort of tool, but his "call me Tony" and permenent-grin personality was perceived by many true Fe ego types as fake, and he sort of went into "help me improve my image" mode with his underlings (such as Alastair Campbell) whenever he felt that his efforts were unsuccessful.

Some LIEs do try to use Fe as a tool, and that's what happened in the above example I gave. His Fe was terrible, imo, but because he polished some things enough, it worked on other people, at times. He tries very hard at 'appearing successful', and how he presents himself to other people - some have said he's charismatic.

It's kind of disturbing though the more you get closer to him and realize the things he does.

He's said "life is sales", and he will use whatever tactic to try to sell himself or whatever he's doing - such as exploiting morality or trying to woo the opposite sex. Although he'd never ever label it as such - save for when he's trying to get you to see his way and as a 'joke'.

Everything is a marketing tool, and a status builder.

He even writes notes, poorly written in chicken scratch because he wouldn't take the Si time to write neatly, and they are supposed to impress other people.

What he doesn't realize is that while the initial glam of his tactics work, anything long term or where people get to know him suffers. Yet, he just deals with every failure that comes his way with a sense of optimism, it's really quite strange.

The problem is that he has no concern or even awareness of how his actions actually affect other people, and he's not aware of the time it takes to do the real, actual work of things - so he can suck people dry if they aren't privy to what he does. (and the problem, for him, is that he doesn't seem to think or realize that people eventually stop buying his act. And when those people do find out, he tries to avoid them as much as possible)


This of course is the example of a relatively unhealthy LIE, who really needs his dual. But LIEs can be that way.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I've known LSE's and LIE's who've apparently been unaware of the time that various tasks can take.

The LSE thinks that other people should be able to have things done 5 minutes ago (perhaps basing it on their own ability to understand the 'logical logistics'), and with the LIE it can result from an un-appreciation of the details of something, sometimes avoiding them like the plague.

Unless i'm missing something, Ryu, imf and myself are saying similar things here.

Except, can you clarify what you mean by XLI being good at following? Taken literally, this does not make sense, SLI's are probably the most independent type in the socion, although I think you are hinting at something else?

[Expat]

but overall they'll still probably make better estimates than say, Fe types weak in both areas described. this if by "actual work", one means getting something done objectively. Fe types might be better at projecting other things, like how long it will take to convince someone of something, but i'm thinking of tasks where that wheeler-dealer stuff is out of the way.

Which is the basic skill of sales and marketing - which is something Ryu referred to with regard to "his" LIE.

As a general comment on this thread, the basic argument of quite a few people here (not ifmd95, I am just going on with the reasoning) seems to be the ancient "I know some LIEs who are like this-and-that etc". Personally I am very skeptical of such arguments (obviously not only with regard to LIEs), especially when used to dismiss other arguments made with base from model A implications. Just because some people (Grek0, Cyclops, Ryu) have typed some other people as LIEs, it does not follow that the latter are necessarily LIEs.

In other words, I am puzzled at how they are so confident of their typings, even when it goes against the logic of model A. It should at least give them something to think.

[FDG]

I don't know the point of this discussion. If we discuss about a LIE which is so Ni that the strenght of his Te is indistinguishable from the strenght of his Fe, then it's not very surprising that he may not be very careful with technical specifications and duration of tasks. If we talk about a LIE with sufficiently strong Te, then it's probably a mistyping.

[Expat]

I don't know the point of this discussion. If we discuss about a LIE which is so Ni that the strenght of his Te is indistinguishable from the strenght of his Fe, then it's not very surprising that he may not be very careful with technical specifications and duration of tasks. If we talk about a LIE with sufficiently strong Te, then it's probably a mistyping.

Well, if a "LIE" seems to focus more on Fe than on Te, then the chances are that he's not a LIE. That's the point many people here seem to be missing; and such people should reconsider the criteria they are using to type someone as "LIE". A "LIE" who has Fe>Te is, by definition, not a LIE.

As for the "extreme Ni LIE" thingy, as long as they remain LIEs, they still - by definition - focus more on Te and Fe. Now, if to see that is difficult, then the problem lies with the competence of those who have problems seeing whether he prefers Te or Fe.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Which is the basic skill of sales and marketing - which is something Ryu referred to with regard to "his" LIE.

Of course I can't speak for Ryu but maybe what he's referring to is a different style of marketing?

As a general comment on this thread, the basic argument of quite a few people here (not ifmd95, I am just going on with the reasoning) seems to be the ancient "I know some LIEs who are like this-and-that etc". Personally I am very skeptical of such arguments (obviously not only with regard to LIEs), especially when used to dismiss other arguments made with base from model A implications. Just because some people (Grek0, Cyclops, Ryu) have typed some other people as LIEs, it does not follow that the latter are necessarily LIEs.

