that description doesn't sound anything at all like my idea of EIIs either but if wacey isn't EII i'll eat my toe.
@Wacey, are you saying that when you cut loose in environment fitting for that, it is characteristic to you to entertain/create/play character, as in finding what would be interesting for you and your company for you to be and going for that?
That would allow following to be possibly applicable as unfavorable description.
That is certainly not characteristic for LIIs regardless of openness and activation level.almost as an attention-starved performing monkey, acting in eccentric ways and flooding you with his behavior if you even show the slightest amount of reinforcement. He is highly obsessed with his image, to the point of being in love with it.
Not communicating and hiding what you think and feel does not constitute a persona.
Being polite is acting according to good social norms and is that regardless of whether there is good will behind that(likely) or whatever. From that perspective "fake politeness"(which I have read used) is senseless combination of words.
Se entertains the image giving it power. Ne disregards it searching for essential qualities and potentials that can be exploited/realized, not changed. That seem to me to directs toward recognition of inherent qualities not creation of persona. Not assuming that I know all the ways the element can be applied though.
Unlike to Fi, concrete people do not exist to Ti, there is only abstract of "a person", one for everyone. That is the difference that might be an explanation, provided you are correct and such is needed.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I'm just naturally eccentric. Haters gonna hate.
But no.
I think LIIs may have a tendency to think about their image, but don't other types care about how people view them as well? If I had to describe the image I tend to portray of myself, "eccentric", 'intellectual", "absent-minded" would definitely be adjectives to make an appearance. For example, if the line for food is too long at college, then I'll go do something else even if all of my friends are going to eat dinner at that time. I genuinely don't want to wait in line for food, but I also sometimes enjoy people finding it funny how "odd and quirky" I am.
And I do think that LIIs like ESEs because they give praise so easily. Yes, yes I am "so smart".
Warm Regards,
Clowns & Entropy
Hey @Esaman. I was having a look over what you wrote and I wanted to tell you that my impression of you is that you are subtly kind. It's nice how straight forward you are, so thank-you.
To your first point my thoughts are no, it is not characteristic for me to play a role or entertain and create a character by imagining what would be interesting then going for that. That is not the reason I would cut loose in an favorable environment. I can guess that would be the realm of Fe/Ni, or Ni/Fe. You see when I read the original quote that I stated I relate to, I wasn't taking it verbatim and applying it word for word to my experience. I felt that the writer was being poetic and this appealed to me. He states it's "almost as an attention -starved monkey", not, they are an attention starved monkey. My thoughts went something like this: "what does the writer mean when he says that?" Is what he said true for my experience?" "Is there some kernel of truth here", "what is he/she trying to get at?"
I believe he was trying to say that EII's really do lack for attention. I often feel as though I want to act a little odd ball and be seen and appreciated for my good qualities. I would like to be this way, because in truth I am a tightly wound person who is highly critical. It's strange because on one hand EIIs are so kind and really do see all the subtle inter-plays and yet they are so stubborn. It could be that I am a little different then many EII's out there and this could be because I had a painful upbringing that included foster care homes and a government home. I cannot relate to this fairy tale image of the ever compassionate EII. I do not feel kindness for others at all times and I am quite defensive, even unnecessarily so. I am a little leery to admit this, because it might be inturperated the wrong way. Sometimes I can behave like a real dink. I am sorry for it and always feel a ton of remorse when it happens. I often was made to feel like a bad child, even though in my heart I did not feel like that was true. So, yes, I am somewhat eccentric and as I become older I care less about hiding that fact. I had to make peace with my past, and must deal with the residual fallout in my minds eye. We are both a product of our upbringing and free of it as well. Was not the writer Dostoevsky eccentric?
I have met others who do not "shut me down" by offering subtle disapproval, or mockery, or strange looks and what not if I act a little goofy or say things that are not quite "right". When I am with these people and have mentally assessed that it is safe for me to do so, then I will flood others with strange, wistful behavior usually. If you have ever met a LSE in real life, then you will see that for them a little bit of performing on cue and following their lead is sort of expected by them. I was not taking this sentence literally and I feel that others shouldn't either.
Now, about the persona, everyone has a persona, or the face that the world views them by. Not communicating and hiding what you think may not constitute a persona, but it certainly is part of the process of a persona. I want to be myself.
