polr VERSUS dual seeking function

[Hugo]

Although model A says that polr is the weakest function, I'm beginning to think that the dual seeking function is the weakest.

People are more aware of their polr, and wish they had their polr as a strength (arguably a 2nd hidden agenda).

People are less aware of their dual seeking function.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to make more sense that the dual seeking function is your weakest function, in order for dual functions to provide complete support to each other.

What do you think?

[Gilly]

I dunno, I've got pretty strong : I play two sports, and I've been told I'm well-dressed more than once.

[Angel von Himmel]

Hugo, I think it is a matter of perspective, but consider this thought ...

Dual-Seeking - Person thinks it is a strong function, but is really a weak function and everyone can see that but the person.

PoLR function - Person knows it is a weak function, but avoids wanting that pointed out. Tries to activelly hide it ...

So, arguably what you say is a possibility, but do not expect anyone to readily admit that fact ... *looks at gilligan87* ...

[Gilly]

Well, I've never been told that I have bad taste; the opposite, if anything.

Sports you could argue with me on, though: I play basketball, but mostly because I'm tall and can shoot 3's. I don't dribble as well as most of the kids on my team. As far as lacrosse goes, I'm a middie so it's mostly running. My shots are fairly fast (long arms). My stick skills are decent at best.

[Expat]

Dual-Seeking - Person thinks it is a strong function, but is really a weak function and everyone can see that but the person.

PoLR function - Person knows it is a weak function, but avoids wanting that pointed out. Tries to activelly hide it ...

I think you're right, I certainly am more concerned about my weak becoming an issue for other people than my .

However, personally I certainly don't think my is a strong function - which, by the way, is precisely as it came out in all the versions of your test.

[Gilly]

I hate weak . When I can't figure someone out, it pisses the FUCK out of me.

[Joy]

I've actually wondered if I have weaker than ... my is really dodgy. I don't get irritated about it though, so I don't believe it's my POLR.

[Hugo]

The point i'm making is not whether the polr is more irritating than the dual seeking function.

The thing i'm getting at is whether the dual seeking function is weaker than the polr function. I think people strive for their polr function to be strong (kinda like a hidden agenda), but not the same for their dual seeking function.

In fact people expect others to have the dual seeking function as a dominant funtion. For example, an intj exects people to have as their base function, and least wants people to have as their base function.

What do you think?

[Joy]

Yeah, that's what I meant. I think my dual seeking function is weaker than my POLR. And my role function is doing a shitty job of making up for it!

[Hugo]

I think it makes more sense that the dual seeking function is your weakest function. You expect others to have it as their strongest function so that they can support you.

[FDG]

I dunno, I've got pretty strong : I play two sports, and I've been told I'm well-dressed more than once.

I play four sports, but I have PoLR.

Guess what?



However, I agree with the general stance of the topic. Something I would like to add is that I think that I notice when people lack my Dual-Seeking function, an this disgusts me - somewhat unconsciously, though.

[Joy]

I think it makes more sense that the dual seeking function is your weakest function. You expect others to have it as their strongest function so that they can support you.

ideally... but not I said the little red hen.

[Hugo]

I'm gonna take a daring step and say that and are an INTj's hidden agenda. INTj's expect others to have as a creative function and they expect others not to have at all.

Similar things go for other types.

What do you think?

[Joy]

I see the logic... what you're bringing up is another piece of the puzzle. IxFps are nice. I get along with them well. But for relationships, I still think that identicals are the way to go though (at least for me).

socionics is a very neatly woven theory

[Expat]

. Something I would like to add is that I think that I notice when people lack my Dual-Seeking function, an this disgusts me - somewhat unconsciously, though.

Looking at that from that angle, I agree. But expecting to find it in other people (ie unconsciously looking for the dual) is not necessarily the same as being the weakest function in yourself.

I think the problem is in the definition of "weakest".

[FDG]

. Something I would like to add is that I think that I notice when people lack my Dual-Seeking function, an this disgusts me - somewhat unconsciously, though.

Looking at that from that angle, I agree. But expecting to find it in other people (ie unconsciously looking for the dual) is not necessarily the same as being the weakest function in yourself.

I think the problem is in the definition of "weakest".

I think it's more of a negative boundary i.e. Other people should not lack my dual-seeking; not: Other people should have my dual seeking.

[Hugo]

However, I agree with the general stance of the topic. Something I would like to add is that I think that I notice when people lack my Dual-Seeking function, an this disgusts me - somewhat unconsciously, though.

