Differences between LII-INTj and ILI-INTp

[FDG]

subtype would be very unopen because they seem to follow their inner sense of certitude more rigidly.

This is precisely the opposite of the truth.

Exactly.

[tcaudilllg]

Huh...?

You've got to remember: as base receives the suggestions. creates them based on information. will not question what has concluded. It may float around possibilities when attempting to , but this outward appearance of openess is actually tightly monitored: a base possibility has already been generated from , and all that remains is the ascertation of what exact form that possibility takes. In subtypes there will be more energy spent on the determination of the possibility's form than on the identification of what forces are dominant. The difference between subtypes is the level of energy available per stage of the function cycle.

[Gilly]

questions EVERYTHING.

- X.
- Yeah, but Y is possible, too.

[Phaedrus]

The LII is probably more decisive. But keep in mind decisive and forceful mean completely different things. Language is an issue here.

In the literature LIIs are described as more "decisive" (more "J" according to the criteria for rational behaviour), but ILIs are described as more "aggressive" (at least sometimes), whereas the non-aggressiveness of LIIs is often accentuated.

How shall we understand this? LIIs seem to be more certain of what they want to achieve and how to plan their actions to get there -- they are "strategists". ILIs don't plan their actions to the same extent, they are less decisive and less strategic -- their "usual condition is something like meditation" and they take the role of passive observers. But on the other hand ILIs are more aggressive (more "resolute") when they actually decide to confront the wrong-doing of others or when they more or less instinctly react to a situation they don't like, for example when they get too much outer stimuli in form of noise or when Megan's INTp housemate gets mad when someone wakes him up in the morning by ringing on his door bell.

[Gilly]

How shall we understand this? LIIs seem to be more certain of what they want to achieve and how to plan their actions to get there -- they are "strategists". ILIs don't plan their actions to the same extent, they are less decisive and less strategic -- their "usual condition is something like meditation" and they take the role of passive observers. But on the other hand ILIs are more aggressive (more "resolute") when they actually decide to confront the wrong-doing of others or when they more or less instinctly react to a situation they don't like,

This completely contradicts quadra values.

[UDP]

This might be more applicable in MBTI terms but I was thinking about it today:



LII - goes into a situation with an idea in mind (ti leading), and considers possible ways to implement it (Ne creative). There is something in mind before hand, and the process is determining if that original something should be changed, built upon, discared, or otherwise.

ILI - goes into a situation open minded more so, wanting to accept information, looking to compare and use Ni. They generally prefer to wait, and create with Te observations that are a product of their intuitional development.


I don't know if I explained it very well, but there is a difference in process that I am trying to get at. To me I can see a direct relation to quadras --- why the INTj must develop an idea (or anticipated conclusion) FIRST, and why an INTp must develop the idea (or conclusion) afterwards. Even here.. I am not sure if I've been clear enough.

But as you can see even this post is an example of what I am talking about. There is a clear idea that I see, and I am trying to communicate it.
(where as for an ILI, they would only come up with this idea after Ni comparison and information intake)

Does this make sense?



PS: a lot of this has to do with a certain course of interaction I've had with an INTp in the past, and if there seems to be a positive reaction to this post, I might get into it further

[oyburger]

I think what you're trying to say was conveyed and I can see how (and have thought about before) how my mind seems to follow the first description, especially if I'm going into a situation where I can't immediately determine the outcome and I need some sort of back-up plan to deal with it.

[Gilly]

I like that, UDP.

LII- Goes into situation with idea about what might happen (rational, unconscious Ni) and uses this to plan out the best course of action accordingly (Ti)

ILI - Goes into situation ready to observe and compare to past experiences (irrational, conscious Ni) and lets what information is readily available from the environment dictate the best course of action (Te).

[UDP]

Good


It stems from my interactions with a clear INTp in the following way...
(we were at first enemies because we thought so differently, and this was a good example of the difference. But over time our mutual respect grew)
((note: He is an INTP ILI, and I am an INTJ LII))


Example:

* Someone would present a problem - "I am dealing with this"
* Me, an LII, would read the opening post in the thread, and present a solution, usually with a brief explanation of application. Sometimes I have a tendency to speak very strongly about things and give off the INTJ 'aura of definiteness'...
* The ILI would become upset in that I was making judgements too quickly, and often criticize me for arrogance and related.


