tereg's thread

[tereg]

I want to branch the discussion from this thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=20304 to start a tangential discussion about what is being discussed in consentingadult's post regarding his perception of me.

Well, I think it's difficult to explain why I don't perceive you as an IEE, because I very much think I use Ne in order to arrive at the conclusion, and Ne is a perceiving function, not a judging function, but lets give it a try anyway:

First we'll start with Ne, although you didn't ask about it. What is Ne? It is about perceiving connections between thing and the perception of possibilities. We must remind ourselves that the use of Ne is not unique to ILE's and IEE's, all types use Ne to some extent. What sets leading and creative Ne apart from other styles of Ne, is that more often than not, leading and creative Ne perceives connections between things and possibilities CORRECTLY, i.e. other types do Ne too, but arrive at wrong conclusions more often, or they tend to see a connection between things THAT ARE NOT THERE. And that is what I see you doing very frequently, but nowhere was it so obvious as that page you started a while ago on the wiki in which you gave examples of your own life and how well these related to things written in Rick's extended type description. When I was going over that account, at pretty much each example I thought to myself "No Tereg, you are seeing a connection that is not there! You are reading it in a Forer effect style."

Now I can't go over all things stated in that thread, because I can't give arguments why you are wrong. This is the nature of Ne: to perceive something and know intuitively if it is correct or not. The connections you created, are imho, wildly imaginative.

This begs an important question to myself: When I draw comparisons or make connections between things (which I believe I have done several times on this forum, not just in the wiki article -- think how many times I've said "This reminds me of..."), is it contrived in such a way that I'm just exercising a some internal desire to where it appears I might be consciously trying to overexert myself to find connections between things? How accurate am I when I draw my comparisons in the sense of not bending or not manipulating what I see to fit around what I perceive? How objective am I with these comparisons?

I would be extremely worried if I were using or seeing connections like grasping for straws -- trying to see something that's not there. This is not something new that someone has brought up, so this is quite troubling. I can clearly remember my dad correcting me when I would arrive at similarly-drawn conclusions and being chastised for it. Could it be that I've just been good enough here on the forums to draw conclusions in such a way that simultaneously I've sort of consciously held myself back from reaching unacceptable conclusions so as to reach and draw "safe" conclusions and appearing to others competent in these manners so as to suggest dominance?

Then how does Ne manifest itself in you? Well, I don't know you personally, but you seem to use Ne in a way I've come to know from leading Si types (clearly, you do value Ne), and particularly SEI's. Normally, Ne as a suggestive function is a privately used function, however, when leading Si types come into contact with leading Ne types, they let their restraint go and start using their Ne socially.

I find this to be an interesting point. If I am reading this correctly this is suggesting that my is let loose more naturally and openly in a social arenas (such as the forum, Stickam, or face-to-face diaglogue) if faced with leading types. So, I guess the question that would need to be asked is: When I am using in the social arena with non- leading types, does it come across differently? Is the suggestion then that non- leading, or even non- valuing types find my comparisons and conclusions a bit awkward and contrived? Say, Gamma. What are the characteristics of a Gamma receiving suggestive information? What do the Gammas here think, then, of conclusions and comparisons that I draw?

Now on Ti: from my perspective, many of your posts are about explaining things into a 'system'. IEE's, contrary to ILE's, do not advertise their 'systems' as loudly as you do, unless they are absolutely positive that they are right about them. Ti PoLR is a privately used function. Ti mobilizing, however, although weak in quality, can manifest itself strongly in quantity. All types use Ti to some extent, so you and I, whatever our types, do too. But similar to what I said an Ne, it's leading and creative Ti types that are more likely to arrive at correct systems (within the framework of their knowledge), where other types are less likely to come up with correct systems (even though their framework of knowledge is big enough to arrive at correct systems, so it's not the lack of knowledge that would be causing the incorrect systems). Your systems are, imho, very entertaining and cute, but they are simply not realistic.

