Se and aggression

[Mea]

You don't see how being passive aggressive, unsure, letting things go, blowing up at the wrong time is unnacceptable for a bouncer? That shit will get me killed.

? why do you sound so defensive. -_-

[Mariano Rajoy]

? why do you sound so defensive. -_-

Imagining myself behaving as an Se PoLR is expected to would have unnacceptable consequences.



Underestimation, hesitation, and complacency get people hurt. If I suck at my job, there are immediate, observable consequenses.

[ataronchronon]

Yea, being the PoLR in an unfriendly environment is really stressful for me. It can seem like the only way I can get people to listen to me is by being really testy and eager to butt heads. I earn a very bad rep when I do this, but it gets things done. The other problem is that it can be hard to turn "off" this constant aggression and I can get into arguments with people who are just making jokes or trying to be nice. I think this is the source of a lot of my conflicts with ENTps. They're just joking around and I'm trying to get people to take me seriously, and I end up putting them down a lot. I would say I have more trouble recognizing a situation that justifies the use of aggression, rather than actually using it and that is what having weak is all about. It's not that I am a pushover, it's that I often don't realize when I am being pushed over.

I think that is where our bouncing friend is coming from. Being a bouncer, it would be easy to determine which situations require the use of force and which ones don't, once you figure out all the rules of engagement. If you get to the point where you can convert to , it's much easier. Not caring about the people you have to "take care of" would also make it a lot easier.

The most trouble I have is when it comes to defending my interests against friends. It's hard to honor , damage , and use all at the same time. I had a really good IEI friend that was a total mooch and I tolerated it for a long time until I just told him to fuck off and stopped talking to him for a while (we did get together again).

[strrrng]

for anyone who is under the illusion that Se is the chess function, consider this explanation.

In chess, what do you do? what is significant? you develop a plan to capture your opponent's king. you make each move after looking at every (significant) possible move and also at how each of those moves plays out down the line. not only this, but you must be able to make the connections that aren't readily visible; you must be able to foresee virtually everything. This is what Ni does. It looks at the underlying abstract patterns governing the pieces and their relationships. It almost instinctively looks at the way things play out, given a certain move. with that, it is able to penetrate to the essence of the situation, and understand the most significant patterns, both tangible and intangible. because of this, it can easily formulate a vision, or foresight, necessary to actually do anything significant in the game. So, you are now here: you have seen these patterns and possibilities, and are now trying to decide which of, say, three plausible moves you will make. This is where Te comes in. while Ni is developing this continual vision, Te is keeping an objective check on exactly what is happening, understanding logical cause-and-effect relationships. When you have these three possible actions, Te simply compares each and eventually chooses one, not necessarily because it is better, but because some plan must be formulated. It is what implements the internal vision of Ni into an external, structured plan. given that it is dynamic, this plan can change, if necessary, but typically it will be so developed that it won't need to.

so, fuck up with that Se bullshit