Differences between LII-INTj and ILI-INTp

[Myst]

right, to connect the dots, perhaps the only way to discern the difference sometimes between LSI and LII with varying accents is quadral values.

Eh, no. LSI is a S type, LII is an N type.

[Bertrand]

Some people may just want to know a person's type to know it, not for any practical reason but because they find typing a fun exercise/hobby and prefer to be accurate.

And yet others prefer real world applications...i.e. in the real world people may not have time to pull out an eighty question sheet and others may not be inclined to show much about their cognition. VI provides a nice shortcut in that sense. Quickly tagging the person's socionics type can provide accurate information about the person's cognition - strengths, weaknesses, blindspots, competencies, incompetencies - that may otherwise take a longer time to figure out.

What somebody does with the result is up to them.

right but we've already pointed out that "information" about their cognition is totally unreliable, it has to produce a result, at the very least measured on the backend via trying to leverage the "typing" toward some end in order to verify its veracity. otherwise its just a meaningless and false sense of confidence

Eh, no. LSI is a S type, LII is an N type.

I mean discern their type by analyzing the person, not that there is no difference on paper between LSI and LII; after all LII has an I in the middle and LSI has an S, but what does that mean and what are the consequences of getting it right or wrong

[Kill4Me]

No, I pointed out that VI doesn't work if you are grouping by big noses and small heads.

You had asked why don't we just type by big noses and small heads.

Those particular physical markers are not valid identifiers.

[Bertrand]

right but neither are yours until you can demonstrate there's something at stake we can use to verify whether or not your markers signify a pattern that is real when judged against no pattern at all

what I'm pointing out is the existence of ethics which governs whether things are worth engaging in, and its so interesting that this is such a difficult concept, I really had no idea people struggled so much with this, even though I knew not everyone was on the same level

[Kill4Me]

Mine are valid identifiers as reflected by the coherence of the groupings.

[Bertrand]

and this is why no one cares enough to adopt your system because it doesn't do anything but look pretty in your own mind; like I said, its like you're trying to reify the dream of an IEI with words and pictures, but you picked a bad (or non) IEI because you adopted the dream from one without a strong sense of why the dream matters, its like you adopted a bankrupt dream (ethical intuition). I see this happen a lot when people take some non dual to be their dual and allow them to guide them and they end up trusting them to their detriment because it wasn't what they needed. its actually starting to sound like you're LSE and what you really needed was an full blown Dostoevsky so you could blindly execute their vision, with the trust of a child. it is sad because its like you're being abused and you don't know it

[Kill4Me]

VI is not my system. I don't care that anybody adopts it. These are my positions. Now you, you make a lot of stupid assumptions and you reason manipulatively with your Ne-creative. It's naive of you to think that physical tells haven't evolved over time that give human beings a way to size up key parts of people's personalities.

You're not a proponent of VI. I get it. I would expect a bullshit artist like yourself to have difficulty with anything that pins reality down in a cut and dry manner.

[Bertrand]

Im not at all against VI, in fact I think its obvious that the way a person lives their life effects their appearance and further that genetics influence a way a person lives their life, so there's an ongoing flow of compounding influences that put people on a trajectory that is plain to see... my point has never been about the legitimacy of VI it has been about the reality of quadral values. the two are not opposed to one another, as they seem to be in your mind

[Kill4Me]

You're referring to a visual intake about the way a person lives their life and its effect on their appearance.

I think its obvious that the way a person lives their life effects their appearance and further that genetics influence a way a person lives their life, so there's an ongoing flow of compounding influences that put people on a trajectory that is plain to see...

That's not VI. Quadra values technique is a load of crap.

[Bertrand]

if you equate VI with your personal approach to socionics then yeah I'm not a "proponent" of it, but just cause you claim VI as your own doesn't make it true, it makes you ridiculous

[Kill4Me]

I never claimed VI as my own. As I said, VI is not my system (VI was being used in Socionics long before my introduction into Socionics).

[Bertrand]

oh it sounds like you don't know what VI is then

[Kill4Me]

I know what VI is and what you described is not VI, slick.

I think its obvious that the way a person lives their life effects their appearance and further that genetics influence a way a person lives their life, so there's an ongoing flow of compounding influences that put people on a trajectory that is plain to see...

You can call that VI but it's an equivocation on the term.

[Bertrand]

yeah, you're probably right; anyway maybe you're onto something so I wish you luck in developing your VI system. I think we all stand to gain something from your insights because at the end of the day the lack of sophisticated ethical motivation doesn't make it any less of a useful tool. sort of like how the atom bomb lead to nuclear power etc. what man intended for evil God intends for good, etc

[Soupman]

My ILI friend tends to like assertive people, people who doesn't fear to show their desires/sexuality/wants and chases after them as he tends to have problems with showing how he feels especially when it is something intense.