I am not sure what you meant by talking about fake politeness, because I was not talking about that. I was talking about equanimity, or composure. I am naturally composed and have a hard time remaining so when I am very upset, this is part of the balance I strike with polr Se. The realm of assertiveness is where polr Se plays out in our EII. I either go way over board, screaming, shouting, or on the other hand by totally withdrawing. For example, if I need to approach a boss or co-worker about easing tensions that I and them have found ourselves in I would rather just say nothing at all, even though clearing the air would be so much more helpful. In this way I appreciate when others broach the subject for me and am at a loss when no one ever does that.
polr Se also plays out in image. I am chronically unsure of how others think of me and am continually thinking about that. I think this is where @Maritsa comes in. I too am personable to pretty much everyone in real life. Image consciousness is an area of extreme discomfort for me and is part of the reason EII are supervised by SEE. For instance, I once wrote this long ass entry here a while back. @Scapegrace pointed out that I was basically writing in my journal. I was peeved for sure because this was not the image I was wanting to have. I simply wanted to be candid and share. She was absolutely right and she helped me see that what I was writing did indeed seem like journaling. It's this image that I worry about and why flattery does nothing for me. Nobody likes to hear their faults and like I have stated many times on this website, EIIs are always aware of their faults and as they get older are less apt to apologize for them. It's why they so adeptly handle LSEs who come with many faults and who need a flexible person to handle them. If a EII has faults, then you can be sure an LSE is going to point them out often bluntly, and no matter how painful for the EII they will acquiesce and try to change for the better, because self improvement is deeply rooted in an EII psyche.
If an LII has faults, be it social or personal, an ESE has a very different approach to handling them. It's as though the try and set the stage by allowing the LII over time to see where they can improve. Personally I think alphas like nit picking in a Ti and Fe sort of way that drives me bananas.
I apologize if this post seems to meander, I really am trying to get my point across and feel as though it is lost in translation from my brain to my fingers.
Last edited by wacey; 12-14-2013 at 05:57 PM.
Yes, self improvement and constant evolution is highly important to me. But, I'm often misunderstood and so are my intentions which is sad because I only intend and want the best for others. I aspire internally to be a safekeeper and a care taker inside because I value those traits and those qualities in others and strive to fulfill them when I don't see such activity around me and I have to say that I'm not very good at those things at all.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
@Wacey
Thanks, that was helpful.
Of the thoughts I have formulated at this time is:
Fi is 3rd person perspective.
@Esaman,
Interesting, how so?
Fi is primarily evaluation of actions socially and social contracts. Those evaluations are somewhat objective- external to subjectivity of a individual to be interpersonal. Evaluations then characterize the individual. Primary interest of Fi in internal world of the individual is the degree to which he has internalized and is committed to different social contracts.
No matter how involved and complete is the insight of the Fi base in to subjectivity the final conclusion is to be of the above perspective- 3rd person (outside) characterization of social entity.
That perspective is functional and is beautiful in its aristocratic (classical, idealized) way of holding a person/oneself...
.. but I reject it. It seems like playing with dolls to me, and I will not hold myself or anyone as such. I attribute this to Fe valuing. Looking in to individual looking for Fe, means finding what he wishes and what he feels about things. Then you analyse it on how much sense it makes and what connections to be had with your own wishes. Straightforward as hell. Fe is first person perspective. No personas or characterizations are needed if you connect on such level - you are behind all the faces.
I think, LII would have instinctual barrier of holding persona as self.
Persona is image or construct.
Fe is not image or construct.
Consciousness is not image or construct.
Ti construct is a construct. ohh... I guess that happens, while being undermined by Ti not being personal.
Cannot say that for myself, because "self" refers to Fe in me and Fe is to be accepted on it own terms. Add to that negativism and issues, and I have a problem.
@lungs
Ne subtype is foggy. Ij judgements kept more on the low (as if under a curtain) with increased sociability. I suppose reaction to Fe could be it ..but I'm not sure. Already know EII who can come across as Logical unless you know them well or there's a situation that demands "ethical action".
LII have periods when they are much louder and spontaneously exited expressive than I am. I tend to not produce loud fun joking things or ways much. I'm much more melancholy and serious although I tend tolaugh and get light hearted perioda where fun is brought to me
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
What are the strong, manifestly observable differences between LII and EII??
