Questions for EIEs-ENFjs about leading Fe function

[Gilly]

lol that made me kind of giddy for a second, both writing it and seeing people agreeing with it...h3h Socionics is cool sometimes.

[Gilly]

I am still kind of giddy-ing...this kind of thing really charges me up for some reason, lol...I was about to go to sleep but now I think I'll have another bowl of Rice Krispy Treat Cereal

[unefille]

I am still kind of giddy-ing...this kind of thing really charges me up for some reason, lol...I was about to go to sleep but now I think I'll have another bowl of Rice Krispy Treat Cereal

LoL.

But hold your horses!

There are still some issues to be tidied up:

1. I can't be Beta unless idolatrie is also retyped. We definitely have either activity or dual relations. I'm not leaving her in my opposing quadra - if I'm coming, I'm bringing luggage! If she's not Beta, that's going to throw a spanner in the works for my type as well.

2. If Beta NF: EIE or IEI?

[consentingadult]

Hmm. I'm pretty certain I don't want someone to share the story with in order to have them clarify what I thought of the events. I travelled with idolatrie and sometimes we're telling the stories and she's got a different spin on something, and I don't hesitate to correct her. I don't doubt my own memories or what actually happened.

this is not quite what I meant. What I meant was, that once you have shared a story you are excited or troubled about, you have 'objectified' it, even when the other person says nothing at all. Once told, it becomes part of the outer world so you can look at it more objectively, perhaps you apply some minor corrections, and then you can let it go and be done with. But perhaps this is too much of an abstract story. I often tell people: words are like little boats we use to carry over emotions from one person to another. So it's a sort of emotional release thing. You need other people for that. Now perhaps you can imagine, from a theoretical perspective, that a base-Fe person has way better control over their emotion expression and thus a lesser need to use other people for emotional release. I hypothesize that a base-Fe person can do emotional release all by themselves, privately. But his won't help you, as it is just a hypothesis

Edit: basically I'm saying IEEs release emotions to get rid of them, EIEs to solidify them. Does that make sense?

I enjoy telling stories, generally. I find it entertaining, for both myself and other people. I like sharing experiences with people because then they also become a source of memory for me. Like once, walking down a street with the sun shining, I was suddenly reminded of some happy things that took place around the same time the year before, because of the weather. And I could call someone who went on that trip with me to talk to them about it, which made it nice, because I like that shared sense of remembrance.

This sounds like Ni to me, but doesn't have to contradict IEE either, because occasionally, IxEs privately get hit by flashes of Ni too. The shared remembrance thing sounds like Fe to me.

I'm definitely keeping the 'playing the role of teacher' thing in mind, but different teachers, valuing different things, would probably affect different personas.

Exactly, but IEEs have Fe and Ni in the id block, so are capable of playing that role and look like EIEs.

I'm not helping you out very much, I'm afraid.

[Gilly]

Heh, it's not so much retyping you as talking about nostalgia and the specific way I experience it...fucking sends shivers down my spine It's like drugs...bwahahaha.

fwiw I could easily see Idolatrie as SLE. I'm not going to try to put together a strong case or anything, but it doesn't seem unlikely at all. My mother is a for sure LSE and I can't make any kind of favorable comparison; her style is much more open, laid back, almost naive, compared to the more striking vibe I get from Idolatrie. You both give the impression of having strong, potentially controversial, love-me-or-hate-me personalities, which definitely rings MUCH more true with Beta than Delta.

[Gilly]

I often tell people: words are like little boats we use to carry over emotions from one person to another. So it's a sort of emotional release thing.

This strikes me as very much Fe+Ni that you are describing here.

The paragraph that it came from seems to be focused on a kind of transference or catharsis, which, again, I identify heavily with Fe blocked with Ni.

I think it can be taken for granted that IEEs and EIEs have certain things in common, so highlighting the fact that something which points to EIE doesn't exclude IEE is redundant at best, and deceptive at worst.

[unefille]

This strikes me as very much Fe+Ni that you are describing here.

The paragraph that it came from seems to be focused on a kind of transference or catharsis, which, again, I identify heavily with Fe blocked with Ni.