So, I guess, again, I need to ask other here: Have the systems I have drawn for myself appeared too contrived or unrealistic for myself? What then is the difference between the Delta NF idealism and vision, and your perception of the systems I create for myself? Is it the case for me, in your view, that my maturity level and "framework of knowledge" is such that I can sort of mask this to others and arrive at realistic systems some of the time?

Functions do not exist in a vacuum, and we have to look at the relationship between Ne and Ti too. I think the way you use your super-ego block points out to ILE seeking.

Finally on Fe: I don't have a good argument for this, I can only say you seem to be a good natured guy, the style of your posts reminds me of the good naturedness of SEI's (as opposed to the manipulative emotionality of IEI's). Futhermore, there is an absence of Fi-style dramatism.

Could you elaborate on this? I'm not sure I quite understand how you perceive in its totality, or perceive dramatism. I don't want to think that you see dramatism simply as corresponding to

Well, all 'n' all not a very good argument, but it's the best I can do. Once more: I don't know you personally, but based on your contributions to this forum, I would say SEI. An SEI who behaves like he's in contact with leading Ne types.

There is a thing I'd like to ask: a while ago you wrote somewhere in a thread (which I can't find) something to the effect that you were frustrated about people not understanding some things that are hard to handle for you. I'm not sure, but if I recall correctly, it was your manager in a hamburger restaurant, but I might have mixed this up. Do you know what posts I'm talking about and where I can find it?

Hmm. This might actually be several things. Frustrated about people not understanding some things that were hard for me to handle. Oh you mean like I was struggling with something, didn't know how to deal with it, another person would try to console me, but they didn't quite understand how to help me (even though the genuinely wanted to help)? I wonder if you're referring to when I was working as a shift manager at Pizza Hut and feeling overwhelmed when things were out of control and out of my control and nothing anyone could say could lift me out of it because I felt like I still had failed or let the store down. Something like this? If not, in the more general sense as you have put it in the post, that can be literally dozens of other similar situations I've found myself in that I could also describe for you.

P.S.: as for the self-typing of other IEE's, I'm not convinced all self-acclaimed IEE's here are. In particular, I would like to stick to the people I've mentioned, because I have seen enough of them and all they have said was not only in agreement with what I consider to be IEE, but also there is a lack of things contradicting the IEE typing. They are in sync. Of all other self-acclaimed IEE's, I can only say that I have not seen very much that confirms they are IEE, but I have not seen anything that contradicts it either, so I'm taking a neutral stand on them. But not with Tereg: I do not see the IEE confirmed in him, but I do see it contradicted. Furthermore, I seen many people in real life taking an MBTI test and arriving at IEE, because that is how they saw themselves, not what they really were. My own girl friend (SEI) was an example of that: When I explained MBTI to her, she thought she was ENFP, but later she came out of Rick's test as ESE (well, she is a very social SEI).

fwiw, the last time I took the MBTI, I tested ISFJ. But that was about 4 or 5 years ago, and, I'm not honestly sure how accurate that was. But, I can say that I have never tested ENFP on the MBTI in my lifetime.

[dbmmama]

tereg,

for one, that was a lot to read at once, for me anyway, at this time. but, the main thing that popped into my head is that i see you making great connections when they have nothing to do with you. like seeing how much blaze resembled lynda carter. brilliant.

but when you make connections between something else and YOURSELF, yes, i believe it gets very subjective and a bit blurry, especially for others to see. it makes sense to YOU but it may not make sense "outwardly."

i don't know what that means according to type. especially because it struck me as very personal when i read it. i do the same damn thing. i am very objective when making connections OUTSIDE of myself, even with others, but not when making connections between myself and something outside of me.

i'll be curious as to what others might say. and i love and appreciate your candor and willingness to openly examine what might be going on inside yourself this way.

[consentingadult]

The very nature of your reply is more proof to me that you aren't leading Ne, and confirms once more that you are a leading Si type. Why? It reminds me of the constant questioning of SEI's, and it makes me feel tired (no offense), because you seek a Ti-style answer and I'm better at Te-style answers. Furthermore, I do not think a leading Ne types will be asking so many questions about their own type, as they are know-it-all-windbags

On top of that, you're writing style is making things very blurry for me, in fact, it is almost making me dizzy. I have a hard time following you, and if you are IEE, you're the first leading Ne type that I have a hard time following.

