Donald Trump

[Dalek Caan]

I didn't say he was SEE only because he power plays, read my post closer. I was condensing the gist of their attitude in the context of that description to point out how his motivations were different than SLEs.

I know, but all you're saying is your own interpretation of SLE vs SEE. Can we keep it practical and conceptual? I don't even know what context you are referring to or how it would make any sense at all in the structure of socionics theory...

By the bit about "emotional affirmation and guidance," I was referring to SLE-IEI duality, where IEIs emotionally anchor SLEs, precisely so that the power games they do play aren't devoid of meaning. If I were to describe how ILIs complement SEEs in this regard, it would effectively be that their Te gives more direction to the social maneuvers SEEs naturally make.

It's just that SEEs aren't ruthless businessmen. You have this crazy notion of power plays and ruthless cunning and it's just not even realistic. I don't know what else to say...

And obviously no one likes him, he's a fucking narcissistic sociopath. That's not why I'm typing him non-beta, and I hope it's not why you're typing him SLE.

my god. No, I typed him SLE-Se because he has shit Fi and he fits the description of SLE-Se much better than SEE-Se by Description by V. Meged and A. Ovcharov. But for the sake of not attributing crappy things to Ti or Fi and giving people the wrong idea about things, I'd be fine if it was left at just Se.

How was it difficult to understand? I was saying p-sub betas (in my experience) have (or at least manifest) more integrity than j-sub betas, because of the Ni/Se polarization...it breeds a certain existential awareness and thus commitment that j-sub betas don't have to the same degree.

That doesn't follow logically though. An Se lead that puts a lot of energy into their Se has a dualistic neurotic relationship to their Ni. Their sense of rationality is weak and their sense of irrationality is one-sided. It's a basic Jungian duality that forms the foundation for framing psychological neurosis. Again, I don't know what else to say. I'd have to know what context you are talking about.

And I agree that Gulenko is sometimes an idiot, but I think that summation of Ni is spot on for what it's supposed to be. And, as a side note, I hope you can see how I wasn't discounting gammas from having Ni integrity in what I said...Trump is just a very distinct character.

Ni integrity? Huh?

Yeah, me pointing out how you painting SLEs as anti-social power climbers by giving a more thorough expression of their motivations and behavior is so much more me stereotyping than you.

No, you've just stereotyped Fi as power plays without rules and shit and said a bunch of other shit that isn't coherent to anyone, but you, you ignored how I even typed him, can't explain how he even has Fi without referencing power plays and rules, and say a bunch of shit in general.

wtf

Whatever

[strrrng]

I know, but all you're saying is your own interpretation of SLE vs SEE. Can we keep it practical and conceptual? I don't even know what context you are referring to or how it would make any sense at all in the structure of socionics theory...

I already mentioned the description Aylen posted in relation to what I said (which you conveniently ignored), which was quite thorough and in line with what I've been saying on a theoretical level. And as far as I can tell, all you've said is regurgitated, stereotypical bs about SLEs being power mongers and disregarding ethical valuations in their pursuits etc.

All I was trying to say about SEEs in contrast to SLEs, is that they play the game in a different, somewhat less "balanced" way—not that they're on a perennial power trip and SLEs aren't, just that SLEs are more existentially anchored.

It's just that SEEs aren't ruthless businessmen. You have this crazy notion of power plays and ruthless cunning and it's just not even realistic. I don't know what else to say...

This coming from the person who has been painting SLEs in the same way, based on facile stereotypes such as, "Fi polr no interpersonal skills or integrity" and whatnot?

And again, I wasn't trying to say SEEs are mere cutthroat businessmen; I was just saying that the player/social schemer archetype people have been continually referencing in the thread in both directions fits SEE better than SLE.

my god. No, I typed him SLE-Se because he has shit Fi and he fits the description of SLE-Se much better than SEE-Se by Description by V. Meged and A. Ovcharov. But for the sake of not attributing crappy things to Ti or Fi and giving people the wrong idea about things, I'd be fine if it was left at just Se.

Sure

That doesn't follow logically though. An Se lead that puts a lot of energy into their Se has a dualistic neurotic relationship to their Ni. Their sense of rationality is weak and their sense of irrationality is one-sided. It's a basic Jungian duality that forms the foundation for framing psychological neurosis. Again, I don't know what else to say. I'd have to know what context you are talking about.

I'm saying that p-subs are naturally ensconced in that axis, so that while an Se-SLE on a purely cognitive level may not use Ni as dexterously as a Ti-sub, their overall orientation is more Se/Ni than the Ti-sub, and thus their attitude will be anchored accordingly.

Ni integrity? Huh?

I was alluding to the Ni awareness that all betas and gammas have, in the sense implied by the Gulenko quote; not using "integrity" in the most general sense of being a good person. IME it's these types who are the easiest for me to just naturally relate to, because of how they pick up on certain nuances and shifts that stem from Ni-based processes.

No, you've just stereotyped Fi as power plays without rules and shit and said a bunch of other shit that isn't coherent to anyone, but you, you ignored how I even typed him, can't explain how he even has Fi without referencing power plays and rules, and say a bunch of shit in general.

wtf

Umm... as far as I can tell, that's exactly what you've done re: him being supposedly Fi-polr or Fe-seeking. I already qualified the power play bit about gamma Fi multiple times and conceded that betas aren't exempt from this element but simply go about it in a different way. You've literally said nothing substantial with regard to his supposed SLEness except that he's callous and emotionally immature in a way that is supposed to comport with generic conceptions of the types.

I already related how she is SLE in her type thread. Take it up there.