I think it can be taken for granted that IEEs and EIEs have certain things in common, so highlighting the fact that something which points to EIE doesn't exclude IEE is redundant at best, and deceptive at worst.

I think you're actually quoting consentingadult there, not idolatrie.

[Gilly]

2. If Beta NF: EIE or IEI?

Well, as far as Enneagram correlations go, 3 is much more EIE than IEI; however, 4 is pretty much the "default" type for IEI, so given that as your wing, it could potentially go either way; however given the fact that many 3 traits point to more emphasis on Se and Te, I would say that EIE is much more likely, so your enneagram type is perhaps very relevant here.

However, on the whole, it really comes down to a few basic things (these are all related to the same things, functionally speaking; I am simply going to elaborate upon angles that I think are worth taking to figure them out):

-Temperament (this can be misleading, and is sometimes particularly hard to gauge with Fe dominants)
-Dual-Seeking Function (do you have more of an apparent need for Ti or Se)
-Asymmetrical Relationships (who is more likely your supervisor/supervisee and benefactor/beneficiary, although the latter set is very much related to the question about your Dual-Seeking function, and can't really be clarified without discussing essentially the same things)
-Reading descriptions (this is often undercut in this community, but reading the right description can lead to some very big "aha!" moments; the important thing to remember is that descriptions are meant to give an overall picture of a type, rather than provide specific details that are always present in representatives of a type).

Some descriptions that I have found to be helpful in differentiating between IEI and EIE for myself:

http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Socioscope_EIE
http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Socioscope_IEI

[Christy B]

I still think you are IEE unefille.

[Gilly]

Do either of you, idolatrie or unefille, have a webcam?

[dbmmama]

I still think you are IEE unefille.

that's because you still believe yourself to be delta...

[idolatrie]

fwiw I could easily see Idolatrie as SLE. I'm not going to try to put together a strong case or anything, but it doesn't seem unlikely at all. My mother is a for sure LSE and I can't make any kind of favorable comparison; her style is much more open, laid back, almost naive, compared to the more striking vibe I get from Idolatrie. You both give the impression of having strong, potentially controversial, love-me-or-hate-me personalities, which definitely rings MUCH more true with Beta than Delta.

My main problem with considering SLE is the fact I don't seem to fit the descriptions of irrationality. They fail to describe how I am to such an extent it seems silly to try to 'see' that in myself. My problem with LSI is that I also don't fit the descriptions of introvert. When I look at those two lists, I pretty much disagree with them point by point. Whereas, the EJ description just natually fits and always has.

Since unefille has been questioning her type, I went and re-read all the descriptions of SLE and LSI. Whilst I can see how elements of them apply to me, I have to admit that LSE still fits best. However, I would find it very difficult to believe that unefille and I are from opposing, or even different quadras.

[unefille]

Edit: basically I'm saying IEEs release emotions to get rid of them, EIEs to solidify them. Does that make sense?

I'm not helping you out very much, I'm afraid.

I think it does, but I'm not sure what I do, or what I'm doing exactly. I guess, I don't really need to expel my emotions. I've noticed that some people, when they're upset, have to let it out. I have no problem holding it in and controlling what I'm feeling. I try to be considerate about whom I let out my feelings to. I talk about my feelings a lot as well, not in a dramatic way and not to everyone, but I do, and I do it because the process of talking about it helps me clarify how I feel about someone. Whether or not I actually like them or dislike them. It helps me sort out all the emotions and figure out the message underneath.

I think one of the reasons I was so attracted to IEE in the first place was the impression that EIEs are quick to judge and gauge 'enemies'. Perhaps this impression is wrong. I often don't have strong permanent feelings about people, which I associated with the fluidity of Ne+Fi. I have sharp impressions of people and I can get upset at people, but a bad encounter will not make me think they are a bad person who I don't like. I can strongly like and dislike someone in the MOMENT reacting to them, but I don't use that impression as the basis for how I see them as a person or how I value them.

I appreciate your assistance.

Edit to add: Ok, I lie. Sometimes I do talk about my feelings in a VERY dramatic way. After all, I don't want to bore the other person. But mostly because it's fun to, sometimes, make crazy expressions and say outlandish things and make people laugh when talking about something otherwise too serious to contemplate sharing.