Anyway, let me answer your questions to the best of my ability, perhaps others can elaborate on them as well.

This begs an important question to myself: When I draw comparisons or make connections between things (which I believe I have done several times on this forum, not just in the wiki article -- think how many times I've said "This reminds me of..."), is it contrived in such a way that I'm just exercising a some internal desire to where it appears I might be consciously trying to overexert myself to find connections between things? How accurate am I when I draw my comparisons in the sense of not bending or not manipulating what I see to fit around what I perceive? How objective am I with these comparisons?

I would be extremely worried if I were using or seeing connections like grasping for straws -- trying to see something that's not there. This is not something new that someone has brought up, so this is quite troubling. I can clearly remember my dad correcting me when I would arrive at similarly-drawn conclusions and being chastised for it. Could it be that I've just been good enough here on the forums to draw conclusions in such a way that simultaneously I've sort of consciously held myself back from reaching unacceptable conclusions so as to reach and draw "safe" conclusions and appearing to others competent in these manners so as to suggest dominance?

First of all I'm sorry to hear that you were chastised for errors in thinking. I call that 'bad parenting'. But it doesn't surprise me, as I have heard about this phenomenon in SEI's before. It could very well be that your behavior on this forum is schema perpetuation: you are trying to prove that you are smart, and you are using people on this forum (and probably others in your life as well) as a proxy for your father (this is called 'transference' in psychology). Well, they day you accepted you had anything to prove, was the day you lost the war.

Let me make something very clear here: I do not think SEI's are stupid, far from that, I think SEI's are intelligent and they know a lot of stuff, but typically they hold back their intelligence. My own girl friend, who is SEI, is regarded by many people in our social circle as 'intellectually inferior' to me, where I myself think we are equally intelligent (although emphasis differs). This is because she holds back her intelligence from other people, unless there is someone whom she trusts (read: leading Ne types).

And no, you cannot not create 'safe conclusions' and be IEE at the same time. Leading Ne types are open about what they think, or they don't say anything, not compromise by reaching a conclusion that is safe and acceptable.

I find this to be an interesting point. If I am reading this correctly this is suggesting that my is let loose more naturally and openly in a social arenas (such as the forum, Stickam, or face-to-face diaglogue) if faced with leading types. So, I guess the question that would need to be asked is: When I am using in the social arena with non- leading types, does it come across differently? Is the suggestion then that non- leading, or even non- valuing types find my comparisons and conclusions a bit awkward and contrived? Say, Gamma. What are the characteristics of a Gamma receiving suggestive information? What do the Gammas here think, then, of conclusions and comparisons that I draw?

Indeed, you would have to ask Betas and Gammas. Most likely they will be rejecting of your personality because.

So, I guess, again, I need to ask other here: Have the systems I have drawn for myself appeared too contrived or unrealistic for myself? What then is the difference between the Delta NF idealism and vision, and your perception of the systems I create for myself? Is it the case for me, in your view, that my maturity level and "framework of knowledge" is such that I can sort of mask this to others and arrive at realistic systems some of the time?

Sorry, but after reading this paragraph, I really need a breath of fresh air. What the hell is it you want o know here??

Could you elaborate on this? I'm not sure I quite understand how you perceive in its totality, or perceive dramatism. I don't want to think that you see dramatism simply as corresponding to

is, amongst other things, about morals, about ethics, about ethical behaviour between people. Have you ever seen the anger or rage of an ESI or EII when their value system is violated? Well, with IEEs it's the same thing, but less intense: when you violate an IEE's Fi-based values (whatever they are) they will use their demonstrative Fe to burn you down to the ground (Borderline PD style rage). Their is no hint of Fi in your posts, no moralism, certainly not Fe rage which is rooted in Fi. To me, you seem to be a good guy, one who is very accepting of people, not someone who, like a tradittional IEE, is very picky and moralistic in their approach to choosing friends (Betas especially find this kind of 'clientelism' very annoying).

