PoLR: greatest strength or greatest weakness?

[Hugo]

I think that each function has an advantage and disadvantage in each person.

For example relates to emotional expression, but also loss of objectivity. Is a strength or a weakness? Well, it's both. This is something neglected by Socionics.

Another example I'd like to use is the polr of ENTjs which is . In socionics, it is treated as the greatest weakness. But is it really the greatest strength? Without asa polr, ENTjs wouldn't be risk takers. The weak polr allows them to be detached from physical comfort, and therefore willing to take risks and test limits. Sacrificing comfort is no big deal for ENTjs.

What are your thought on this?

[Ms. Kensington]

you know, i was just thinking about this these days, but not specifically in regard to socionics.

But the INTj has as his weak point, Se, or use of force.

I was just thinking the other day about my restraint and how this is a strength for me.

so i would agree that the polr can be seen as a lack of the negative qualities of that function, and even a strength of the type.

[Hugo]

Absolutely ... and this is something that socionics has neglected.

is a brilliant strength of INTjs, as they have amazing self-restraint.

[Cone]

Yes, Hugo, yes.

It always occurred to me that we have weaknesses because we want strengths. So I've never understood why people are always trying to improve their role function or PoLR, because that's not the way they work.

[Ms. Kensington]

hugo, can you say a little more on why you think socionics is neglecting this aspect of the polr? at present it seems like just a shift in viewpoint. but are you saying, as cone seems to suggest, that socionics might encourage people to work on their "weak" points?

[Kim]

For example relates to emotional expression, but also loss of objectivity. Is a strength or a weakness? Well, it's both. This is something neglected by Socionics.

He seems to say that Socionics has neglected the idea that the PoLR is both strength and weakness in terms of addressing and discussing it?

[Kreatuv]

Ok, couldn't this same perspective be applied to every single function preference? I mean, every function has it's good and bad moments/uses.

From what I understood of the function descriptions they listed both positive and negative aspects. Also, I think this is the same concept that typoloy has adapted on a whole already. It's a major part of typing, whether or not people admit it, to find weaknesses and strengths in types. That's all the descriptions do, basically. Of course, I think descriptions should also include the negative sides of types more so This possibly would stop people from mistyping themselves as much and picking types they aspire to be like.

Then again, maybe you're just talking about the questionable distinction between function order labels, and which ones should be placed in which order. In that case, I would agree, it seems paradoxial. I guess it's difficult to say which functions are strengths and which are weaknesses. Of course, people are going to assume that their primary functions are their strengths and their PoLR is their weakness, simply because socnioncs presents it this way. The whole idea of ordering functions by rating is pretty misleading. I've even seen some people go as far as numbering lists to represent the strengths and weaknesses. Maybe it would be better to simply categorize them and give an explination of both sides, instead of instantly assuming it is a strength or weakness?

Added: And by this I mean giving an explination of both sides of every function for each type and how it manifests itself in each type positively and negatively without using hierarchy to determine it's effectiveness.

Would that solve the problem?

[tempus]

If you mean to say that the lack of presence of the fourth function is a strength then I would disagree with you. Individuals may perceive it as a strength however, as they associate the lack of the fourth function with the abundance of the first function. I will try to explain this with an example: Te from the point of view of ISFps and INFps will be resented for completely different reasons. ISFps associate Ni with Te because Te is created through Ni. (Ni accepts, Te produces.) Thus they can come view Si as the antithesis of Te, because Ni represses Si. For INFps it will be the other way around.

In conclusion, PoLR: not a strength, but definately perceived to be one.

[Joy]

I'm with herzblut... my PoLR has been giving me grief lately.

[diamond]

I agree with Hugo, although I have one question:


So what's actually good about having a PoLR?

Yeah! What's so great about that?

[Joy]

You know I'm supposed to be really upset right now. And who knows? Maybe I am! How the hell would I know?! GAAAHHHHH

[Hugo]

I suppose as a polr helps you to give less consideration to people, and therefore more consideration to what actually needs to be done.

[Joy]

Yes and no. On one hand I can clearly see what needs to be done. But on the other hand... it really fucks with me to see that I'm hurting someone. And it's not even directly me, more the situation. That doesn't make it any easier for that person though. And it sorta makes me feel like a monster.

[Hugo]

So (as a polr) is a weakness, but also a fantastic strength.

