Which PoLR is easiest to spot?

[Grendel]

Evil is having no empathy at all for people. That's not being mean (SLE's are usually not mean, they are very suave and give an impression of kindness), but behaving in way that is not in the best interest of another person. This is something that comes naturally to Fi PoLR types. That's why they make good salesmen.

No, it's about having no compassion. Empathy is a cognitive-social process used to channel collective disgust and hatred as often as it's used to channel kindness and compassion. The -HA-driven desire to preserve order, often through use of -driven force, is one function of empathy. You'd be hard-pressed to say that instilling coercion upon your target is showing him compassion.

Compassion is an emotional incentive to help someone in worse circumstances than your own. It can be channeled empathically or it can stay fully internalized, but the motivation is always to help the other person, never to harm him. It's possible to show empathy without compassion -- and, in rare cases, to show compassion without empathizing, like in cases where you never actually meet the person you're helping face to face.

[carrina]

[.

[golden]

No, it's about having no compassion. . . .
Compassion is an emotional incentive to help someone in worse circumstances than your own. It can be channeled empathically or it can stay fully internalized, but the motivation is always to help the other person, never to harm him. It's possible to show empathy without compassion -- and, in rare cases, to show compassion without empathizing, like in cases where you never actually meet the person you're helping face to face.

Some general notes, you don't need to see these all as directed at you, although I'm taking your statements as a prompt . . .

You're making an interesting distinction between compassion and empathy, but if you're saying that Fi-polrs cannot act compassionately, my experience says this is utterly untrue. First, I think any type can behave compassionately. Second, I've known several SLEs who were real suckers for people whose circumstances were grim, and who were exactly the kind of people who would not tune out or turn away from someone they knew was suffering. I've seen them get taken advantage of, too, by people who should share some of that burden but let the SLE shoulder all of it, and by people they tried to help but who just couldn't get their act together, or were flat-out bad characters.

How I often see Fi-polr manifest in SLEs is a lack of certainty about how other people feel about them, about where they stand with the people they care about. Sometimes they assume they are not liked or wanted, and develop various defenses in response to that feeling. They also are vulnerable, as my previous paragraph implied, to being used.

I don't interpret as "force" per se, but more as the Se-dominant person being aware of where the levers of power actually are in a wide variety of situations. They see this better than many people do, and so they often find themselves situationally compelled to pull those levers. ("Someone's got to do it.") They actually will do this on behalf of other people whom they perceive as unable to do it for themselves.

I'm not trying to paint this type as saintly, but they are complex and aren't given much credit in socionics discourse for what is tender and selfless in them.

ILEs I feel less qualified to talk about, because I probably don't understand them as well.

[carrina]

Some general notes, you don't need to see these all as directed at you, although I'm taking your statements as a prompt . . .

You're making an interesting distinction between compassion and empathy, but if you're saying that Fi-polrs cannot act compassionately, my experience says this is utterly untrue. First, I think any type can behave compassionately. Second, I've known several SLEs who were real suckers for people whose circumstances were grim, and who were exactly the kind of people who would not tune out or turn away from someone they knew was suffering. I've seen them get taken advantage of, too, by people who should share some of that burden but let the SLE shoulder all of it, and by people they tried to help but who just couldn't get their act together, or were flat-out bad characters.

How I often see Fi-polr manifest in SLEs is a lack of certainty about how other people feel about them, about where they stand with the people they care about. Sometimes they assume they are not liked or wanted, and develop various defenses in response to that feeling. They also are vulnerable, as my previous paragraph implied, to being used.

I don't interpret as "force" per se, but more as the Se-dominant person being aware of where the levers of power actually are in a wide variety of situations. They see this better than many people do, and so they often find themselves situationally compelled to pull those levers. ("Someone's got to do it.") They actually will do this on behalf of other people whom they perceive as unable to do it for themselves.

I'm not trying to paint this type as saintly, but they are complex and aren't given much credit in socionics discourse for what is tender and selfless in them.

ILEs I feel less qualified to talk about, because I probably don't understand them as well.