In other words, I am puzzled at how they are so confident of their typings, even when it goes against the logic of model A. It should at least give them something to think.

I don't follow you. As far as I can recall I haven't posted a disagreement or dismissed any of the posters views on this thread, nor am I aware of having said anything which contradicts model A (maybe others have), if I have, please point it out, it's possible i'm wrong or I haven't explained myself properly.

In regards to using actual examples of people i've typed as LIE (for instance), I can understand your skepticism if it is along the lines of.. you (Expat or others) can't personally verify it etc. For myself i'm quite happy to use and for others to use real life examples, without it socionics becomes less relevant and applicable, at least for me, it's just discussing stuff on a forum really. I would say observing the types irl and discussing this is useful to me.

Of course if someone was to talk about a type which was in clear violation of how that type should behave, then I would probably query it, with a view to learning about the type or correcting the error (however it transpired). Perhaps that is what your inferring, that they are removed from how LIE's actually are? But in regards to skepticism, there's always the risk of error, and it can be difficult to check things, but what else can we do while being in such a wide-spread community as this little forum?

Edit: something else which may be relevant, how others of a different type view a certain type may be different to how an identical would view them. I suppose it's interesting to see how other types view each other, whether it's right or wrong (usually there is a different slant of 'perception', but with discussion one would still expect it to be able to be tied in with model A, if said typings are correct). As an ILE I know once said, something along the lines of: it's not quite 16 types when there are different cameras/lenses looking at the same thing.

[UDP]

And if This is the guy's weakness. . . don't you see how that doesn't fit LIE? No concern for Fi-related things? No awareness of Te-related things? How the heck is that an LIE?

Perhaps how I worded things is confusing you. Obviously I would not say an LIE has "no awareness of Te related" things.

What I said was...
"The problem is that he has no concern or even awareness of how his actions actually affect other people, and he's not aware of the time it takes to do the real, actual work of things"

That doesn't mean "He doesn't value Te". A more specific way of saying things, perhaps, is that he is clueless about the details and practical aspects of what he talks about. (To me). He's good at planning and arranging, but he is terrible at managing things that are critical to success of programs. He hopes to just assign plans for other people to follow, and hopes that they will do well in them. (ETA Also, from my perspective, "real, actual work" involves Te+Si things, and the person didn't have much consideration for Si). I saw him as basically unwilling to do any legwork that he didn't see as immediately beneficial for him or his image; so in fact, he was extremely focused on Te, but imo, he was unhealthy in that he was so ego-focused that he wasn't able to see how his efforts to make himself look good got in the way of things. Not look good in a "Fe-sense", but in a "Te-sense" of opportunities, resume building, connections, etc).

That is what I was talking about for "actual work". He's overly optimistic about the success of such things.

The person struck me much more focused (too much so) on the long term impact of things - plans, ideas, scheming and positioning, and was in fact obsessed with such. You could say he was 'obsessed' with Te and Ni. Fe was his tool that he developed to help him in this way, although he's not very good with it despite the polish he tries to put on it. He's concerned about Fi as he gets very nervous about Fi issues as he deals with them extremely awkwardly.

If I was to say anything needed to happen, I'd say the person I was talking about needed his dual to straighten him out some -- help him tone down his obvious over-focus on Fe, and give him some Fi/IJ stability in terms of people, and finally give him help with Se practicality.


PS: you should be able to tell that I don't think much of the person. This doesn't affect my typing of the person, however - and it's even more a point of why I am making a big deal about how he was LIE, and not just an EIE in 'the opposing quadra'. It's more about a 'bad person' who is an LIE (LIE E3), than someone being an LIE that I don't like. What I'm describing is an unhealthy LIE E3, that's all. I've been around other LIEs who are different this, in terms of both enneagram and health, and they are different. But I do not think the person is "Fe>Te".

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[unefille]

Knowing two LIE-Ni who are both E3 (3w4 so/sp and 3w2 sp/so), I can't say either of them sound the way Ryu is describing his LIE to be. Both are quite open to being corrected on their factual knowledge. It's not because they're more eminently reasonable than most people (by virtue of being LIE or something) or that their always correct (definitely not the case, as I've corrected them more than once) -- but this is an area of confidence for them. It doesn't hurt their ego to be corrected, they consider my points on merits and then bolster their own position, unless I convince them otherwise, which they've always been perfectly happy to acknowledge if that is the case.

To an LII (or other Ne-valuing person), an LIE might seem more 'obstinate' about their 'credibility'? Sometimes its a matter of a different threshold before which someone will entertain a position as legitimate or actively revise their own and Se-valuers tend to have a higher threshold, irrespective of Fe/Ti/Te/Fi.