The profiles that are out there seem vaguely interchangeable to me. Arguments can be made for EII overanalyzing too much, and LII being a perfectionist and so on.
What are some clear ways you can distinguish between the two, especially overlooking nuances that could be associated with gender instead?
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
I find quite hard to mix them.
Deltas are very earthy people and thus they drive towards it in every way possible. This is very explicit in their speech.Their idealism is also very pragmatic in common but bit more fluffy when considering individuals. This is more apparent in EII than in IEE.
When contrasting LII's and EII's EII's are not the ones who will hold a fixed view but may exhibit stubbornness in more singular directions than in holistic ways.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
https://www.sociotype.com/tools/type-comparison/LII-EIIDifferences between LII (INTj) and EII (INFj)
1. INFjs are more likely to believe in objective truths than INTjs. That is, INFjs are more likely to believe there is a correct or best way of doing something than INTjs.
2. INFjs are often better at solving and minimizing interpersonal problems, where as INTjs often struggle understanding them.
3. INFjs place greater value on their resources than INTjs. For INFjs, resources like their money, time, sleep, etc., fall into their "inner personal space," and the INFjs will be more likely to deprioritize an interest if it starts to drain these resources too much.
4. INTjs place greater value on their interests than INFjs. For example, INTjs will maintain high levels of energy and focus on an interest they value, even deprioritizing their other resources to maintain the interest. For example, INTjs may spend a large amount of energy on an interest they value, often to the detriment of their time, sleep, relationships, money, etc.
5. When conversing, INFjs types are inclined to communicate in the form of monologues, where each party has "its turn." Because of that they subconsciously attempt to transform a dialogue into a series of monologues. Conversely, INTjs tend to prefer more of a question and answer style format.
6. INTjs are more likely than INFjs to perceive and distinguish themselves primarily through personal qualities. INTjs focus on individualism more than INFjs.
7. INFjs are not as inclined to compare and verify concepts as INTjs. INFjs assume that these can have only one unique interpretation (the "correct" interpretation), and INFjs often do not think about the fact that the other person may be interpreting them differently. Much more than INTjs, INFjs apply concepts such as "objective reality," "unequivocal facts," and de-emphasize concepts; INFjs consider that they know the "right" way of doing things, how something "truly is," etc.
8. INFjs are often able to form quicker opinions of others they have just met than INTjs. This is based on the ability of INFjs to draw conclusions about the person based on the groups the person belongs to; INTjs are more reluctant to make these inferences.
9. INFjs are more likely than INTjs to use "emotional anchors" that resonate with their internal emotional condition. These emotional anchors could be a book, a movie, a place, a song, etc. INFjs use these anchors to strengthen their inner emotional state and thus will repeat the experience: e.g., re-reading a book, re-watching a movie, continually going back to a place to experience the emotions associated with it.
10. INFjs, more than INTjs, frequently perceives and defines themselves and other people through group associations. INFjs focus on collectivism over individualism.
11. When working on a project, INTjs experience more discomfort (than INFjs) if the project does not have a clearly delineated end-goal or result. This happens because INTjs have more difficulty monitoring and understanding how the project is developing than INFjs because they are outside of the process.
12. When assessing an option or available choice, INFjs tend to focus more on how the choice could benefit them (what it would potentially yield) than INTjs would. On the other hand, INTjs would be more cognizant of the potential risks and potential losses that may accompany the decision that INFjs may unconsciously minimize.
13. INFjs tend to internally combine emotional exchanges with other activities rather than separating them out like INTjs. E.g., INFjs see having fun occurring simultaneously with other activities, such as work or even serious affairs. INTjs are more likely to internally separate out having fun with other activities, although the two can be interchanged at a high frequency.
14. INTjs are more inclined to believe there are relative truths than INFjs. That is, this relativity is perceived by INTjs as an extenuation of the differing beliefs, opinions, intentions, etc. of each person.
15. INTjs are more likely to make decisions based on logical reasons than INFjs, who are more likely to make decisions based on their own feelings.
16. INFjs are more likely (than INTjs) to use special rituals or other culturally accepted formalities when forming relationships with others. What that means is that the emotional proximity and relationship status for INFjs be more externally predetermined. Additionally, INFjs generally progress in relationships through stages, and therefore are more familiar with these stages than INTjs. INFjs tend to be more linear in their relationship progression than INTjs, and INFjs assign importance to the formalities of recognizing the start and end to each of these stages.