[unefille]

Do either of you, idolatrie or unefille, have a webcam?

I suspect I do somewhere, but it's not set up at the moment and my old computer is all packed up.

[idolatrie]

Do either of you, idolatrie or unefille, have a webcam?

Yes, but not set up on my computer. If I have enough time, I'll try to do something with it.

[consentingadult]

This strikes me as very much Fe+Ni that you are describing here.

correct. it is abut subconscious Id based (in the Freudian sense) motivation.

[consentingadult]

I think it does, but I'm not sure what I do, or what I'm doing exactly. I guess, I don't really need to expel my emotions. I've noticed that some people, when they're upset, have to let it out. I have no problem holding it in and controlling what I'm feeling. I try to be considerate about whom I let out my feelings to. I talk about my feelings a lot as well, not in a dramatic way and not to everyone, but I do, and I do it because the process of talking about it helps me clarify how I feel about someone. Whether or not I actually like them or dislike them. It helps me sort out all the emotions and figure out the message underneath.

I think one of the reasons I was so attracted to IEE in the first place was the impression that EIEs are quick to judge and gauge 'enemies'. Perhaps this impression is wrong. I often don't have strong permanent feelings about people, which I associated with the fluidity of Ne+Fi. I have sharp impressions of people and I can get upset at people, but a bad encounter will not make me think they are a bad person who I don't like. I can strongly like and dislike someone in the MOMENT reacting to them, but I don't use that impression as the basis for how I see them as a person or how I value them.

I appreciate your assistance.

Edit to add: Ok, I lie. Sometimes I do talk about my feelings in a VERY dramatic way. After all, I don't want to bore the other person. But mostly because it's fun to, sometimes, make crazy expressions and say outlandish things and make people laugh when talking about something otherwise too serious to contemplate sharing.

i hear you say things that apply to IEEs and things that I relate to EIEs and sometimes even contradicting things. I sense you are an Fi valuer, but Fe as well. Now I wonder which one is authentic and which one adopted.

Personally I have a strong sense of your type. The question is of course: how do we get you to figure out your own type in confident way. Perhaps I'll think of something later.

[Gilly]

I think you're actually quoting consentingadult there, not idolatrie.

Whoopsies. Fixed.

[strrrng]

My main problem with considering SLE is the fact I don't seem to fit the descriptions of irrationality. They fail to describe how I am to such an extent it seems silly to try to 'see' that in myself. My problem with LSI is that I also don't fit the descriptions of introvert. When I look at those two lists, I pretty much disagree with them point by point. Whereas, the EJ description just natually fits and always has.

Since unefille has been questioning her type, I went and re-read all the descriptions of SLE and LSI. Whilst I can see how elements of them apply to me, I have to admit that LSE still fits best. However, I would find it very difficult to believe that unefille and I are from opposing, or even different quadras.

I don't think you should judge based on the introvert/extrovert, irrational/rational dichotomies; they can be confusing and convoluted. For example, ESTps can behave in ways that are associated with "rational" temperament - being very driven, structured, systematic. It comes down to function preference, really.

I think one of the reasons I was so attracted to IEE in the first place was the impression that EIEs are quick to judge and gauge 'enemies'. Perhaps this impression is wrong. I often don't have strong permanent feelings about people, which I associated with the fluidity of Ne+Fi. I have sharp impressions of people and I can get upset at people, but a bad encounter will not make me think they are a bad person who I don't like. I can strongly like and dislike someone in the MOMENT reacting to them, but I don't use that impression as the basis for how I see them as a person or how I value them.

That impression is wrong; the converse is true. The ego block for IEE will make them more apt to "judge" people - extrapolating unseen qualities in the person and fitting them within a subjectively defined system/judging based on how it resonates with them internally. The tendencies that you have described in yourself point to ego block, and at this point, I am certain you are EIE.

The bolded portion conveys an Fe > Fi preference: always taking the situation at hand as it is and not imposing rules/preconceptions (static fields - similar to how Ti imposes structure/laws) on how you view people.

[JuJu]

Are there any damn real Deltas?

We've become a quadra for castaways and pirates.

[idolatrie]

Are there any damn real Deltas?

We've become a quadra for castaways and pirates.