A deeper, socionics explained issue is this:
* I presented a conclusion or solution strongly. But I was by no means "hell bent" on making it the only one. I just presented it thoroughly so as to determine if it was applicable, or if it should be discarded. It was the best solution I could think of off the top of my head, so I would present it, and go from there.
* This did not sit well with the ILI because he must have information to use his Ni, and come to a Te conclusion at the end. To him, my process seemed very rushed, and as mentioned, I seemed very opinionated -- seemed much more concerned with my own thoughts then if they applied to the situation.

Of course, in reality, neither the ILI or the LII has a better proceudure, they just do things in the opposite order.
To me, probably my favorite part of being an LII is that I more actively experiment and interact with the material. By asking questions with an intention already in mind, and deviating from a point, that allows me more input -- I can "feel it out more", than if I just sit back and observe, or ask questions for more information. That's another difference -- the ILI would ask questions generally for more information, or more often, just wait. For myself, that's being too far "removed". But I imagine that is just what an ILI needs.

(and that is actually one reason why I didn't understand the ILI's irritation with me -- because it would be very unlikely that he would speak before anyone else did. Someone else would have to go first anyways. But again, now I understand that, because of a somewhat arrogant tone, and also because I offered my suggestions in a visually 'more definite' way, it cut off the ILI from the intuitional data he needed)


Learning from this experience has been most beneficial. Obviously at first I was completely unconscios of what I was doing, and took ILI's irritaiton as some strange personal matter. But socionics has helped me understand the whole process a little more.....and I would suspect that it has to do with core details of the difference between ILI and LII.


The same processes in a different order
Ti and Ne
Ni and Te

I like that, UDP.

LII- Goes into situation with idea about what might happen (rational, unconscious Ni) and uses this to plan out the best course of action accordingly (Ti)

ILI - Goes into situation ready to observe and compare to past experiences (irrational, conscious Ni) and lets what information is readily available from the environment dictate the best course of action (Te).

Yeah, that sounds good to me. Fits in with the experience I've described above very well. And it also works with the quadra agendas, and how they fit into the socion.

[UDP]

I wonder if my example would hold up for an INTP LII or an INTJ ILI
Subtype implications are also up in the air.

I wonder what the rest of the INTxs have to say about it

[UDP]

I was using "correct" terminology:

ALL CAPITALS is MBTI (INTJ)
Lower case final letter is Socionics (INTj)

(not everyone seems to apply that rule, though)

You could theoretically have an INTP LII and an INTP ILI, because they aren't identical theories (The INTP refering to the MBTI score, and the LII + ILI being Socionics scores). But I'm not getting into MBTI / Socionics corrleation --- that was not at all the point of my thread.


I wrote that the ILI was an INTP because that was his MBTI result

[Jonathan]

How shall we understand this? LIIs seem to be more certain of what they want to achieve and how to plan their actions to get there -- they are "strategists". ILIs don't plan their actions to the same extent, they are less decisive and less strategic -- their "usual condition is something like meditation" and they take the role of passive observers. But on the other hand ILIs are more aggressive (more "resolute") when they actually decide to confront the wrong-doing of others or when they more or less instinctly react to a situation they don't like,

This completely contradicts quadra values.

What part of his quote do you think contradicts quadra values? I don't think he was saying anything very controversial here. Not sure which part you disagree with (?).

[Phaedrus]

How shall we understand this? LIIs seem to be more certain of what they want to achieve and how to plan their actions to get there -- they are "strategists". ILIs don't plan their actions to the same extent, they are less decisive and less strategic -- their "usual condition is something like meditation" and they take the role of passive observers. But on the other hand ILIs are more aggressive (more "resolute") when they actually decide to confront the wrong-doing of others or when they more or less instinctly react to a situation they don't like,

This completely contradicts quadra values.

What part of his quote do you think contradicts quadra values? I don't think he was saying anything very controversial here. Not sure which part you disagree with (?).

Gilligan, I hope you realize the importance of what you are saying here. If you are right in your claim that what I have said completely contradicts quadra values, we have pin-pointed a clear contradiction in Socionics, and that's very interesting.

What I have said is consistent with socionic type descriptions. I'm not sure it contradicts quadra values, but it is possible. At least there seems to be a tension between how the quadras are described and how the socionic types are described.