17. INTjs are often more interested in studying systems, structures, and functionality than INFjs.
18. INTjs are relatively better at assessing the emotional atmosphere occurring in a group or during an activity than INFjs.
19. When meeting someone knew, INTjs are not as likely as INFjs to perceive "getting to know somebody" as a special kind of activity. INTjs know very well whey they are getting acquainted (i.e., what the purpose of the relationship is, be it business, personal, travel, etc.). INTjs, in contrast with INFjs, do not divide the process of getting acquainted into consecutive stages; rather INTjs immediately establish the necessary emotional distance in contact and can regulate it if needed. To bridge the gap between poorly acquainted people in a group INTjs amp up the emotional tone; this can be mutually experienced happiness or misfortune. The name and title of the person are of secondary relevance to INTjs and their relationship with the other person.
20. When INFjs form opinions of others, these opinions are formed under the influence of their attitude towards the group to which the person belongs. To INFjs, it is incomprehensible how it is possible to belong to two opposing groups at the same time:, i.e., "you're either with us, or with them and against us."
21. INFjs tend to prefer using persuasion as a means of convincing others to do something, where as INTjs prefer to use argumentation as a means of convincing others.
22. INTjs pay more particular attention to aspects of a situation or plan that are insufficient or lacking. This can be interpreted by others as INTjs having a negative assessment of various situations and events (.e.g, "the glass is half empty). On the other hand, INFjs pay more attention to what is actually present in a situation, and this can be interpreted as an affirmative or positive manifestation of the surrounding world, situations, possibilities, and prospects (e.g. "the glass is half full").
23. When developing a plan of action or process, INFjs tend to see themselves as "within the process"; they are immersed in it. Often because of this, they have more difficulty managing several plans at once. On the other hand, INTjs tend to place themselves "outside of the process"; they dissociate from it. For them the process or situation is something external from themselves.
24. When something is perceived by INFjs as being incorrect, they are more likely (than INTjs) to tell the person who made the error what they did wrong and how to do it the right way. INFjs are focused on who made the error and helping them to correct the mistake.
25. INTjs are more likely (than INFjs) to seek new and novel experiences rather than returning to something already lived through. They will generally only re-read a book, re-watch a movie, or revisit the same place if they have forgotten it or are hoping to learn something new from it.
26. INFjs are more vulnerable to logical manipulation than INTjs. However INTjs in contrast, are often more vulnerable to emotional or ethical manipulations than INFjs.
27. The "comparison and verification of concepts" is a more common phenomenon among INTjs than INFjs. This comparison not only concerns INTjs methods, but also their understanding, terminology, etc. INTjs are attuned to the fact that different people might understand and interpret different concepts and terms differently. They perceive terminology as well as actions of other people as part of the subjective concept inseparable from personal opinion, position, intent, etc. In contrast to INFjs who perceive terminology as "objective," INTjs understand personal differences behind terminology (this applies even to well established terms) and they attempt to compare and verify them.
28. When something is perceived by INTjs as being incorrect, they are more likely (than INFjs) to ask why it was done that way. Instead of necessarily trying to correct the person who made the error, INTjs attempt to understand the person's reason for their decision/action.
29. INTjs attitude towards a specific person (more so than INFjs) is based on their personal characteristics (authority, intellect, personal achievements, etc.) INTjs recognize superiority of certain individuals drawing from their personal qualities
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
LIIs value Fe and EIIs don't. So LIIs are more likely to "loosen up" and participate in a lighthearted atmosphere.
EIIs think a lot more about their relationships and the people around them. They're better at being sensitive to other's feelings. They may focus a lot on work-related tasks but they also find them inherently stressful and ask for help more unlike LIIs.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I’m serious type. I think about and am concerned for the serious matters in life. LII still like emotional varied environment. My LII friend posted this on his Facebook “Cheers happy venereal disease day” while matters of sexuality I view as serious holy almost difficult to talk about and instead I speak about love. Still he speaks about love too but he finds a lot more to laugh about than I do. He can be very much like ESE in his intensity of expression on a rare occasion “loud, intense”
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I wonder if deltas are fans of Monty Python's Flying Circus. That could be a real clarifier.