[diamond]

yeah, sometimes I feel evil . . .

Not sure I see much strength in a weak

[diamond]

Herz, I shan't tell lest others think ill of me . . .

[mimisor]

yeah, sometimes I feel evil . . .

Not sure I see much strength in a weak

Hmm...maybe being able to do bad bad things because of a lack of a guilty concience?

funny enough, Herzy. hmm.. if we think about the holocaust, aushwitz, concentration camps etc.

Anyway, I still can't see what in the world is the Se PoLR good for..
It bothers me a lot.

[Hugo]

... I still can't see what in the world is the Se PoLR good for.

The answer is in this thread.

[Hugo]

He seems to say that Socionics has neglected the idea that the PoLR is both strength and weakness in terms of addressing and discussing it?

Yes. But not only for the polr but for all the functions of each type.

For example, in socionics is treated as the entp's biggest strength. But it is also a big weakness because it is the cause of a high level of absent-mindedness.

[MysticSonic]

Being able to use Se effectively =/= having a less amount of self-restraint than another one whom does not possess such an effective Se function.

[detail]

as a PoLR is about being the "superheroes" of society at the expense of not being personally appreciated but receiving cold recognition instead. Hidden Agenda seems to balance this in order for the goal of the "role" to be correctly oriented. I thought about that long ago but didn't look yet if all the hidden agendas act as their corresponding PoLR police to prevent the PoLRs from becoming too "individualistic" towards society thus assuring the PoLR will remain a strength. Maybe it's only a coincidence for PoLR and hidden agenda though. I can also see how "To love" would regularize as a PoLR for SLIs and ILIs in order for these two types not to become too harsh with those they know personnally, thus keeping their role of objective, ultimate evaluators. Of course it doesn't work perfectly as the human mind is more complex than a 2 variables pattern can explain. I think it's already a part of Socionics except for the "role in the society" part.

[Maxwell Demon]

Detail you are talking about social benefits rather than personal strengths and weaknesses . . . can you elaborate along the personal lines?

:wink:

[detail]

Detail you are talking about social benefits rather than personal strengths and weaknesses . . . can you elaborate along the personal lines?

:wink:

That was the point as i mentionned i was reffering to social "roles". Actually i wanted people to elaborate the theory with their own views of their types but didn't say it clearly. As for elaboration along the personal lines, well i sense a personnal consequence of the PoLR's strength floating all over the post, particularly in that passage "not being personally appreciated". That's also why i can't be sure of the type/role in society theory because the functions involved in the case of my own type tend towards the direction of such a theory.

[Kreatuv]

Stephen Hawking can't walk..
It's also his strength. If he could actually walk, do you think he would have spent all that time writing so many crappy books and studying so much nerdy crap?!

See, it works.

[detail]

See, it works.

Yes, you're right, it works.

[detail]

Ok, couldn't this same perspective be applied to every single function preference? I mean, every function has it's good and bad moments/uses.

From what I understood of the function descriptions they listed both positive and negative aspects. Also, I think this is the same concept that typoloy has adapted on a whole already. It's a major part of typing, whether or not people admit it, to find weaknesses and strengths in types. That's all the descriptions do, basically. Of course, I think descriptions should also include the negative sides of types more so This possibly would stop people from mistyping themselves as much and picking types they aspire to be like.

Then again, maybe you're just talking about the questionable distinction between function order labels, and which ones should be placed in which order. In that case, I would agree, it seems paradoxial. I guess it's difficult to say which functions are strengths and which are weaknesses. Of course, people are going to assume that their primary functions are their strengths and their PoLR is their weakness, simply because socnioncs presents it this way. The whole idea of ordering functions by rating is pretty misleading. I've even seen some people go as far as numbering lists to represent the strengths and weaknesses. Maybe it would be better to simply categorize them and give an explination of both sides, instead of instantly assuming it is a strength or weakness?

Added: And by this I mean giving an explination of both sides of every function for each type and how it manifests itself in each type positively and negatively without using hierarchy to determine it's effectiveness.

Would that solve the problem?

Yes but not necessarily from the perspective that people (As tendencies show for different types) have a dimension that is overlooked by doing that which is direction. Entropy, when considering a more complete formula that takes direction into account is different because it becomes relative to the hypothetical destination, which means that functions strengths and weaknesses are relative to the general tendency too. That's what makes a PoLR a strength and not an alternative, like your Hawking's exemple seemed to imply.