[Phaedrus]

LII - goes into a situation with an idea in mind (ti leading), and considers possible ways to implement it (Ne creative). There is something in mind before hand, and the process is determining if that original something should be changed, built upon, discared, or otherwise.

ILI - goes into a situation open minded more so, wanting to accept information, looking to compare and use Ni. They generally prefer to wait, and create with Te observations that are a product of their intuitional development.

This is very good, UDP.

I don't know if I explained it very well, but there is a difference in process that I am trying to get at. To me I can see a direct relation to quadras --- why the INTj must develop an idea (or anticipated conclusion) FIRST, and why an INTp must develop the idea (or conclusion) afterwards. Even here.. I am not sure if I've been clear enough.

I am very interested in seeing how you would relate what you have said to quadra values.

But as you can see even this post is an example of what I am talking about. There is a clear idea that I see, and I am trying to communicate it.
(where as for an ILI, they would only come up with this idea after Ni comparison and information intake)

Does this make sense?

Yes, it does.

PS: a lot of this has to do with a certain course of interaction I've had with an INTp in the past, and if there seems to be a positive reaction to this post, I might get into it further

As I already said when you first mentioned this in the Alpha forum, this is very interesting in highly illuminating. I have been in a clearly similar situation myself -- but on the other side (that of the ILI).

It stems from my interactions with a clear INTp in the following way...
(we were at first enemies because we thought so differently, and this was a good example of the difference. But over time our mutual respect grew)
((note: He is an INTP ILI, and I am an INTJ LII))

I am also an INTP ILI, and he is an INTJ LII. We were not enemies, but from the beginning we had problems working together effectively because we thought so differently.

Example:

* Someone would present a problem - "I am dealing with this"
* Me, an LII, would read the opening post in the thread, and present a solution, usually with a brief explanation of application. Sometimes I have a tendency to speak very strongly about things and give off the INTJ 'aura of definiteness'...
* The ILI would become upset in that I was making judgements too quickly, and often criticize me for arrogance and related.

The bolded part is the key to understand the ILI's reactions.

A deeper, socionics explained issue is this:
* I presented a conclusion or solution strongly. But I was by no means "hell bent" on making it the only one. I just presented it thoroughly so as to determine if it was applicable, or if it should be discarded. It was the best solution I could think of off the top of my head, so I would present it, and go from there.
* This did not sit well with the ILI because he must have information to use his Ni, and come to a Te conclusion at the end. To him, my process seemed very rushed, and as mentioned, I seemed very opinionated -- seemed much more concerned with my own thoughts then if they applied to the situation.

This is absolutely perfect! Now I have a somewhat better understanding of how LIIs think. Everyting you say here is exactly how it was for me when I worked with the LII. (I described the experience very briefly in the Alpha forum before The Big Deletion. I and the LII tried, along with the help of some other people, to change the direction of a corrupt organization in an attempt to make it more democratic. We were in the minority and ultimately failed of course, but is was an instructive experience.

To me, probably my favorite part of being an LII is that I more actively experiment and interact with the material. By asking questions with an intention already in mind, and deviating from a point, that allows me more input -- I can "feel it out more", than if I just sit back and observe, or ask questions for more information. That's another difference -- the ILI would ask questions generally for more information, or more often, just wait. For myself, that's being too far "removed". But I imagine that is just what an ILI needs.

Exactly. You have described the differences between LIIs and ILIs very well here. Everyting you say is correct as far as I can tell. It is very good that you describe what it is like from the LII perspective.

(and that is actually one reason why I didn't understand the ILI's irritation with me -- because it would be very unlikely that he would speak before anyone else did. Someone else would have to go first anyways. But again, now I understand that, because of a somewhat arrogant tone, and also because I offered my suggestions in a visually 'more definite' way, it cut off the ILI from the intuitional data he needed)

Brilliant. Exactly to the point -- especially the bolded parts.

I would suspect that it has to do with core details of the difference between ILI and LII.

I think you are right about that.

IMPORTANT:
From what you have explained in this thread it is absolutely clear, without the slightest of doubt, that you and I are different types in MBTT. You are clearly an INTJ and I am clearly an INTP. It is also clear that you think that you are an LII and that I think that I am an ILI.