I agree.
Although I would say se isn't really force but seeing the world and being receptive to outside experience, a sort of passive perception rather than logical thought. Being more tuned to the world could create a power dynamic where someone could take advantage of another's lack of perception. I believe the force is secondary, it's just a way to involve oneself with the world, the experience of not being a separate entity from the environment. The feelings and thoughts that a person with se lead has will determine how they interact with that experience but it comes secondary.

[Myst]

You're making an interesting distinction between compassion and empathy, but if you're saying that Fi-polrs cannot act compassionately, my experience says this is utterly untrue. First, I think any type can behave compassionately. Second, I've known several SLEs who were real suckers for people whose circumstances were grim, and who were exactly the kind of people who would not tune out or turn away from someone they knew was suffering. I've seen them get taken advantage of, too, by people who should share some of that burden but let the SLE shoulder all of it, and by people they tried to help but who just couldn't get their act together, or were flat-out bad characters.

How I often see Fi-polr manifest in SLEs is a lack of certainty about how other people feel about them, about where they stand with the people they care about. Sometimes they assume they are not liked or wanted, and develop various defenses in response to that feeling. They also are vulnerable, as my previous paragraph implied, to being used.

I don't interpret as "force" per se, but more as the Se-dominant person being aware of where the levers of power actually are in a wide variety of situations. They see this better than many people do, and so they often find themselves situationally compelled to pull those levers. ("Someone's got to do it.") They actually will do this on behalf of other people whom they perceive as unable to do it for themselves.

How would you see the Fi role of LSI differing from the Fi PoLR of SLE in these terms?

I agree.
Although I would say se isn't really force but seeing the world and being receptive to outside experience, a sort of passive perception rather than logical thought. Being more tuned to the world could create a power dynamic where someone could take advantage of another's lack of perception. I believe the force is secondary, it's just a way to involve oneself with the world, the experience of not being a separate entity from the environment. The feelings and thoughts that a person with se lead has will determine how they interact with that experience but it comes secondary.

I agree with most of this. Golden's view of it seems a bit "Ni-contaminated" but other than that, I agree with that too. Especially this, about the force being secondary in that it is just one way to involve yourself with the world.

[carrina]

How would you see the Fi role of LSI differing from the Fi PoLR of SLE in these terms?

clearly this question wasn't asked of me but i find talking about the difference between types interesting. I don't think it's a subtle distinction. I think that overall, these types can be very similar, just like many other types. But, when you get down to specifics, the types aren't actually that symmetrical in this way.

I wouldn't piece it all the way down to model A this way, I would think about it in terms of overall type. It's hard for me to talk about this just for the record and it might be muddy.

The role function works with the rest of the type and is a way to compensate (in some instances, overcompensate, painfully,) for the dual seeking function being so badly used and needing help with it (painfully desperately needing help with it BEGGING FOR HELP, JK, drama).

So for example the Fi in LSI would be a person more calmly connecting with others and actually finding ways to verbalize it, in hopes that the other person would switch it to the dual seeking and indulge the insecurity for needing vibrant, even sometimes too intense (beta) emotional commentary on the relations, or situations.

Because the SLE has different dual seeking and role function, I would compare those instead of the polr. I would suggest that the SLE (and SEE) will verbalize possibilities (sometimes stupidly and sometimes there are good suggestions) and not commit to limiting the experience in hopes that the interocular would switch to Ni, suggesting why one situation is better than the other. My oppologies that this is slanted toward gamma explanation of efficiency. the IEI would less likely verbalize lesser possibilities (although this can happen for sake of good conversation, for example, talking about mystical possibilities (jung)) but would more often suggestion better emotional states and become playful, joking, silly, or just verbalize a preference for what would be an experience worth having, in the sense that the IEI indicates what situation would emphasize the emotionality involved.

Now, to give you what you actually asked for and to compare polr to polr, the SLE would compensate for the lack of fi by joking and assuming that the other party wants that, thereby satisfying other's need for his/her involvement in the social experience. The difference is the need level. SLE doesn't think he needs help or necessarily try to get others to do this for him. its more of an offer of playful camaraderie. (which by the way, the IEI will either accept this offer happily, or will have been rubbed the wrong way and switch to demonstrative bitch mode, applicable to men too).