Same with me

In addition you don't like people with your polr function as their base function, although you would like your polr function to be your strong function.

[Hugo]

I think it's more of a negative boundary i.e. Other people should not lack my dual-seeking; not: Other people should have my dual seeking.

I don't understand what you mean

[Hugo]

Looking at that from that angle, I agree. But expecting to find it in other people (ie unconsciously looking for the dual) is not necessarily the same as being the weakest function in yourself.

I think the problem is in the definition of "weakest".

Expecting to find something in people that you don't have yourself, suggests that you are lacking something. You need it to stay balanced. If you didn't expect it in others then it's probably because you have it.

With the polr function, you don't expect it in others but you want as your strength (but never will, hence "place of least resistence"). Polr is your hidden agenda.

But I still think the dual seeking function is the weakest function.

[FDG]

I think it's more of a negative boundary i.e. Other people should not lack my dual-seeking; not: Other people should have my dual seeking.

I don't understand what you mean

Person X thinks:

People should not disrespect my Dual-Seeking, but I don't need people to actually display my dual seeking.


Given |-| |0| |+|,

where |-| is disrespect, |0| is neutral and |+| is display (of the Dual-Seeking)

Person X has no problem with |0| and/or |+|
but is disgusted by |-|





Please note that I'm not using the symbols +/- in the way they are usually used in socionics; and the |a| symbol has no mathematical meaning.

[Hugo]

People should not disrespect my Dual-Seeking, but I don't need people to actually display my dual seeking.

How would people respect your dual seeking function without displaying your dual seeking function as their base function?

[FDG]

Looking at that from that angle, I agree. But expecting to find it in other people (ie unconsciously looking for the dual) is not necessarily the same as being the weakest function in yourself.

I think the problem is in the definition of "weakest".

Expecting to find something in people that you don't have yourself, suggests that you are lacking something. You need it to stay balanced. If you didn't expect it in others then it's probably because you have it.

If you don't have it, you don't know what it is, so you cannot expect the function in other people. That's why you don't like people with your PoLR - you cannot get them, because you don't know what their base function is.

With the polr function, you don't expect it in others but you want as your strength (but never will, hence "place of least resistence"). Polr is your hidden agenda

No. The hidden agenda balances out the PoLR. Take note how every introverted PoLR has his extravert version as hidden agenda of the type, and vice versa.

Example: makes the ENFj and ENTj unsure of their appearance, so they compensate showing

But I still think the dual seeking function is the weakest function.[/quote]

[FDG]

People should not disrespect my Dual-Seeking, but I don't need people to actually display my dual seeking.

How would people respect your dual seeking function without displaying your dual seeking function as their base function?

By not infringing it. What are you trying to tell me, that people display only their base function?

[Expat]

No, I think FDG is right.

We are repelled by people that have our PoLR as base function, because it's so weak in ourselves that we barely understand what it is.

Our dual-seeking function is rather something we crave in others - that is, it's weak in ourselves, but not so weak that we barely understand it - just so to make us wish to see it in others.

[Zeia]

No, I think FDG is right.

We are repelled by people that have our PoLR as base function, because it's so weak in ourselves that we barely understand what it is.

Our dual-seeking function is rather something we crave in others - that is, it's weak in ourselves, but not so weak that we barely understand it - just so to make us wish to see it in others.

I agree with this. I can see in my own life where I've wanted to be around people with considerable amounts of Fi, to the point that most of my best friends are either primarily logically based (Te or Ti as base) or ENFp's (Fi creative function). I really like to see how Fi works in them and what different experiences they have as a result, and then compare that to my own experiences.

[Creepy-]

I'm glad there are ENTjs like Expat and FDG around to say what I want to say before I say it and save me the trouble

I think my is stronger than my . Maybe not quantitatively, but certainly in character. I can joke about my deficiencies but STAY AWAY FROM MY PoLR!!!

And as Expat so eloquently said, I understand enough to appreciate it when others manifest it. just makes me nervous because I'm afraid my weakness will be exposed, so I spend too much time on the defensive to gain much of an understanding.

[FDG]

No, I think FDG is right.

We are repelled by people that have our PoLR as base function, because it's so weak in ourselves that we barely understand what it is.

Our dual-seeking function is rather something we crave in others - that is, it's weak in ourselves, but not so weak that we barely understand it - just so to make us wish to see it in others.