Juju, dear, you may need to sit down to hear this. But. It's true. Much like the easter bunny and santa, deltas don't actually exist.

[JuJu]

Juju, dear, you may need to sit down to hear this. But. It's true. Much like the easter bunny and santa, deltas don't actually exist.

...but, but, my Mom said.... :cries:

And that SLI I knew... All a mirage!!!

[unefille]

...but, but, my Mom said.... :cries:

And that SLI I knew... All a mirage!!!

Actually, Deltas are much more like leprechauns. There's a reason they're so humble and down-to-earth - they're literally closer to it as well. No reaching for the sky for Deltas.

[idolatrie]

I don't think you should judge based on the introvert/extrovert, irrational/rational dichotomies; they can be confusing and convoluted. For example, ESTps can behave in ways that are associated with "rational" temperament - being very driven, structured, systematic. It comes down to function preference, really.

On the functions, though, I have massive problems with thinking I'm Ti ego rather than Te ego. I'm not just relying on the intro/extrovert, rational/irrational dichotemies, but when looking at it holistically, I still feel LSE is more strongly indicated. When I was first introduced to Socionics, I read a lot of the descriptions (such as all the Russian ones) and I was just amazed at how accurately the LSE ones described me and how I live my life. This was before I had any preconceptions about the types at all. I know various people on the forum put different weight on the descriptions v the functions v the dichotemies etc etc, so I'm not trying to say that's going to be conclusive proof to anyone. But I cannot deny that first moment of reading about LSE and going 'how can this possibly describe me so well?'

In terms of the functions, however, I think my biggest sticking point is Te/Ti. My understanding of Ti is that it is like a model, a closed logic system. Following the rules laid down, if A then B. It implies that there is a single correct approach to follow, that there is the possibility of right and wrong in an objective sense. Sort of like mathematical reasoning: rules deduced from a set of governing axioms. That there is nothing outside the system. Best practice as opposed to best fit.

My understanding of Te is that it is more about locally contingent information gathered to create the most holistic basis of knowledge. You look at how things work, and derive your understanding of that in a way that is particular to that phenomenon. That reasoning cannot necessarily be generalised from the individual to the aggregate. So you judge things on their particular effectiveness - does it work? There is no objective set of rules that can be applied from above.

I reject the possibility of universal, objective values/standards. I think everything has to be evaluated on its own utility value. And that my reasoning cannot necessarily be imposed upon another, because our perception of phenomenon are not objective but rather always subjective and value-laden. But my own knowledge, I am certain of. I do not believe someone can tell me what to think because I can do that for myself. I may be presented with another way of reasoning, and I'll evaluate it, and if I find it relevant or effective, then I'll adopt it - either integrating it with my exisitng approach or if it is incommensurable, I'll determine which is more appropriate according to its ability to accurately reflect the reality of the situation.

[Christy B]

Wow! I think this is a wonderful description of how Te works.

[Kristiina]

unfille, you sound very beta. Either EIE Ni subtype or IEI.

Sybtypes are rather general things. People have written very different descriptions for subtypes. But basically the main principle is that people often use one of their ego block function more than the other one. Fe subtype is very lively and active, very clearly Fe-dominant and clearly EJ temperament. If you're gonna mistake it for another type, it'll probably be ESFj. Ni subtype focuses on Ni and it makes them contemplative and a bit more calm and relaxed. They almost seem like their mirror type - IEI because Ni seems to lead their attitude more than Fe.

You seem EIE Ni subtype. That means you may seem like IEI, but you still have Si PoLR, Se Hidden agenda, etc. You are also inclined to take the lead in everyday matters because you become impatient when observing events from sidelines too long. It's likely you want to know the general direction of events and it feels uneasy when you're just going with the flow without a direction.

[Park]

unfille, you sound very beta. Either EIE Ni subtype or IEI.

We are not giving her to Beta. Period.

(Deltas, please support me here.)

And it's "unefille", not "unfille", you Si deficient Betazoid!

[Satan]

Actually, Deltas are much more like leprechauns. There's a reason they're so humble and down-to-earth - they're literally closer to it as well. No reaching for the sky for Deltas.

Down on their hands and knees.