Now, in my opinion, it would be a very strange thing indeed if you and I -- despite the obvious differences in how we think and approach problems, which you have described above -- could still be the same socionic type (LII). It must be something wrong with the theory of Socionics and how it puts people in different groups (types), if it insists on putting you and me in the same type group.

As I see it you have managed to pin-point some of the fundamental differences between LIIs and ILIs, and my guess is that to be a real LII you must identify with your way of thinking, and to be a real ILI you must identify more with my way of thinking, as you have described it yourself.

[eliphalet]

So how can you tell them apart?

[Joy]

by ESFjs and ESFps

[drd252]

IDK, I identify with both

[Phaedrus]

IDK, I identify with both

Then it is more likely that you are an INTp than that you are an INTj. INTjs usually don't identify with INTp descriptions.

[Joy]

How convenient.

[implied]

by ESFjs and ESFps

that seriously could be the easiest way. "who is this person's dual?" etc.

[FDG]

by ESFjs and ESFps

that seriously could be the easiest way. "who is this person's dual?" etc.

Yeah. Sometimes people in throwing other people's types around, they forget about this implication. For some individuals, your statement could be turned into "Who could be able to stand this person??"

[UDP]

Interacting with duals and conflictors is probably the best
Once you know that, you will begin to understand quadra atmosphers and trends



other things that might help:

Blast an INTp with and see how he reacts.
I can say that an LII will react very strangly to an blast... will become quite rigid....

It is very critical to the methods of rough and cheap action. Robesp'era it is not possible to subordinate to volitional pressure. Any attempt to press on it inevitably leads to the conflict. It does not yield to the arm-twisting even when this threatens its life. It will not make it possible to humble itself, it will not make it possible "to take itself as the throat" - better it will die. It will not make it possible to pinch itself in the rights - it immediately demonstratively resists this (its kind preventive measure).

If you try to coerce an LII into something you will end up with a fight.


As for ILIs,

To emotionally vulnerable, easily hurt, uncertain of his attractiveness Balzac it is extremely important to know the degree of the interest in it of partner. Sometimes he uses for this this "trick": after addressing to the partner about by anything paramount meant, it suddenly makes pause and as if it is distracted to something insignificant, unnoticeably controlling the behavior of partner and waiting, when and as it appears interest in the theme touched upon. In the interrelations with Caesar this even and the method to discipline the constantly scattering attention of its duala, the attempt to concentrate its attention in itself; and also, what is very important in the process of dualization, the attempt to soizmerit' the significance of its own values with the values of its partner.)

It stands to reason, Balzac even for himself cannot explain the true reason for his "imperturbability" (but mysteriousness in himself it generally none it sees and never its namerenno it fills - it indeed not ethics, but logician). Most frequently it behaves thus from the desire to only fence itself from the psychological discomfort, which it sees in the emotionally oversaturated psychological regime. For this very reason, as it counts, the only possibility for it to be insured - this to create the visibility of imperturbability. But since this is done mainly in the ethical situations, its partners frequently feel themselves insulted by its indifference, those more assumed. Here and it turns out that farsighted Balzac the first becomes the victim of his own backup insurance.

Do something that is considered traditionally nice, and see the reaction. LIIs will comply or make a small affimitive "that's okay", going along with it sort of thing. ILIs will be strangly indifferent. LIIs have "complex ethics", LIIs prefer direct, straight forward emotions from people . ILIs look for someone who is sure of themselves, and sure that they want to go through the ILI's 'complex ethics'.


Heh, Sing an ILI happy birthday randomly, and ask them to get up and dance with you, and they will probably dislike it greatly. An LII would not know what to do, and probably go along with you if you dragged him, so long as the LII knows you a little and you were being more celebrative than coercing.


One is a victim, the other is an infantile.

[Joy]

http://www.socionics.us/theory/quadras.shtml

1. Alpha Quadra [top]

extraverted intuition blocked with introverted logic:
Types from the Alpha Quadra enjoy freely exchanging new ideas and theories as a form of intellectual leisure. They like to systematize knowledge and create new categories and speculative hypotheses without necessarily intending to see their theories tested or implemented (subdued extraverted logic).

extraverted ethics blocked with introverted sensing:
This quadra enjoys carefree emotional expression and sensory delights and is able to derive never-ending pleasure from simple things — funny stories, exotic dishes, family picnics and group outings, and visual and performing arts.