On the other hand, if you were to critique the LIE's manner of presentation - ouch. They both puff themselves up a great deal about 'showmanship' and 'selling the product', but it's clearly where they are the least confident. Maybe this is what Ryu means? It's where they focus a lot of their conscious efforts, and they sort of try to 'deconstruct' things like charm, or charisma, and package it into a 3-step process. I find them very alien when they do that; they're very mechanical about all that jazz. It's possible that where a non-E3 LIE might either care less about their presentation and affect on others, or be more openly insecure, an E3 LIE is simply more overtly focused on the 'superficial' aspects of Fe: basically making an impression. And the do it via Te rather than actual Fe, which is why I feel like they're sometimes wielding blunt instruments in a glassware shop. They don't focus on what is going on 'underneath', they focus entirely on the words -- and so they miss their cues and seem bizarrely off-tune and really really fake, like a deaf man trying to sing.

[UDP]

Don't talk down to me.

I'm not talking down to you.

You continue to say (and show how) the man is Ni and Fe-focused, but have yet to show how he has any ability whatsoever in Te.

Because I took it for granted. You doubt that he's LIE, but I'm coming from the standpoint that this person is already LIE. Think about it.

If you want to interpret everything I said as him being Fe focused - but that's your interpretation of things. Diana's thoughts. My thoughts are that he's using Fe as a tool, and he's absolutely, clearly, undoubtedly Te dominant, because all his Fe actions are subordinate to his Te goals. Fe never, ever, ever is used without the consent of Te. This is why he is LIE. If I've not expressed that clearly, or I've made it sound like he is really Fe dominant, then my words were wrong.

What "Fi issues" is he concerned with? You already earlier said that he was unconcerned with Fi matters.

I think you've mistyped him, and this is probably why:

imo, in striving to be "objective" you're being less so.

Right... Here's what I think: you only saw me commenting about Fe and Ni and you disregarded my remark about him being LIE. So you assumed you knew better than I did, and because I didn't present you with a full list of how this person is clearly Te leading and clearly LIE, it furthered your thinking that I don't know anything about what I'm talking about and the person is EIE.

I obviously have dislike for the person, so your comment about being "objective" is out of place. I don't like the person but that doesn't affect my analysis of the situation, particularly in terms of socionics.

As for his Fi issues, he gets very insecure and acts reallllly weird when he thinks people are not liking him or think poorly of his character. He tries to be light and positive when this happens, but his attempts at Fe really start to tank. His Fe is so polished because he's not very secure about it, but it's very shotty - tricks and gimmicks. It's nothing like a real Fe dominant. He's looking for an ESI to calm him down and get him to stop all of that stuff. Also, particularly in terms of Fi, he gets very nervous when you make any question about him being on bad terms with someone, particualrly someone he thinks of as valuable. He tries to send personalized notes to 'help maintain' relationships with people, especially if he's worried about them falling apart. It's a lot of typical "EJ effort" expended, but he realizes that he has no control over how other people feel about him or think about him, he doesn't see himself as in charge of ethics or relationships in any way (in terms of his subconscious). All he can do is put forth effort. He's absolutely not F in ego.

[UDP]

Knowing two LIE-Ni who are both E3 (3w4 so/sp and 3w2 sp/so), I can't say either of them sound the way Ryu is describing his LIE to be. Both are quite open to being corrected on their factual knowledge.

Where did I say the person I'm talking about is not open to being corrected on factual knowledge?

Wha?

n the other hand, if you were to critique their manner of presentation - ouch. They both puff themselves up a great deal about 'showmanship' and 'selling the product', but it's clearly where they are the least confident. Maybe this is what Ryu means?

How people are getting things other than that, I don't know.

It's where they focus a lot of their conscious efforts, and they sort of try to 'deconstruct' things like charm, or charisma, and package it into a 3-step process. I find them very alien when they do that; they're very mechanical about all that jazz.

Right....... that's just what I said...........................

Some LIEs do try to use Fe as a tool, and that's what happened in the above example I gave. His Fe was terrible, imo, but because he polished some things enough, it worked on other people, at times. He tries very hard at 'appearing successful', and how he presents himself to other people - some have said he's charismatic.
...
He's said "life is sales", and he will use whatever tactic to try to sell himself or whatever he's doing - such as exploiting morality or trying to woo the opposite sex. Although he'd never ever label it as such - save for when he's trying to get you to see his way and as a 'joke'.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I think the self-marketing is somehow more obvious in ENTj's than some other types.

I suppose ENTj's care more about career advancement than the company or the employees or such, something to do with Te and their Se HA. In contrast to ENFj's, the Se HA is still there, but it's effect is tempered a little with them being ethical types, caring about others and the group and such and such.