I would nope away from such a person and am drawn to people who give an air of "fairness" and emotional warmth. I just get really easily influenced by anyone showing genuine warmth and interest to me and while I have problems with verbalizing emotions too, when it is intense, I have a need to somehow emote it out so making weird noises, grinning ear to ear with sparkling eyes with flailing hands or dying whale noises tend to be my go to expressions at such times.

He also tends to have an eye out for how to profit from things, ie he is rather into video games and knows how to make charas to sell in games, a Te focus to it, while I am a lot more into needless details/trivias/whatever the game maker could be thinking.

Also he tends to love speculative lores where nothing is as certain, things like Dark Souls lore while I feel a need for certainity so I tend to like things like Portal series where it is a lot more humorous. He doesn't really like antichamber as well, for entire purpose of that game is understanding how logic of that game works and there isn't much replayability value there as once you figure it out, things can be rather easily linear after that. While for me it is a precious game for the maker of the game, who is likely to be an LII or Alpha NT at least, made the game to observe and play with how people thought while they play a video game. It was his way of understanding human nature/psychology which he finds boring.

Funnily enough, he is actually the type to say "Science is not just facts, it is also imagination." with his Ni poking in, marveling at possibilities of the universe while I am a lot less into that and would rather focus on things I can systematize to a certain extent and then placing some wiggling room.for exceptions.

There is also being a 5 vs 9 involved there too probably, as he is 5w4 sp/so but those are the things I have observed.

He is a lot undecisive inside while he comes off as more certain outside, while I am a lot more certain/have a categorizing outlook to things inside but come off as more open minded and softer/less certain outside due to making my intuitive associations outside, using things and people's reactions as a sounding board.

You are describing the Dominant-Normalising subtype romance. I had a big argument with Roan "Aestrivex" LaPLante, about that delineation were I said I hated the horrible cold SEE description and the general aggressive spirit of the "quadra". What you describe as LII suggestive actually suits me. The popular description of "Te" was so off, I actually agree with Roan's re-description here because it's the more accurate version. ILI are more intellectual than practical, and not inherently business oriented - the more scientific inclined are perplexed looking at what is supposedly "Te".

ILIs place great importance on factual accuracy and a basic understanding of how things work. They may be inclined to look down on or pity people who consistently demonstrate ignorance of what they consider to be simple, essential facts. It is often also very important to ILIs that a person's beliefs account for any new factual information. For this reason, ILI's are often characterized by a nagging and constant sense of doubt, contradiction, and misinformation. They tend to be skeptical of other people's positions, and even frequently question their own. In groups the ILI will often question the validity of the information exchanged. Likewise, many ILIs will use a mocking and aggressive tone if they believe that the information being presented is incorrect or absurd. ILIs can also be very adept at removing errors in facts and statistical data, especially in undertakings that they consider as high priorities. ILIs may brush off failure unconcernedly, viewing it as merely a necessary misstep on the road towards success.

A sense of the efficiency in an ILI's life is a prerequisite for his inner peace. This manifests very differently in ILIs than SLIs; the latter are much more likely to be proactive about making their physical environment comfortable and managed with an efficient use of resources. In contrast, ILIs are largely indifferent to their physical surroundings, and their desire for efficient allocation of resources may extend to less tangible forms, e.g. the allocation of resources in a game or hypothetical political scenario, the efficiency of a computer program or corresponding piece of code. An ILI will demonstrate perfectionistic tendencies most clearly in such situations where they can work out the details in their heads or on paper.


ILIs can differ significantly from Te dominant types in that they are less likely to take direct action to achieve practical and societal gain, and may not even choose to gather new information very actively. ILIs often do not acquire knowledge with any clear purpose other than to further their own understanding. When ILIs do use their knowledge for specific purposes, such knowledge is not usually considered a means to an end. When ILIs are required to pursue practical knowledge required for some aspect of their functioning -- such as how to fill out a series of bureaucratic forms -- sometimes ILIs embrace this information and quickly assimilate every aspect of it. More often, they will be disinterested and spurn this activity to whatever extent possible.


ILIs tend to have a deep, factual understanding of subjects or fields of interest. Sometimes ILIs perceive the real-world occurrences around them, such as the daily tedium of work or school, through a lens created to understand the information that they care about most, though they may choose not to share this perception with others. They often have little to contribute in many social situations, but when a topic of interest comes around they can end up being the center of attention, disseminating the information of their expertise.