Although both the LSI and SLE like to participate in mutual camaraderie. The difference is in the approach, ability, and focus. They both have the painful ethical inability, SLE is less likely to suffer from it.

Medium to low functioning LSIs, or those void of a strong Fe force in their lives, are super likely to feel pain in the day today about this lack.

[golden]

How would you see the Fi role of LSI differing from the Fi PoLR of SLE in these terms?

It just doesn't seem to be as pronounced an issue. I think sometimes, though, that I forget that LSIs have some of this same weakness, because they are pretty good at putting on a pleasant, respectful face, so long as they are motivated to do so. I start to think that they're actually better at it than I am, but they aren't, as it's more shallow and breakable and it doesn't really respond to the situation but is more one-size-fits-all "acting nice." LSIs are sometimes extremely good judges of character and notice things I don't, and they don't seem as drastically generous as SLEs, they're more cautious ime.

I agree with most of this. Golden's view of it seems a bit "Ni-contaminated" but other than that, I agree with that too. Especially this, about the force being secondary in that it is just one way to involve yourself with the world.

"Contaminated."

[carrina]

LSIs are sometimes extremely good judges of character and notice things I don't

The best in the socion

[Myst]

clearly this question wasn't asked of me but i find talking about the difference between types interesting.

No worries.

The role function works with the rest of the type and is a way to compensate (in some instances, overcompensate, painfully,) for the dual seeking function being so badly used and needing help with it (painfully desperately needing help with it BEGGING FOR HELP, JK, drama).

So for example the Fi in LSI would be a person more calmly connecting with others and actually finding ways to verbalize it, in hopes that the other person would switch it to the dual seeking and indulge the insecurity for needing vibrant, even sometimes too intense (beta) emotional commentary on the relations, or situations.

The dual seeking function is not really actively seeking in any concious way. But yeah, I can relate to the Fi use as put here.

Now, to give you what you actually asked for and to compare polr to polr, the SLE would compensate for the lack of fi by joking and assuming that the other party wants that, thereby satisfying other's need for his/her involvement in the social experience. The difference is the need level. SLE doesn't think he needs help or necessarily try to get others to do this for him. its more of an offer of playful camaraderie. (which by the way, the IEI will either accept this offer happily, or will have been rubbed the wrong way and switch to demonstrative bitch mode, applicable to men too).

You find the LSIs you know try to get others to do it for them?

Although both the LSI and SLE like to participate in mutual camaraderie. The difference is in the approach, ability, and focus. They both have the painful ethical inability, SLE is less likely to suffer from it.

Medium to low functioning LSIs, or those void of a strong Fe force in their lives, are super likely to feel pain in the day today about this lack.

Pain, like?

It just doesn't seem to be as pronounced an issue. I think sometimes, though, that I forget that LSIs have some of this same weakness, because they are pretty good at putting on a pleasant, respectful face, so long as they are motivated to do so. I start to think that they're actually better at it than I am, but they aren't, as it's more shallow and breakable and it doesn't really respond to the situation but is more one-size-fits-all "acting nice." LSIs are sometimes extremely good judges of character and notice things I don't, and they don't seem as drastically generous as SLEs, they're more cautious ime.

Ok this is how I see it too. I wouldn't like to think of it as "breakable" when supported by logic too, though.

"Contaminated."

Lol, it's nice Ni!

[carrina]

The dual seeking function is not really actively seeking in any concious way. But yeah, I can relate to the Fi use as put here.
I think that the dual seeking does in-fact "seek", less consciously though, I agree.


You find the LSIs you know try to get others to do it for them?
Yea, in a sense. They are at the least very receptive and inviting towards that behavior, at the most they try to find ways to facilitate it in others, even to the point where they become abusive if others don't see this need and respond.



Pain, like?
Pain like consciously knowing that something is missing and feeling depressed over it. Feel free to disagree, but I have experienced this and am convinced of the phenomenon occurring. probably only in lower functioning people though.

.