Subdued elements:
The Alpha Quadra is especially sensitive to and critical of mercantilistic views, ostentatious displays of wealth and status symbols, rude and aggressive behavior, moral criticism, and people who suggest they are wasting their time on unproductive things.

Typical Alpha quadra group behavior:
Spontaneous, disorganized activities "for the fun of it." Light-hearted, non-serious atmosphere with very few "heavy" moments. Skipping from topic to topic without focusing on the implementation of conclusions reached.

3. Gamma Quadra [top]

extraverted sensing blocked with introverted ethics:
Types from the Gamma Quadra have a realistic, materialistic outlook on life, relationships, and society and tend to view life as a marketplace where forcefulness, positive thinking, social maneuvering, hustle and bustle, and loud humor get you where you need to go.

extraverted logic blocked with introverted intuition:
This quadra believes that ideas and fortuitous events should be turned into something profitable and marketable — something that does some kind of work for people. The Gamma Quadra values self-sacrifice in the name of serving society.

Subdued elements:
The Gamma Quadra looks down on indulging in self-centered pleasures and in engaging in activities unrelated to society's needs.

Typical Gamma quadra group behavior:
Trading jokes on materialistic topics (money, sex, winning and losing). Rowdiness and drivenness. Prefer socializing in smaller groups (about six people or less) and planning and carrying out productive activities together.

[UDP]

I am not sure that is entirely fair in terms of...
...well I was going to say "me", as it portrayed LIIs in a very carefree way - in that I've spent that last 3 years trying to figure out what to do with my life and the concerns of society are a major part of that.

But in general, I can undestand that in terms of the alpha quadra, and some LIIs, yes. One LII is fascinated with... cars, and it sounds like he wants to be an engineer so he can work on them

[Jonathan]

http://www.socionics.us/theory/quadras.shtml

I think Rick's site is great, and he's a great asset to the forum, but the stuff on quadras always has me scratching my head.
Rick has said himself that interest in various things is often not the best indicator of type...I remember he stated on this forum, for example, that one might have an intellectual ILI or other type...or an LII who isn't that intellectual.

I don't want to be too pert here, but I am curious where he got these descriptions for the quadras. They seem, to me, kind of stereotyped, and they don't even match with the people he has typed in those quadras. Can you imagine Warren Buffett or Charles Darwin being rowdy and telling x-rated jokes as their standard mode of behavior?

What does it mean that Alpha types do things "for the fun of it"? Does no other quadra do things for the fun of it then? I'm kind of confused actually because Rick often talks about LIIs as being so over-serious.

The description says that Alpha people freely exhange new ideas and theories as a form of intellectual leisure. That sounds kind of like Filatova's description of ILI; just read it. And what about all the Gammas on the forum who exchange ideas. Aren't we all exchanging ideas...freely? I don't think anyone on this forum is asking anyone to pay to read their posts...well, there was that one guy, I forgot his name...but as to the rest of us...are we all Alphas then?

In my view, the quadra descriptions are simply the worst thing that Socionics has to offer. There's a lot useful in Socionics, but the quadra descriptions have got to go. Socionists should just wake up and throw that part out.

@Rick...if you're reading, I don't mean to attack to hard here...It's just that the quadra stuff just doesn't make sense to me, for the reasons stated above.

[Jonathan]

Interacting with duals and conflictors is probably the best
Once you know that, you will begin to understand quadra atmosphers and trends



other things that might help:

Blast an INTp with and see how he reacts.
I can say that an LII will react very strangly to an blast... will become quite rigid....

On the surface, it sounds good. But what exactly does it mean to "blast" people with and ? I suppose the way people talk about around here sometimes, an " blast" sounds like being mugged at gunpoint. Perhaps a more tenable blast that ILIs would like is being flattered by someone dragging them into doing something...Oh wait, you said further down that LIIs like to be dragged into doing stuff too.

Will ILIs really take offense if you sing happy birthday to them? I do know people who feel embarrassed if family members make too much of a fuss over them, but not necessarily ILIs. Anyhow, I don't see much evidence that that's type-related.

Actually, most people really do like it if you're nice to them. The only people I've found who sometimes don't like it are IEIs. I don't think any NT dislikes other people who are nice to them...for that matter, SFs, all SFs, tend to be super-nice to people.....even the SFs that have .