ILI humor is typically saturated with irony, cynicism, witticisms, and sarcasm. When provoked, an ILI can engage in highly toxic sarcasm, insulting the offender's intelligence. In such situations, the ILI can come across as cold and malicious, but the ILI will see himself as simply punishing an obnoxious individual for his foolishness.


ILIs are often highly critical of others' ideas and actions. Typically this is because these ideas violate the ILI's understanding of the facts, or because ILIs see more efficient or realistic solutions. ILIs often channel their energy towards constructive criticism because they frequently lack the initiative to take decisive action themselves.

Also the "Aggressor-Victim" erotic attitudes felt stupid to him, but shouldn't be surprising given that he's a Dominant subtype, thus breaks that stereotype. Even the psuedo-aggressor descriptions are kind of off, they seem to exist to shoehorn "Ni" as unanimously victim like in romance.

What you've described as pertaining to LII actually suits me but if you are actually that sociotype then our information dissonance will emerge on closer communication. With Cognitive "LIIs" this pattern Viktor describes remains true despite congruent quadral values.

V.V. Gulenko "Criteria of reciprocity"

Discussion Tuning


Communication has a formal tone. The information received from your quasi-identical partner often doesn't quite meet your expectations. It will be necessary to adjust yourself to the style of conversation to have a balanced discussion. It is very difficult to understand each other on the spot – meaning of the statements made by your quasi-identical partner is going to be disclosed over a long period of time, when you will come back again to the same problem. The same thought partners articulate in different ways. Because of the inability to prove anything to each other, misunderstandings and unproductive debates arise. As a result partners tend to underestimate and devalue each other.


Binary signs of intertype relations


Quasi-identity is good for public debates. In presence of a receptive audience, partners usually support one another, pick up and develop each other's ideas. Bold, far-reaching projects are proposed. However, in a narrow circle it becomes more difficult to understand each other: an impression forms that the partner doesn't really understand what you're saying.


Quasi-identical relations are stable when partners first agree on positions before taking on anything serious. Otherwise, there will be little benefit from mutual support. Being unprepared and not tuned into working together, it is impossible to get a useful result in these relations.


Quasi-identical relations develop pragmatic logic of both partners. A lot of prospective ideas come to mind. Emotions are relevant only upon successes or failures in their implementation. These relations also promote a sense of humor and give rise to optimism which is not always warranted.


Quasi-identical partners tend to test their ideas in practice, however, they do this not by gradual realization but by bold implementation. These relations move partners towards taking risks, awaken their entrepreneurial spirit, instill optimism. Quasi-identical pair can use what has been tried and tested in the past, restore positive traditions.


These relations can offer great dynamics. They are oriented at adventure, push partners into risky behaviors. In these relations plans often change, new projects get put forward, tried and tested. It is impossible to stop and take a breath. In a static environment, quasi-identity breaks down rapidly.


In quasi-identical relations, at first you don't feel tension. Hope persists that your partner will understand your point of view and join in. However, this does not occur. The longer both work on the same problem, the more they diverge. To preserve unity, both have to pretend that they are of same mindset. This won't save them for long and they will have to come up with something new or go back to the past pending issues.


Advice on getting along


Quasi-identical relationships have pronounced differences of opinion. The longer you talk, the more difficult it becomes to understand the point of view of each other. Understanding based on logical level is a stumbling block in this relationship. Relations tire, but fatigue is not felt right away. Some time after communication both partners experience an elevated mood.


It is recommended to invite quasi-identical to solve difficult, previously not encountered problems. Tension of these type of relations alleviate by engaging in enterprising and productive activities. Avoid haste in making important decisions, because these relations are lacking a sense of reality.


Democratic attitude, sense of humor, optimistic outlook on life strengthens these relations. Seeming lack of problems is deceptive. Quasi-identical pair is well suited for risky or adventurous operations. Static environment, peace and quiet, are not advised. Frequently travel, learn about the world. Show interest in novelties and try to create something new yourself.

[Myst]

You are describing the Dominant-Normalising subtype romance. I had a big argument with Roan "Aestrivex" LaPLante, about that delineation were I said I hated the horrible cold SEE description and the general aggressive spirit of the "quadra". What you describe as LII suggestive actually suits me.

I really don't think you are an Se valuer. Maybe not LII but not Se valuing.

[Myst]

I mean discern their type by analyzing the person, not that there is no difference on paper between LSI and LII; after all LII has an I in the middle and LSI has an S, but what does that mean and what are the consequences of getting it right or wrong

What it means... The basic function dichotomies (S/N in this case) are... well, basic.

LII applies their logic on abstract ideas and LSI applies them on concrete things.

[Soupman]

I really don't think you are an Se valuer. Maybe not LII but not Se valuing.