[Expat]

In terms of the functions, however, I think my biggest sticking point is Te/Ti. My understanding of Ti is that it is like a model, a closed logic system. Following the rules laid down, if A then B. It implies that there is a single correct approach to follow, that there is the possibility of right and wrong in an objective sense. Sort of like mathematical reasoning: rules deduced from a set of governing axioms. That there is nothing outside the system. Best practice as opposed to best fit.

My understanding of Te is that it is more about locally contingent information gathered to create the most holistic basis of knowledge. You look at how things work, and derive your understanding of that in a way that is particular to that phenomenon. That reasoning cannot necessarily be generalised from the individual to the aggregate. So you judge things on their particular effectiveness - does it work? There is no objective set of rules that can be applied from above.

I reject the possibility of universal, objective values/standards. I think everything has to be evaluated on its own utility value. And that my reasoning cannot necessarily be imposed upon another, because our perception of phenomenon are not objective but rather always subjective and value-laden. But my own knowledge, I am certain of. I do not believe someone can tell me what to think because I can do that for myself. I may be presented with another way of reasoning, and I'll evaluate it, and if I find it relevant or effective, then I'll adopt it - either integrating it with my exisitng approach or if it is incommensurable, I'll determine which is more appropriate according to its ability to accurately reflect the reality of the situation.

Yes that's a good description of Te and Ti from a Te viewpoint.

Except: in a Te dominant, Ti is used as a tool of Te. So you can, from the knowledge gained from Te, accept - or create - general, objective rules that can be applied from the individual to the aggregate. This is, simplistically, the definition of the scientific method. Which is also a natural mindset for Ti dominants, except they use Te as a tool of Ti.

[Expat]

That impression is wrong; the converse is true. The ego block for IEE will make them more apt to "judge" people - extrapolating unseen qualities in the person and fitting them within a subjectively defined system/judging based on how it resonates with them internally. The tendencies that you have described in yourself point to ego block

Yes, I agree. The only slightly blurring point is that IEEs, having creative , are also prone to adapt their "judgement" of people; but, rather than the "disliking people in the moment" that unefille described, I think it's more like an inclination to frequently - perhaps even continually - re-evaluate their judgement.

The distinction can be seen in the dynamic vs static. EIE's is truly dynamic. IEE's creative is a "succession of static snapshots". Whereas an EII's has longer-lasting snapshots.

[Christy B]

Whereas an EII's has longer-lasting snapshots.

Interesting, this is how I explained Fi to dolphin when she asked me how I experienced Fi.

[unefille]

I still think you are IEE unefille.

We are not giving her to Beta. Period.

(Deltas, please support me here.)

And it's "unefille", not "unfille", you Si deficient Betazoid!

I AGREE!

Unefille har written only one thing I can't identify with. The one thing is that I can travel alone. I've done it a lot of times. I'll always meet someone I can talk with once I get there, and I find new people exciting. Except for that I ALWAYS find unefille spot on when describing her feelings. It's all me, she describes "me" like I would have described myself in my language.

If she's not IEE-Ne, than I'm not neither. I'm almost certain I am.

But fwiw, I think 3 or 4 IEIs in here has mentionned I seem IEI. I don't know what that proves...

<3 you guys (and Deltas generally)

Unfortunately, I am giving EIE some serious thought. I hadn't expected some of the answers that were given to my questions. Moving away from some of the stereotypes I had formed from the beginning about Beta before I bothered studying the functions (and which I never revisited after learning the functions, which I think twisted how I was taking in the information), I see more and more Ni and Fe traits. I still see Fi and Ne there too, but the case for IEE in my head is definitely beginning to fall away. I'd hate for my type re-consideration to breed any confusion for anyone else (I already had to apologise to idolatrie for 'getting us into trouble' and 'breaking our world').

I feel like I'm undergoing another 'discovery process' the way I did with the Enneagram, where I started with 5, then 7 then 9 and finally (and truly) 3. Here, I began with ILE, went to IEE and was completely convinced and happy, and now...

I think the case of EIE is marginally stronger than the case for IEE at the moment, but two very strong lynch-pins to Delta at the moment is that all the Deltas have been so awesome and idolatrie's type. Given the nature of our relationship, I simply cannot imagine a world where we are from opposing quadras. We might have to do a combined type thread sometime and figure this out...

