I don't see how it has anything to do with Fe Polr.
I don't see how it has anything to do with Fe Polr.
Stop derailing. This is about how awesome soy sauce is and trying to find out why Jug doesn't like being awesome. We're still waiting on the answer to nil's question. Jug is just showing his inadequate soy sauce knowledge in avoiding the question.
if Fe deals with picking up on the tone and context and "between the lines" stuff of what someone as saying then what would that mean for Fe polr?
i'm trying to think of an irl example and i can't. i could be wrong. if nil wasn't joking, that might be a cute example lol. (sorry nil.) but maybe i was taking him too literally.
Originally Posted by laghlagh
Is there something wrong with wanting to know why one would not wish to use soy sauce?
As far as my husband goes, I'd say on one hand he's hypersensitive to that kind of thing, but on the other hand he's probably not sure if he's reading it right. I think he'd be offended by what you said, but not because he couldn't read between the lines. It would probably be more because it sounded like you wanted a suggestion and then kink of rudely shot down the suggestion. If you would have just said you didn't feel like soy sauce, I think he would have been cool with that. But if you specifically asked for a suggestion, I don't understand why you'd respond so negatively.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
How the fuck are you gona explain why you aren't in the mood for soy sauce (and why would you want to)? Are you gona describe the consistency and texture of the food along with its flavor and then talk about your bodily sensations at the time and whether they mix well with it? Or maybe you're gona go off on some other food you have a greater craving for, or the pattern of you eating soy sauce over the last month and how that's led to a lower personal demand of soy sauce? THe question is fucking annoying because it cant be answered that easily and even if it was answered no one gives a shit.
Is there something wrong with wanting to know why one would not wish to use soy sauce?
I didn't think it was...
No.
Yeah i've been scratching my head since I initially read the OP. Glad it's not just me misunderstanding Fe-POLR.
It might be a Te/Ti, Fe/Fi miscommunication. I know that I feel like Ti types take things I say WAY too literally. So it might go both ways as well.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
LOL!! I love this photo.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Thanks Ashton. Please more explanations such as this. Thanky.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
like are you saying Fe is obvious displays of emotion/intention so Fe polrs pick up on the opposite, the underlying emotion/intention?
i'm thinking that probably isnt what you meant but this is the only mental reference point i can find because i'm lost.
idk, i don't think what i said about literalness is totally wrong but i feel like i'm missing the connection of some dots somewhere.
You could regard Fe-PoLRs as people who read social cues through the lens of their valued accepting functions, being Si-Ne for the SLI and Ni-Se for the ILI, with both heavily mediated by producing Te-Fi. Questioning the face value of theatrical behavior naturally leads to analyses of subtext and motivation, impulse and anticipation. Since emotional displays can exaggerate or mask the true importance of a situation, the Si+Te/Ni+Te-oriented Fe-PoLR will respond to dramatics by wondering (or assuming) what drives them, what outcome is desired from them, and what objective conditions exist apart from their subjective impressions or explanations (i.e., what's really going on).
There are two main forms of literalness that spring to mind here. One stems from the simple error of thinking that what's said is what's meant, which might result from missing/discounting/ignoring affective signifiers and then giving a stereotypical Te/Fi-oriented response (i.e. "here's a bunch of pertinent info" or "here's my personal feeling"). The second stems from recognizing that what's said isn't what's meant and then playing off of the contradictions to hoist the interlocutor by his/her own petard. This can be used to mock faulty thinking, unrealistic expectations, or unwarranted demands. It's also useful to retard, divert, or derail what an Fe-PoLR often regards as others' excessive emotional momentum.idk, i don't think what i said about literalness is totally wrong but i feel like i'm missing the connection of some dots somewhere.
It is great isnt it.
Well the way i understood what Ashton was talking about is that Fe-POLRs completely ignore Fe info and consequently, the Fe bullsh-- coming from the other person doesn't cloud their assessment of what that person's intentions are, because the Fe info being put forth just doesn't register in their Fe-POLR brain.
And yes that was a runon sentence.
Like for example, for me, I'll be trying to be friends with somebody, and that person is smiling and being really nice. My first thought is ooo they seem nice, let's see if we can be friends. And then i'll start assessing the person from a character standpoint, and even though the Fe emanated does give some clues, but does admittedly sometimes interfere with the assessment.