Hmm. This might actually be several things. Frustrated about people not understanding some things that were hard for me to handle. Oh you mean like I was struggling with something, didn't know how to deal with it, another person would try to console me, but they didn't quite understand how to help me (even though the genuinely wanted to help)? I wonder if you're referring to when I was working as a shift manager at Pizza Hut and feeling overwhelmed when things were out of control and out of my control and nothing anyone could say could lift me out of it because I felt like I still had failed or let the store down. Something like this? If not, in the more general sense as you have put it in the post, that can be literally dozens of other similar situations I've found myself in that I could also describe for you.

Yes, pizza hut it was, I'll look it up and create another post in this thread.

fwiw, the last time I took the MBTI, I tested ISFJ. But that was about 4 or 5 years ago, and, I'm not honestly sure how accurate that was. But, I can say that I have never tested ENFP on the MBTI in my lifetime.

I don't know about ISFJ, but ESI is out of the question: it is very clear that you value Ne and I know ESI's to be quite skeptic: they have a total inability to recognize patterns, e.g. my mom, who had two men in her live, and both of them beat the crap out of her. Still, in her opinion, this was only accidental and there was no pattern in her own behavior style that led her to choose these men in the first place. Such is the nature of ESI's skepticism towards Ne, it is why they lack the capacity to grow intellectually and spiritually, and why they are so few of them on this forum.

Finally, I want to say that I could be wrong about you being SEI, but I don't think I'm wrong about you not being IEE.

[FDG]

Such is the nature of ESI's skepticism towards Ne, it is why they lack the capacity to grow intellectually and spiritually

That's a bit of a big leap, from being skeptical towards Ne to being incapable of growing intellectually and spiritually. After all, there are still 7 functions left, and many of them can be deemed as capable of supplying intellectual and spiritual stimulation

[JuJu]

I was gonna reply to consentingadult in the otha thread, but since we have this new one...

And so does my SEI girl friend, and my LSI ex, and my SLE ex. Many types (perhaps all of them??) seek stability and support. However, I do think SEI's have a greater need for it, are also more capable of giving in to it, whereas IEE's might be more split about it.

Wouldn't the SEI be able to provide stability, to a degree..? That's what I've found, dating SEIs... My apartment never got dirty and she went to work on time (that's what I consider stability haha.) She also bought me all of these pans I never use... Ah, I miss her... These dishes keep piling up.

(joking... Although she did say that she enjoyed doing the dishes... Oh, bless her.)

[consentingadult]

I was gonna reply to consentingadult in the otha thread, but since we have this new one...



Wouldn't the SEI be able to provide stability, to a degree..? That's what I've found, dating SEIs... My apartment never got dirty and she went to work on time (that's what I consider stability haha.) She also bought me all of these pans I never use... Ah, I miss her... These dishes keep piling up.

(joking... with an undertone of seriousness... She said she enjoyed doing the dishes... I felt like I was falling in love.)

Exactly! SEI provide the kind of stability IEE's seek (although they also provide a lot of annoying Fe in the process ) My own life got a hell of a lot more stable since I got into a relationship with my current SEI girl friend.

[consentingadult]

That's a bit of a big leap, from being skeptical towards Ne to being incapable of growing intellectually and spiritually. After all, there are still 7 functions left, and many of them can be deemed as capable of supplying intellectual and spiritual stimulation

Yeah, I must admit you're right. but this is how it looks from my perspective.

[consentingadult]

I can't find the Pizza Hut thing on this forum, Pizza Hut is only mentioned on the Wiki, and not in the context of what I was thinking of. It's hard to provide a decent argument on something that can't be referenced, but here it is anyway:

It was a situation in which you weren't performing well in the eyes of someone else, possibly a customer. You then started to 'whine' about how people had no understanding for difficulties in your work. Basically, I felt you were shifting responsibility off your own shoulders. It was an Fe appeal for understanding, a form of 'external locus of control', whereas Fi valueing types tend to have an 'internal locus of control': they tend to lay blame on themselves if things go wrong, even when they are not responsible. Such is the nature of Deltas and Gammas. An IEE will blame himself first instead of appeling for sympathy and understanding, which would be denigrating to IEE's.