P.S Someone is probably going to tell me that this entire post reeks of Beta theatricality.

P.P.S I've only ever tested as ENTp and ENFp. I think there was one test result where ENFj was the 2nd or 3rd highest result. i feel rather deceived by these tests (I know functional analysis is much more reliable than tests - I jest)!

[unefille]

I have been ENTP in my mind for 10 years, receiving ENTP-adapted training (MBTT) at work. I have been an IEE for only 2,5 months. So if EIE it is, then EIE it is. I do relate to the type description, and I do see what the BETAs in this thread write. However, I don't relate to the Beta quadra description at all. What do you think about the quadra descriptions? And also I think I value Te>Ti and Ne>Ni, but I'm not completely sure. I guess we can be different types. I often relate to some of the self declared SEIs and IEIs and SEEs and EIIs and sometimes to the ILEs in here, so you definitely could be another type. However I don't relate much to the other EIEs for some reason. I'll enjoy reading about your process!

I complained about the Beta quadra description just yesterday in another thread! And I have to admit, I don't identify all that much with other EIEs either. I do identify very strongly with you and strangely enough, some of the female ISTps like songofsappho.

I still think I value Te, because I find Ti very dogmatic, but only in its application to people, which might be balanced out by strong Fi as well. I can see ways in which I might value Ti - I'm a bit of structure nut when it comes to my writing and I can be very precise about the way I order my arguments, and I'm a stickler for clarity of expression. As for Ne and Ni - I can see both very strongly now, especially from what strrrng and Gilly have posted about the emotive powers of memory. And just thinking about the way I describe things in my writing - it's very much trying to use words to articulate an inner image; the essence of what I percieve, rather than the sensory properties of it, though I do that too. Worth pondering.

[Gilly]

because I find Ti very dogmatic

I will say again that I think this is a very common issue for Beta NFs, and especially EIEs, when it comes to what is commonly perceived as "Ti." Beta NFs commonly reject the idea of "structure" in terms of living a rigid lifestyle, having everything planned out, living strictly according to a "code," following rules, etc. Their "need," if you will, for Ti comes from exactly this: I think they are prone to having troubles with the more bureaucratic details of living in the real world, and as such need a baseline of things (financial matters, especially) to be "taken care of" by a competent, patient dual who can help them deal with the petty, frustrating details that are necessary to live life as it is, and just have it taken care of so that they can focus on the "important" things, or whatever the EIE sees as his/her "calling," if you will.


That's part of it, anyways. Also I think Beta NFs can, at times, be swayed easily by "strong" arguments; ie, they will occasionally blow one or two things out of proportion, thinking they have found "the reason" to believe something, support a cause, etc; they need the discretion (sometimes suspicion) of someone who is not so easily convinced, and together the strong inclinations of the two in opposite directions balance out to a reasonable stance.

[unefille]

That's part of it, anyways. Also I think Beta NFs can, at times, be swayed easily by "strong" arguments; ie, they will occasionally blow one or two things out of proportion, thinking they have found "the reason" to believe something, support a cause, etc; they need the discretion (sometimes suspicion) of someone who is not so easily convinced, and together the strong inclinations of the two in opposite directions balance out to a reasonable stance.

Which exactly describes my dynamic with idolatrie: whenever I get worked up about something, or on the verge of changing my mind, in a fret, I lay out all my thoughts and arguments on the table for her. She's much more set and rigid in her thinking processes and she tends to reject a lot of arguments. She's also much slower to change her mind. In that way, in order to persuade or argue with her, I have to clarify my thinking. Eventually, we reach a reasoned conclusion that is much more productive.

!!

P.S Which is why so much hinges on her typing now. I feel I am much easier to persuade and changeable. She's sort of my 'sanity anchor'.

[Expat]

Gilly, I think that is spot-on.

[Kristiina]

I will say again that I think this is a very common issue for Beta NFs, and especially EIEs, when it comes to what is commonly perceived as "Ti." Beta NFs commonly reject the idea of "structure" in terms of living a rigid lifestyle, having everything planned out, living strictly according to a "code," following rules, etc. Their "need," if you will, for Ti comes from exactly this: I think they are prone to having troubles with the more bureaucratic details of living in the real world, and as such need a baseline of things (financial matters, especially) to be "taken care of" by a competent, patient dual who can help them deal with the petty, frustrating details that are necessary to live life as it is, and just have it taken care of so that they can focus on the "important" things, or whatever the EIE sees as his/her "calling," if you will.