Maybe if you define what these and "blasts" are, I'd understand better. But be careful, because if you describe an blast as physically hurting someone or making them do something they don't want to do, I think you'd be describing something that no type would want. (Even "victims" don't want to be abused.)

And sorry if I sound sharp today, I'm just in that sort of mood.

[UDP]

Se blast.... one type would be a prolonged series of shifts, taking the LII out of the IJ environment. Or the LII having to learn something new and completely out of his former thought context, in a hurry. Questioning why he cannot pick up things as fast, or, not knowing what is going on in comparison to others

Fe blast.... the ILI being encouraged or invited to participate in some sort of a celebrating, emotionally loud event, him refusing, and then receiving complaints because he did not go along with it, leaving him wondering how to deal with other people, or if it is worth it, etc. Questioning why he cannot be as happy as other people, or how other people relate so well together when it is difficult for him.


My above post was shoty and rushed, and this one isn't any better both are made in a hurry, and now I'm late for bed

[Phaedrus]

I don't want to be too pert here, but I am curious where he got these descriptions for the quadras.

Yes, the description of the quadras really is a problem, as Jonathan points out, and I have also been waiting for a clear answer to the question who wrote those descriptions, and how he/she/they came up with them.

What does it mean that Alpha types do things "for the fun of it"? Does no other quadra do things for the fun of it then? I'm kind of confused actually because Rick often talks about LIIs as being so over-serious.

I we choose to talk about Alphas as non-serious (Merry) then we should not talk about LIIs as being over-serious. That leads to confusion. But where has Rick talked about LIIs as "over-serious"?

The description says that Alpha people freely exhange new ideas and theories as a form of intellectual leisure. That sounds kind of like Filatova's description of ILI; just read it.

Correct observation. I really think that the quadra description often do more harm than good, and in this particular case that is probably true. But when we have spotted the real LIIs and ILIs by other means than quadra descriptions, we begin to see what is probably meant by such phrases. We can see that there is a slight difference in attitude between LIIs and ILIs, and that that same difference in attitude is even more clearly seen if we compare, for example, ISFjs with ENTps.

ILIs take questions of truth more seriously than LIIs. They are more aggressive in their pursuits for finding the objective truth, and they are more pushy when they think that they have found it. The same might be said of LIEs, whereas you often don't know whether an ILE is serious or joking. LIIs are at least closer to the ILEs than the ILIs are in that respect, but if we compare how LIIs and ILIs live their lives overall, we might come to a different conclusion, becuase in their outward behaviour LIIs might come across as more serious than ILIs.

If we compare ESIs with ESEs we find that ESIs are usually slightly "tight up"; they are serious people by any normal usage of that word, whereas ESEs don't bother much at all about "big" questions and the objective truth. They want to live their life in a clearly Merry way, and they are fine with that.

In my view, the quadra descriptions are simply the worst thing that Socionics has to offer. There's a lot useful in Socionics, but the quadra descriptions have got to go. Socionists should just wake up and throw that part out.

I don't know if they have to go altogether, but the surely need a revision of some sort. Or a manual on how to understand them that is much better than what we have now.

[Phaedrus]

Will ILIs really take offense if you sing happy birthday to them?

Probably not, but they will probably feel awkward. Though, as you say, that might not be type related.

Fe blast.... the ILI being encouraged or invited to participate in some sort of a celebrating, emotionally loud event, him refusing, and then receiving complaints because he did not go along with it, leaving him wondering how to deal with other people, or if it is worth it, etc. Questioning why he cannot be as happy as other people, or how other people relate so well together when it is difficult for him.

Good example.

[Jonathan]

Se blast.... one type would be a prolonged series of shifts, taking the LII out of the IJ environment. Or the LII having to learn something new and completely out of his former thought context, in a hurry. Questioning why he cannot pick up things as fast, or, not knowing what is going on in comparison to others

Fe blast.... the ILI being encouraged or invited to participate in some sort of a celebrating, emotionally loud event, him refusing, and then receiving complaints because he did not go along with it, leaving him wondering how to deal with other people, or if it is worth it, etc. Questioning why he cannot be as happy as other people, or how other people relate so well together when it is difficult for him.


My above post was shoty and rushed, and this one isn't any better both are made in a hurry, and now I'm late for bed

I should get out of the habit of writing posts that late myself; it makes me sound like a total jerk (although at least I got all those points out ). I sure hope nobody was offended by my sarcastic style last night; it certainly wasn't intended to be offensive.