[MysticSonic]

That could easily be the result of having strong Fe.

[Joy]

That makes sense. I'm still trying to figure out how weak helps me at all.

[Rocky]

Yeah. What's the strength of a weak ?

And the strenth of having a poor is having , poor is , etc.. that's all it is.

[tempus]

Well, it's serendipity if you're an INFp like I am. We don't like to swim against the current so we just figure out which way it's going and just go with the flow. ESTjs, who have very strong Te, don't know which way the flow is going, or if there is even a flow at all.

[tempus]

Uh, that's in response to "what is the strength to having weak Te?"

[Artemis]

Well, it's serendipity if you're an INFp like I am. We don't like to swim against the current so we just figure out which way it's going and just go with the flow..

I even say that! "Just go with the flow."

[mimisor]

... I still can't see what in the world is the Se PoLR good for.

The answer is in this thread.

Yes, I can see, but still I find having a Se PoLR most uncomfortable

Anyway, in the end is just the price we pay to be strong with other functions

[Kreatuv]

... I still can't see what in the world is the Se PoLR good for.

The answer is in this thread.

Yes, I can see, but still I find having a Se PoLR most uncomfortable

Anyway, in the end is just the price we pay to be strong with other functions

You'll be more independant for it, in a myraid of ways, of course that will get you hated a lot, since most people can't do this and feel intimidated by going against the grind. Your resistance to authority or control will shape you in a unique way.

Shit, actually, I can't bullshit this one, you're right... that isn't worth the constant hassle associated with PoLR

In reality, you'll always be a reject and no one will ever understand you.
It's true. Why lie? There's nothing good about PoLR

[Joy]

Everything in life is a trade off I guess. Balance is key. blah blah blah

[Hugo]

ying yang

[Kreatuv]

You'll be more independant for it, in a myraid of ways, of course that will get you hated a lot, since most people can't do this and feel intimidated by going against the grind. Your resistance to authority or control will shape you in a unique way.

Shit, actually, I can't bullshit this one, you're right... that isn't worth the constant hassle associated with PoLR

In reality, you'll always be a reject and no one will ever understand you.
It's true. Why lie? There's nothing good about PoLR

I'm not sure if you have a clear idea about what a Se PoLR means.

I think it's the other way, not bearing the authority or control, disliking authority and control which is a pressure to a Se PoLR

Yeah, thanks for restating the obvious, dumbshit.

[Joy]

Okay, I figured out how weak can be an advantage. I think I get to decide how I feel a lot more than most people. If it doesn't make sense to feel a certain way, it's pretty easy for me to stop. I can decide to feel too, but not to as great an extent.

[diamond]

I don't interpret as being a feeling thing, more a relationship thing.

I guess the strength of is pure cold logic, detached from personal relationship issues. Not sure you can ever completely take people and relationships out of any equation, though.

Are there really strengths in each functional position? I always thought of the first and second function as the strength, the third and fourth as the dark side of the first and second, or as weaknesses.

I get what somebody said about - the weakness being absentmindedness, though.

I dunno now I'm totally confused!

[Kreatuv]

Yeah, thanks for restating the obvious, dumbshit.

More simply said, a weak Se doesn't like to receive orders which imply
making use of it.

But not only this, it's more than that, it's about general clumsiness with
everything which involves phisicality, even the most inessential
everyday task. So that's why it is most uncomfortable, because
you need to feel its effects on a daily basis, you (well me)
are "reminded" about it every moment

Oh, ok, well I admit I didn't know this part...
I was never really unskilled at moving around much, in fact, I skate really well.. I'm also good at shooting hoops and I can run pretty damn fast... Also, I worked as a stocker for 2-3 years, and I can remember the only jar I ever dropped.. haha.. most people would do tripple that within their first week..
But yeah, I'm not clumsy.. so maybe I don't have weak
that sounds like it sucks.. If you have weak Se then how can you fight good? I'm really agile when I need to be, actually. If Se controls that stuff then I definitely have some of it someplace.

Maybe weak is good, because when you are confined indoors a lot since you're constantly stumbling around, you are more likely to exercise your mind So, you get smarter and smarter... and also because you don't like taking orders... you'll purposely seek out crazy ideas no one has thought of just to feel like you aren't conforming...
Also, I was just kiddin around when I said you were a dumbshit
You cool, you cool