Personally, I am a fan. @Beautiful sky, what do you think of Bjork and Monty Python? Are you a fan or are these artistic forms of expression too out there for you??
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
I feel like I am both.
I like the idea of being EII more. But then I recall a manager I had for two years. She looked like Mike Tyson. She acted like a guardian angel toward me, as my physical energy was kind of low for the job and she filled in the gaps for me with vigor and strength and would assure me everything was done, time and time again. So maybe SLE is my Supervisor and SEE my conflictor.
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
base T types are cold, technically interested
base F - the opposite
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Thomas Sowell vs Luciano Floridi
Stern vs Cold (autistic)
//In a superficial way as both are Balanced Stable in temperament, both types - especially their masculine representatives, are composed "serious" and seem to have it together with a direction and chosen orient towards life.
INFJ are stern, ideological on matters of principle, especially the more traditionally masculine representatives who become seers for their community.
INTJ by contrast are cold-autistic nominally as opposed to serious, taking things as a matter-of-fact
Collectivist vs Individualist
(generally ideological "group" worldview vs generally individualist)
*gets a bit tricky considering Sowell is a libertarian, nevertheless his ideology is a blue print for the collective as opposed to embracing chaotic, incoherent individualism as is the justification with individualist libertarians - Luciano isn't a libertarian BTW.
Individualists are less interested in a overarching worldview looking at things peripherally, more concerned with looking at the world as is - predominantly. That's the more dispassionate scientist in general (by the way all types do science even SFs, the supposedly least interested as evident in Neil DeGrasse Tyson ESE)
Pseudo-caregiver vs infantile
if you know them personally this will become evident, Pseudo-caregiver has a habit of teaching and coaching their partner whilst the infantile does not being sort of manipulated and lead by their caregiver. Feminine LSE women are more matter of fact dutiful dealing with more pragmatic matters in care and attentiveness, whilst Feminine ESE jazz it up with more flare and unorthodox attentiveness to their partner.
Last edited by Soupman; 03-03-2019 at 07:46 PM.
I think main difference really comes in Fi/Fe valuing and how this shows up in their life-
For example, an EII friend in my friend group at uni really doesn't like it when the atmosphere becomes too "childish/emotively emotionally charged". Sometimes IEI friend and I will be just making weird faces at each other, or making random noises to laugh over them, while she would seem fairly uncomfortable with the attitude and stay away a bit instead of joining in. She also tends to have a... heavier, more melancholic vibe to her, and while I'm not the most social butterfly (far from it) I tend to be known more as cheerful/a lot more emotive when I actually get out of my head and actually look at what is going on around me.
ESI friend and her tend to talk a lot about other classmates' lives and about interactions they had with others from the uni, or if they have a love interest on someone, the mood is generally a lot more subdued as they talk, though some laughter either from ESI friend making a blunt, unexpected comment or a joke at EII's expense comes up. When they talk about others, 60% of the time I have no clue who they are even talking about, as now I'm realizing that I don't even know the names of half of the class, whoops.
From distance, we both come off as not exactly the most social ones and tend to interact with people if other side initiates contact first, but once the contact actually develops, the difference is usually that she is actually interested in details of others' lives/somehow ends up actually involved in others' lives, while I tend to stay peripheral aside from common interest talks and when I find a common interest, people do say that I suddenly light up, while her demeanor is more stable. Even when I try to be more considerate of others and actually try to show an interest in someone's life, I end up worrying that I might end up asking too personal questions and don't want to have a misstep by assuming I'm close to someone or that they even want to become someone that is a part of my life, while her contact with others is a lot more fluid and has her actually getting to know them, while I either get bored with such topics or again, feel worried to ask too many questions on the personal life (or even forget that I should be asking those at least out of courtesy when I get too hyped about a common interest).
We both have an interest in art/literature, though her main interest lies in more tragic real life influenced stories, a more grounded in reality and people approach to it (with 4w5 sp first morbidness and interest in especially death related music/art/stories) that are more personal to her that she doesn't share as openly, though it can get quite image heavy and generally emotionally heavy, while I tend to try to find someone to share my thoughts and feelings on anything that gets me emotionally stimulated and want to bounce off thoughts with someone, a need/desire to share that experience with someone and tend to skirt around as heavy topics. (my 9ness might be rubbing off on that, though.)