Anyhow, your post here is clearer. Still, this time I wouldn't like either thing. If I'm in my train of thought, I hate being taken out of it. I'd be interested if there are ILIs who, while engrossed in a train of thought or having a great revelation or in the middle of concentrating on something, would like to be hurriedly taken out of it to do something completely different.

Also, "not knowing what is going on in comparison to others" sounds like a reference to introversion. The reason why both ILIs and LIIs may feel that they don't know what's going on in a group setting is that they're not talking to people, so nobody told them x y or z. I would think that a critical remark "how come only you don't know that this is what we're all doing?" could hit both ILIs and LIIs in their soft spot.

I'm a little confused by the thing about LIIs not picking things up fast. I thought LIIs are good at that. But if you mean, again, in a group situation, where you can't have time by yourself to think about something, well that sounds like a reference to introversion. ILEs and LIEs would be comparatively better in interacting in such situations without having to spend time "in deep thought."

Conversely, if an LII doesn't feel like doing something, would he/she appreciate receiving complaints for not going along with it? Surely there must be times when an LII doesn't feel like being part of a "loud emotional event" just because he/she doesn't feel like it; and to be criticized for that would probably be just as annoying for an LII than for an ILI, if not more so. (?)

Anyhow, I think most ILIs are able to relate to people at a normal level, so they probably wouldn't be questioned about why they can't relate to people well unless someone was purposely attempting to make them feel self-conscious.

Now, for ILI, would this be perhaps a realistic "Fe blast"?: Everybody's singing and clapping, and the ILI doesn't feel like it because he/she feels no enthusiasm for what people are singing and clapping about. And an person says "how come you're not singing?" or "join in the fun!" In my view, the ILI will not actually not be very bothered; it wouldn't be a big deal. However, the may be bothered by ILI's lack of response.

@Phaedrus: Here's one example from a What's My Type thread about Nicole Kidman, where he describes her as 'dreadfully serious':

I actually have a hard time seeing anything other than the actors' own types in movies
Even if she is playing a type, why does she look so stern and speak so categorically? Why does she seem depressed and preoccupied -- tortured, actually -- if she's supposed to be dreamy ? Why is she so dreadfully serious?
But yes, I can see that they're trying to create a atmosphere, especially when they talk about death.

Personally, I don't think that's necessarily a conflict with the Reinin dichotomy; maybe the word "serious" is being meant in two different ways. Anyhow, I tend to like to withhold judgment on the Reinin dichotomies; there's classical Socionics, and then there's Reinin; if if they're both true, then great, but if something contradicted Reinin, that only impacts the Reinin theory.

[UDP]

I think a true INTp would feel the outside pressure to get "involved" in a group emotionally in a sort of team spirit as sort of agonizing torture, a living hell.

*shudder*

"Team spirit" is degrading at the very best.

polr

[implied]

I think a true INTp would feel the outside pressure to get "involved" in a group emotionally in a sort of team spirit as sort of agonizing torture, a living hell.

*shudder*

"Team spirit" is degrading at the very best.

i completely agree.

[Jonathan]

I think a true INTp would feel the outside pressure to get "involved" in a group emotionally in a sort of team spirit as sort of agonizing torture, a living hell.

*shudder*

"Team spirit" is degrading at the very best.

i completely agree.

Considering that team spirit and being involved in a group emotionally is a group activity that some people enjoy and others don't, what would the corresponding thing be to LII?

I.e: Pressure to be involved in group emotionally in a team spirit way IS TO ILI AS ____ IS TO LII.

?

[Enters Laughing]

I've been reading stuff about personality disorders as I frequently do and thought this might be a good distinction between INTj and INTp? (I know what people have said about the matching of personality disorders to types, like the Oldham thing, but I think some of them characterise some behaviours in socionics. so meh).


INTj (Avoidant Personality Disorder) (I think this may apply to INFjs too, and obviously other types probably to different extents)

Quick Summary:
Avoidant personality disorder is characterized by extreme social anxiety. People with this disorder often feel inadequate, avoid social situations, and seek out jobs with little contact with others. Avoidants are fearful of being rejected and worry about embarassing themselves in front of others. They exaggerate the potential difficulties of new situations to rationalize avoiding them. Often, they will create fantasy worlds to substitute for the real one. Unlike schizoid personality disorder, avoidants yearn for social relations yet feel they are unable to obtain them. They are frequently depressed and have low self-confidence.