As it's normatively described - sure but mutually, neither does it make sense entirely as "POLR", "Superego", "ignoring", or demonstrative (unless you are trying to shoehorn the theory and ignoring it's issues with the other premises).

[Bertrand]

soupman makes an excellent point, 1D x is very different than its normative description, and that's precisely how we tend to view it even when we know its not instantiated in the case at hand; its hard to escape the normative definition as leaking through because that becomes its baseline "meaning." in other words anything below the normative is something other than Se or what have you because the normative is equivalent to the function itself, because it has to be understood somehow and thats precisely what a normative description is. so when people see "oh Se is lacking" its like yes! it is! but that doesn't immediately switch it to non valued, which is a different dimension

[idontgiveaf]

ILI - ili males in real life are well, in my own view.. Or maybe i only confirm one ili male in real life. My opinion doesn't reflect all the ili males.. But, tbh i don't really get along with em. It's actually hard, eventhough i try they still doesn't like me. It's not that i hate em, but they doesn't like me.
I don't fucking know why. He's fucking weird. No matter what i do. He is like an old man.. A serious one.. I actually thought he's older than me.. But he's 3 years younger. Wtf 😂 but still act as if he's older lol xD
He's not like that to everyone but only me i think :/
But i have female ili, we fortunately are bestfriends i mean, close friends. She trust me a lot.

LII - lii males are really cool. I like em. I don't have problems dealing with this type. I get a long really well. Plus they're naturally nice tbh. And they're really intelligent tbh. Like yeah.

[Myst]

As it's normatively described - sure but mutually, neither does it make sense entirely as "POLR", "Superego", "ignoring", or demonstrative (unless you are trying to shoehorn the theory and ignoring it's issues with the other premises).

Well ok that's all I can say, I don't know you enough to say more.

[Lao Tzunami]

The LII I know want you to accept their mindset, which is different from the ILI's I've know. Ben Carson (if you accept he is ILI) said something like, "if you have an opinion before seeing the facts, you're not doing it right".

[Kill4Me]

I type Carson LII-Ti 9w1 sp/so. He's just too stuffy and pedantic for an ILI. The quote reminds me of what Elon Musk (LSI-Se) said in an interview, about how he likes to "boil things down to the most fundamental truths, what are we sure is true and then reason up from there."...that whole thing about Ti's cognition for hard-headed data collection.

[Rebelondeck]

Look at they way they engage with others. LIIs tend to listen and observe without saying much; sometimes they seem to go blank and lose eye contact for a while; and they use convenient openings in conversation to insert themselves. When LIIs start, they tend to stop listening and almost lecture; they don't like interruptions until they're finished with the thought. The cycle repeats. ILIs never disengage but often come across as being really defensive even when they're not; they tend to want to project a self-assured, knowledgeable nature, and will spout bravado when all else fails. ILIs tend to play devil's advocate a lot and will beat subjects to death; LIIs aren't so focused and seem far less communicative, but they don't appear nearly as self-righteous even though they may be.

a.k.a. I/O

[The Reality Denialist]

It depends a lot from individual but:

Some ILI's are very judgemental towards originators when something is not done best way possible and you point it out... it was just a comparison. stuff...

Some of them tend to be more fixed to get something done "right" according to their taste. Again .

LII's get more focused to get everyone's definitions and logic right. Things and actions should be fair and "right".

[Rebelondeck]

........LII's get more focused to get everyone's definitions and logic right...........

LIIs don't do that well in dynamic conversations unless they're well prepared. They may bring up simple points of logic and definitions as a tactic to give them time to think; unlike ILI, they don't think well on their feet. ILI will bring up similar items but usually more for defensive reasons - playing "silly bugger" or deflecting. In spontaneous conversation and verbal sparring, the ILI has the upper hand; in a prepared debate, I'd give it to the LII. The LIIs do try to get information exchanges perfect while ILIs try to keep their beliefs or images intact, and often neither succeeds but their conversations can be rather productive when they're not of a personal nature......

a.k.a. I/O

[Spermatozoa]

Here is the difference explained in simple terms:

LIIs need a mommy/daddy, so you can seduce an LII by feeding it.

Whereas ILIs need a escort, so you can seduce an ILI by fucking it.

[WinnieW]

LIIs need a mommy/daddy, so you can seduce an LII by feeding it.

Your opinion is based on stereotypes, I guess. I admit that I'd like to have a butler.

[Spermatozoa]

Your opinion is based on stereotypes, I guess. I admit that I'd like to have a butler.

A little temptation, and that can surely be arranged.

Does your ideal butler look like this?

[Spermatozoa]

Two women can provide you with a more efficient service than one.

[WinnieW]

Yes, you are right, but what about the housework? Cooking, cleaning, washing...
but yeah, butlers are the nurturers for adults.