That's all anectdotal though, but didn't want to give a complete cookie-cutter copy paste on the matter, so welp.
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
The way you approach the theory is of a feeling type. “I like this person, thus he is my dual.” “I hate this person, so he is my conflictor.” Thinking types are not that confident in their likes/dislikes to base the entire theory around their attitude towards others. In fact thinking types might ruin real relationships if they don’t think someone is their dual or mirror. It’s totally the opposite of what you are doing. You get what I’m saying?
I may be wrong but that’s my impression.
Without a word spoken, it can be difficult to tell them apart and both are perfectionists in their own way but once they speak, they're really easy to distinguish.
LII vs EII
strategist vs moralist
absolute vs relative
practical vs philosophical
smarter than thou vs holier than thou
advisor vs preacher
accomplishment vs nirvana
director vs diplomat
straight forward vs complicated
clear vs nuanced
cutting vs sensitive
doer vs organiser
wants competence vs wants respect
analyse vs valuate
projects vs causes
seeks resolution vs seeks balance
a.k.a. I/O
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
One could possibly be on the fence but both the Ti and Fi-processes would likely have to be somewhat reduced sets due to processor limitations. One has to keep in mind that only one set of processes can arbitrate in a stable system. Process priority establishes type - not online time. A process control split between Fi/Ti would likely create chaos. Both types can do both sides of my list to some extent but when the rubber hits the road, which side has the highest tendency/priority?
a.k.a. I/O
Yes, it could mean reduced resources overall if the two are more evenly balanced. When I look at my overall quality of life, my academic and professional successes in areas of logic outweigh my relationship successes.
I found it easy to make friends in high school and college and then early in my career, but have struggled with this ever since. My family relationships have been horrific in recent years and situations in which one should "fight for oneself" in response left me horrified to even be in such a situation to begin with, and leaving the battlegrounds rather than engaging in my basic human rights. Instead I would retreat into reason and would question, how could they behave so irrationally and hurtfully with their ignorance? So if there must be a weighing of F and T, it seems I would be more of a T type female.
As a reminder, I aced college philosophical Logic class no problem, didn't even have to read the book, whereas the average grade in the class was a C and many had dropped it due to the difficulty level. Every aptitude test I have ever taken in pure logic has been an A or usually a perfect score. It is much higher than my analytical reasoning (which is more deductive). I have more confidence in my ability to deal with the logical than the interpersonal aspects of a situation. When it comes to interpersonal relations, I lean toward an overly idealistic goodwill to all and control none type of approach.
Also, when it comes to the interpersonal life, I married late in life for the first time at age 44. I would imagine that F types would tend to marry easily younger and be able to capture their significant others more easily at a younger age. I have had some pretty exacting standards and was not usually assertive towards those I was interested in over the years, to the loss of many interested prospects who also would not make the next move, awaiting a cue from me first. That lead to several impasses.
Just a reminder - the first type test I ever took was an MBTI one at age 15 and I got INFP. Then by age 18/19 for years I got INTP most of the time yet occasionally INFP, INFJ, INTJ. It was always high intuition, high introversion, and the rest was up in the air. I got even scores between F and T much of the time. I relate to type profiles of INFP INTP INTJ and INFJ particularly certain INFJ MBTI profiles seemed accurae when they wrote more about the mystically-oriented side of ones nature.
Subjects I have studied in my lifetime include - dance including choreography of ballet and modern/jazz, visual art, piano (self-taught), music composition, computer programming (8 languages), philosophy, foreign language dabbling, drafting and layout spaceplanning, architecture, jewelry making, CAD (7 systems), theology, comparative religions, religious textual studies, chakras and kundalini, personality type systems (enneagram, socionics, DISC, mbti), astrology, tarot, Jungian psychology, cosmology, astrophysics, astronomy, physics, fractals, mathematics, Celtic cultural studies, music appreciation (folk, new age, pop, alternative, electronic, choral, classical), drawing and painting (acrylic, oil, watercolor, gouache), writing avant garde poetry, photography, stained glass work (limited experience), mythologies, collecting rocks and minerals, metaphysical lore of crystals and meditations with them and much experimentation, new age ideas.