Symptoms of Avoidant Personality Disorder:
Social inhibition; retreating from others in anticipation of rejection
Preoccupation with being rejected or criticized in social situations
Fear of embarrassment results in avoidance of new activities
Poor self-image; feelings of social ineptitude
Desire for improved social relations
Appear to others as self-involved and unfriendly
Creation of elaborate fantasy lives

INTp (Schizoid Personality Disorder)

Quick Summary:
People with schizoid personality disorder avoid relationships and do not show much emotion. Unlike avoidants, schizoids genuinely prefer to be alone and do not secretly wish for popularity. They tend to seek jobs that require little social contact. Their social skills are often weak and they do not show a need for attention or acceptance. They are perceived by others as humorless and distant and often are termed "loners."

Symptoms of Schizoid Personality Disorder:
Weak interpersonal skills
Difficulty expressing anger, even when provoked
"Loner" mentality; avoidance of social situations
Appear to others as remote, aloof, and unengaged
Low sexual desire
Unresponsive to praise or criticism

Additional Information:
It is important to distinguish schizoid from avoidant. Avoidants will feel anxiety in social situations and have the desire to fit in, while schizoids simply prefer to be alone. It is occassionally difficult to distinguish between schizoid and Asperger's, as well.

This disorder is diagnosed more frequently and is often more severe among males. Schizoids usually do not seek treatment on their own and are often coaxed into it by a loved one.

[Phaedrus]

It is correct that Schizoid Personality Disorder correlates with being an INTp, but Avoidant Personality Disorder correlates with being an ethical type, so INTj is not the most typical type having that disorder. I think a better candidate correlating with being an INTj is Schizotypal Personality Disorder. Besides that I have seen such tendencies in at least one real life INTj, it is not unlikely that Jung had it. INTj is the most likely type for Jung, and he definitely had a view of the world that fits most of the criteria for Schizotypal Personality Disorder.

[UDP]

I think a true INTp would feel the outside pressure to get "involved" in a group emotionally in a sort of team spirit as sort of agonizing torture, a living hell.

*shudder*

"Team spirit" is degrading at the very best.

i completely agree.

Considering that team spirit and being involved in a group emotionally is a group activity that some people enjoy and others don't, what would the corresponding thing be to LII?

I.e: Pressure to be involved in group emotionally in a team spirit way IS TO ILI AS ____ IS TO LII.

?

Pressure to be involved in a situation that is all about hierarchy, especially a place where competition is a must among everyone involved.

One example is a distant pair of friends who relax by playing aggressive board games all the time. They are beta, and they feel disappointed in me because I do not like being in a constant state of competition to relax or pass the time.


What else...
A place where everyone is out for themselves, and there is no order. A place, especially working environment, where all people are concerned about is profit, and bend laws and do things in 'wrong' or 'evil' ways.




Perhaps we should consider:
IP dynamic fears EJ dynamics, as the two differing takes on "changes" is uncomfortable (Ni having do deal with sporadic emotionality of Fe).
IJ static fears EP static, as the two different takes on "consistency" is uncomfortable (Fi having to deal with constant 'threat' of Se)


that could be improved, more accurate.



PS:
IP wants things to _____________________, EJ _________________________ ?
IJ wants things to consistently stay the same, EP wants things to consistently change

[strrrng]

ok, I am wondering what the essential differences between ILI and LII are. Also, I know mbti and socionics aren't translatable, but it just annoys me that the same functions (atleast dominant and auxiliary) mean completely different things in each. A comparison of Ni and Ne without all the jargonized bullshit would be appreciated.

[Creepy-bg]

yeah that annoys us too... sucks doesn't it?

anyways, I'm not the person to answer your questions. I'll let one of the people who enjoys that sort of thing do it.

BTW welcome to the forum! :wink:

[UDP]

You are going to have to learn socionics just like everyone else. Good luck.

http://socionics.us/

[Logos]

http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...ikisocion_home

http://socionist.blogspot.com/2006/1...s-blog_14.html

And as a forewarning, be careful about bringing up the ILI/LII debate too much on these forums, because such threads typically get hijacked by a boarder, who shall remain nameless.