That piece of text (I still can't find it) is a clear example that you value Fe over Fi.

[implied]

I can't find the Pizza Hut thing on this forum, Pizza Hut is only mentioned on the Wiki, and not in the context of what I was thinking of. It's hard to provide a decent argument on something that can't be referenced, but here it is anyway:

It was a situation in which you weren't performing well in the eyes of someone else, possibly a customer. You then started to 'whine' about how people had no understanding for difficulties in your work. Basically, I felt you were shifting responsibility off your own shoulders. It was an Fe appeal for understanding, a form of 'external locus of control', whereas Fi valueing types tend to have an 'internal locus of control': they tend to lay blame on themselves if things go wrong, even when they are not responsible. Such is the nature of Deltas and Gammas. An IEE will blame himself first instead of appeling for sympathy and understanding, which would be denigrating to IEE's.

That piece of text (I still can't find it) is a clear example that you value Fe over Fi.

any other examples? i thought a focus also shifted towards a tendency to shirk responsibilities and obligations. and please, tell me, where are you getting this Fe = external locus of control/ Fi = internal locus?

I don't know about ISFJ, but ESI is out of the question: it is very clear that you value Ne and I know ESI's to be quite skeptic: they have a total inability to recognize patterns, e.g. my mom, who had two men in her live, and both of them beat the crap out of her. Still, in her opinion, this was only accidental and there was no pattern in her own behavior style that led her to choose these men in the first place. Such is the nature of ESI's skepticism towards Ne, it is why they lack the capacity to grow intellectually and spiritually, and why they are so few of them on this forum.

well, diana, looks like you're screwed.

[consentingadult]

any other examples? i thought a focus also shifted towards a tendency to shirk responsibilities and obligations. and please, tell me, where are you getting this Fe = external locus of control/ Fi = internal locus?

You are extrapolating here, although I can see how me not being complete on how locus of control manifest itself, could have led to the confusion.

every type is capable of both external and internal locus of control. However, the manifestations differ.

I also think in itself is not about shirking responsibilities, this is caused by weak Se and Ti/Fi, and only in pathological cases.

When speaking of IEE's, I don't think they shift responsibilities to other people, they simply neglect (shirk) these responsibilities and let them grow over their heads.

[JuJu]

When speaking of IEE's, I don't think they shift responsibilities to other people, they simply neglect these responsibilities and let them grow over their heads.

BINGO

consentingadult, I believe, understands the IEE very well...

Over time I've noticed Socionic differences between me and tereg, but I've attributed it to subtypes--the way we write, subject matter, etc... Should I elaborate?

I like tereg very much--and in all honesty, believe that he knows himself/Socionics well enough to make a good judgment... I never read his reaction to Rick's extended description... Maybe I'll go do that.

This discussion could lead to a better understanding of the IEE type for everyone.

[aestrivex]

This begs an important question to myself: When I draw comparisons or make connections between things (which I believe I have done several times on this forum, not just in the wiki article -- think how many times I've said "This reminds me of..."), is it contrived in such a way that I'm just exercising a some internal desire to where it appears I might be consciously trying to overexert myself to find connections between things? How accurate am I when I draw my comparisons in the sense of not bending or not manipulating what I see to fit around what I perceive? How objective am I with these comparisons?

I would be extremely worried if I were using or seeing connections like grasping for straws -- trying to see something that's not there. This is not something new that someone has brought up, so this is quite troubling. I can clearly remember my dad correcting me when I would arrive at similarly-drawn conclusions and being chastised for it. Could it be that I've just been good enough here on the forums to draw conclusions in such a way that simultaneously I've sort of consciously held myself back from reaching unacceptable conclusions so as to reach and draw "safe" conclusions and appearing to others competent in these manners so as to suggest dominance?

this behavior would make sense under the context of Ne + subdued logic.