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
@vesstheastralsilky When under stress or out of their comfort zone, LIIs can behave ESE-like (secondary configuration); they can often become fairly animated and or chatty - sometimes dramatic. However, once this spate is over, the results are viewed through LII processes so I wonder if your perception of EII processes being at work is really the behaviour your secondary processing configuration as seen through LII glasses.
a.k.a. I/O
Skip to end for core distinction.
Ti and Fi are not value judgments....neither falls into some moral domain. Socionic functions are information processors. Ti and Fi are information processors. That means value neutral. As I have said many, many times before, the butchering of any socionics function into a conflation with morality must end. It's good that people start seeing socionics purely in terms of cognition...
Let's start with definitions:
Fi cognition is an internal mirror of other people's inner worlds. It would be like having another person inside your skin, that you're constantly introspecting to. Fi has heightened capacity to experience that other person's thoughts/memories/goals/discomforts/impressions and grasp the other persons' psychology as if it were organic to their own.
Fi/Ne cognition excels at envisioning/anticipating/forecasting immediate and distant futures for the person....so the possibile ways in which the surrounding context will effect that person's psychology.
Ti-lead equals hard-headed data collection. Ti-leads are looking to get the most fundamental truths (axioms) and then build knowledge from the ground up. It's the ultimate in the linear, logical, clear-headed scientific approach. (in contrast, Ni-leads have the strongest cognition for archetypes.) Ti-dom is looking more for the unknowns and perpetually involved in looking for and identifying problems that go into the deeper "undercurrents" of an outward structure. In contrast to Ti/Ne, Ne/Ti has a more non-linear cognition....you can find examples of time distortion in Ne-lead's reasoning process once you start to pull them out of their skin. Not so for Ti-lead.
Ti/Ne is a correlator of systems as Ne lends a cognition for synthesis. However, Ti/Ne has no vision in which they're sacrificing off old systems in order to build a new one. They aren't innovative, but tend to be doggedly loyal to what's already in place.
Distinction follows from definition:
the main distinction between Tidom and Fidom is in their approach to knowledge about other people. Ti-dom disregards aspects of the inner view - thoughts, feelings, spirit, values, consciousness (the mental, emotional, spiritual inner life)-- in their approach to studying and explaining people's behavior. Fi-dom overemphasizes the inner mental, emotional, spiritual inner life when it comes their evaluation and understanding of other's people's behavior. Thus, Fi devalues/underemphasizes the objective properties in other people and strongly cognizes subjective properties...Ti devalues/underemphasizes the subjective properties in other people and strongly cognizes objective properties.
Ne-creative in Ti-dom cognizes the possible ways in which the environment will condition an individual's behavior. Ne-creative in Fi-dom cognizes the possible ways in which the environment will effect an individual's inner world.
Last edited by Kill4Me; 03-14-2019 at 10:42 PM.
If it weren’t for the occasional ting of Fe, LII look like me (emotional, easily bothered sensitive, thoughtful and somewhat melancholy). I think we look a lot alike but they can obviously do Ti so much better than I can. I know this because my use of Ti never frees my sister’s clenching Fe moods.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I am having exactly the same difficulty deciding my type. Mostly I tend to lean towards EII but some people got me to convince myself I am LII based on the photo thread. I definitely feel more fulfillment in small social circles compared to lively groups.
This post isn't about the differences between LII's and EII's, but rather is about their similarities.
I know an LII researcher, and every time I stop by his office, the first thing he does is offer me a coffee from his wide selection of coffees. I will drink anything because I'm Si-PoLR, but he doesn't know that. He's treating me as if I were an ESFj instead of an ENTj. My mask is that I dress very, very well during business hours. Plus, he probably feels that weird mental attraction that takes place between Ti-doms and Te-doms and is mistaking it for Duality.
I have an old drinking buddy whom I kind of love, and I recently realized that he is a semi-Dual, an EII. I don't see him very often, but he stopped by this weekend and before we sat down, he asked me if I was going to offer him some coffee?
I paused, reoriented, and said, "Sure! Um, the place is being renovated and all I have right away is instant in cold water." (It's what I drink, actually.)
He just looked at me like I was a total dummy.
"But I have some real coffee in the freezer."
"I'll have that."
So I brushed the plaster dust off the coffee grinder on the floor and washed the wood chips out of the pot on the stove and started boiling water while I cleaned the French Press, and he was happy.