That's part of it, anyways. Also I think Beta NFs can, at times, be swayed easily by "strong" arguments; ie, they will occasionally blow one or two things out of proportion, thinking they have found "the reason" to believe something, support a cause, etc; they need the discretion (sometimes suspicion) of someone who is not so easily convinced, and together the strong inclinations of the two in opposite directions balance out to a reasonable stance.

speak for yourself ILE.

I do like rules and planning and all that. Structure is cool and I love organizing my stuff and making my own systems and structure. I put tiny colorful post-it notes in books and I neatly label my boxes and catalogues... I will go the extra mile to ensure that things are easier in the future. I suck at maintenence though (e.g. paying bills every month on the same date till I die. I wish I could just set up a system for that.) I like people who have lots of rules and I love to be in organized environment. But only because I know the rules don't apply to me and I do break them pretty often and I kinda expect people to forgive me for that. I openly show respect for these rules, but I often forget to follow them.

[Gilly]

Oh, and don't be fooled by all this talk of rowdiness and personal jests, etc; this is a "stereotype," a common manifestation of group behavior. I myself am not a fan of big, rowdy parties and crap like that; I was for a very short period of my life, but I got over it pretty quickly. As far as social life goes, I like having friends in a lot of places, giving me the opportunity to socialize with whomever I like, but I am prone to developing strong bonds with a tightly-knit group, sometimes of no more than 2 or 3 people, whenever I settle down in a place for an extended period of time. I like socializing in a more intimate atmosphere where people can share their life experiences and their views, how they see things. I enjoy lengthy conversations about life visions, worldviews, plans to make something happen, artistic endeavors, adventures, spiritual experiences, defining moments in life, things that are "sacred," and the like.

I get absolutely nothing from superficial conversations in which people simply "update" each other about their pointless day-to-day goings on in life: "So Shirley threw a fit at me and Bob yesterday...Did you see Jim's new rims on his car?...I had cramps when I got out of bed today...Sometimes I wish Shirley wasn't such an angry bitch..." I think these kinds of things can be appreciated deeply by the individuals who experience them (for serious; sometimes I get more out of standing up and looking out my window than a long philosophical rant with a buddy), and I love talking to people about their personal lives if they need an ear or someone to give them advice, but just listening to people important-ify the stupid shit that happens on a daily basis, to me, seems ridiculous. This is what made me so tired of big parties: I got sick of having to come up with stupid, pointless shit to talk about with people who I had already shared most of my interesting stories with, who didn't have any interesting stories or thought they were too "personal" to tell me, with whom I couldn't share my more personal thoughts for fear of offending or freaking them out. When I try to talk about things that interest me in a "light" social setting, someone usually reacts with thick-necked chortled laughter and a "Whoa buddy, that's deep..." which causes me to roll my eyes, because they obviously think I'm trying to be impressive or magnanimous or something, when, really, I just want to talk about what's interesting to me.

[Gilly]

speak for yourself ILE.

Hush, you

I do like rules and planning and all that. Structure is cool and I love organizing my stuff and making my own systems and structure. I put tiny colorful post-it notes in books and I neatly label my boxes and catalogues... I will go the extra mile to ensure that things are easier in the future. I suck at maintenence though (e.g. paying bills every month on the same date till I die. I wish I could just set up a system for that.) I like people who have lots of rules and I love to be in organized environment. But only because I know the rules don't apply to me and I do break them pretty often and I kinda expect people to forgive me for that. I openly show respect for these rules, but I often forget to follow them.

I guess some people are different. What I'm trying to convey is that it is very common for an EIE to see "structure" as rigid and dogmatic, and that there are other reasons for valuing Ti that are just as common as the ones you present (again I would defer to Rick's description of EIEs).

[Gilly]

P.S Which is why so much hinges on her typing now. I feel I am much easier to persuade and changeable. She's sort of my 'sanity anchor'.

Heh, I wish I had one of those.