I agree with this. I can see in my own life where I've wanted to be around people with considerable amounts of Fi, to the point that most of my best friends are either primarily logically based (Te or Ti as base) or ENFj's (Fi based). I really like to see how Fi works in them and what different experiences they have as a result, and then compare that to my own experiences.

I think that you meant Fe, not Fi. :wink:

[Zeia]

No, I think FDG is right.

We are repelled by people that have our PoLR as base function, because it's so weak in ourselves that we barely understand what it is.

Our dual-seeking function is rather something we crave in others - that is, it's weak in ourselves, but not so weak that we barely understand it - just so to make us wish to see it in others.

I agree with this. I can see in my own life where I've wanted to be around people with considerable amounts of Fi, to the point that most of my best friends are either primarily logically based (Te or Ti as base) or ENFj's (Fi based). I really like to see how Fi works in them and what different experiences they have as a result, and then compare that to my own experiences.

I think that you meant Fe, not Fi. :wink:

Yeah, I keep mixing up the colors, I think black should be introverted :wink:. It's fixed.

[Hugo]

If you don't have it, you don't know what it is, so you cannot expect the function in other people.

You do instinctively know what it is, and expect it other because you don't have it yourself and don't seek to have it as your strength. But with the polr function, you do want it as your strong function.

But I still think the dual seeking function is the weakest function.

This is the point i've been trying to make with this topic.

[Hugo]

We are repelled by people that have our PoLR as base function, because it's so weak in ourselves that we barely understand what it is.

The polr is something we understand excellently. We just don't have it, but still want it.

The dual seeking function is something we donlt want as out own strong quality, but rather we want others to have it as their strong quality. We want to be dependant on others for this.

We want to be independant of people who have our polr function as their base function. In order to do this we strive to have polr function as a strength (which of course will never happen).

[Hugo]

I'm glad there are ENTjs like Expat and FDG around to say what I want to say before I say it and save me the trouble

I think my is stronger than my . Maybe not quantitatively, but certainly in character. I can joke about my deficiencies but STAY AWAY FROM MY PoLR!!!

And as Expat so eloquently said, I understand enough to appreciate it when others manifest it. just makes me nervous because I'm afraid my weakness will be exposed, so I spend too much time on the defensive to gain much of an understanding.

Please note that I am distinguishing between painful function and weakest function and am claiming that the dual seeking function although not the most painful function, is still the weakest function, moreso than the polr function.

[Joy]

I agree with you Hugo.

I think the POLR is tough to use because it doesn't mesh well with our first and second functions. For example, with an ENTp, we use intuition and logic most comfortably, both of which require objectivity. is the least objective function, IMO, so we feel uncomfortable using it because we can't use it very well with our first two functions. We try to do this balancing act, but without full use of and we're like a fish out of water.

[Gilly]

For example, with an ENTp, we use intuition and logic most comfortably, both of which require objectivity. is the least objective function, IMO, so we feel uncomfortable using it because we can't use it very well with our first two functions. We try to do this balancing act, but without full use of and we're like a fish out of water.

I rather think is the least objective function: is used to put the needs of others into perspective, making it at least somewhat more "objective." , on the other hand, is a bit more self-serving, and has a hard time overcoming intself in order to take ANYTHING into perspective.

I've tried the / balancing act before, and it basically leads to a brain full of irrational contradictions and feeling shitty no matter what choice you make. It also makes you question your type (Exhibit A: Me).

I don't see as very objective. It's neither objective or subjective; it just is. It's objective in the sense that it doesn't take emotions into account, but on the other hand, it sometimes comes up with things that are completely irrational and nonsensical.

[Joy]

you can't really use without objectivity though... and I think you're right about , although I do think you can use and still be objective.

[MySaviour]

Objectivity is ever so constantly rationalized subjectively.

Yay!

[Joy]

it is true that a mortal could never be truly objective

[discourse]

If there can be any measuring then I would say they are equal. The difference is that the PoLR is Conciouss function and the Dual Seeking is unconciouss function. As you all know there are two rings in model A. The Mental and the Vital. The first one is conciouss and the second one is unconciouss. The Dual Seeking- Hidden Agenda block is also the place where Jung's Anima/Animus are .

[Hugo]

But the fact that the dual seeking function is unconcious makes it weaker than the polr because the polr is conscious

[Angel von Himmel]

Hugo, you need a woman ... and just so you will not feel bad I am pretty much in the same boat.

[Zeia]

Hugo, you need a woman ... and just so you will not feel bad I am pretty much in the same boat.

I am as well