On the opposite spectrum, say someone seems really overbearing and ominous towards me (say, a professor). I might get intimidated because of that Fe info, and that could get in the way of me learning, whereas an Fe-POLR might totally not even notice that professor's outward emoting and just learn what is there to be learned. Those are sort of the images in my mind. obviously i could be off.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
They don't totally ignore it they just choose which parts of it they value and which parts of it they dont give a shit about.
That's more of an ILI thing... Si egos are usually very understanding of you not liking something "just because." The ILI here might have acted differently if you replied to him also in "slow measured, low key speech" that you don't like soysauce, otherwise they don't know to take you seriously or not. This does happen to me with IXTps.
They seem to be very naively trusting at times though. The Fi-HA can be a weakness when dealing with the bullshit coming from someone they like.
Whether Fe is wholly or partly indigestible to Fe-PoLRs is dependent on which sociotronicalistic model one favors and one's understanding of it*, but in any case the resulting mentality possess an intellectually mediated social interface. Fe-laden gestures meant to convey and instill certain emotional states aren't accepted as they were presented. Instead they're rationalized (primarily*) via Te-Fi in conjunction with their blocked irrational functions and examined forensically for significance, intent, and verity. If these elements are found to be discordant with observations then the bullshit detector goes off.
For instance I dislike movie scores in which the composer and director attempt to engender a hoped-for emotional response in me that the film has failed to produce. The music intrudes upon my personal experience of the characters as they're portrayed and seeks to impose a "correct" feeling toward them that is dictated by the director. No doubt some find this emotional steering welcome but to me it feels as if I'm being subjected to a cheap instrument of coercion by moviemakers who fall short of true artistry.
I would think, "If this person's niceness is genuine then this may be someone worth knowing, although I hope there's no expectation that I'm going to respond with equal effusiveness, because fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck that. In fact this demand upon my attention is somewhat draining as I'd rather focus on things I find more interesting, so I might shut this individual off soon. However, I'll continue humoring this person in the meantime and making observations."Like for example, for me, I'll be trying to be friends with somebody, and that person is smiling and being really nice. My first thought is ooo they seem nice, let's see if we can be friends. And then i'll start assessing the person from a character standpoint, and even though the Fe emanated does give some clues, but does admittedly sometimes interfere with the assessment.
In a similar situation I'd think, "This dude is uptight. What a puffed up clown. Hopefully we don't have any interpersonal friction that will affect my grade in this class. His self-important posturing is hilarious and it's already difficult for me not to tweak his nose."On the opposite spectrum, say someone seems really overbearing and ominous towards me (say, a professor). I might get intimidated because of that Fe info, and that could get in the way of me learning, whereas an Fe-POLR might totally not even notice that professor's outward emoting and just learn what is there to be learned. Those are sort of the images in my mind. obviously i could be off.
It does cloud the decision-making process.
I think it's worse for INTps because, not only do you have the prospect of going against someone you favor, you also are aware of how that action will affect the future by doing something you might regret.
The INTp's present actions are restricted by the future reactions(ironic).
Quality posts.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
Yeah wow, this was so enlightening, thanks Korpsey! It's nice to know what is actually going through the Fe-POLR mind, because all I can do is really guess. LOL btw @ the scenarios!!
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
So how would this work in reverse? How do XEIs use Si/Ni to evaluate Te information?
They seem to be unable to sympathize unless they have had same experience. For example:
ILI *calls to inquire if I'm going to a certain formal event*
me: sorry no, I'm down with flu, would rather spend the next 2 days in bed
ILI *tried to persuade me how important the event it*
me: no, I'd rather rest now so I'll be ready for work next week, it's chilly outside and there will be parts where we'll have to be sitting outside
ILI *pushes further, explains how I can avoid all those parts where we'll be sitting outside in the breeze and drug myself up*
me: *scratching my head, wondering why he isn't picking up from my intonation that I'm about to lose my voice too as I'm half-whispering on phone*
Some time later me this ILI and myself driving in same car:
me *starts coughing*
ILI: you're coughing too? I had this cough for 3 weeks *proceeds to deliver a sympathetic mini-speech about coughing*
me thinking to myself "oh ... I see how it works"
Seems like when you're telling Fe-PoLRs about how you feel, they can automatically discard this information as bullshit and may be even suspect that you're just pretending or trying to trick them into something. This doesn't mean, however, that information is indeed false. The times that they do show a response to Fe-information is if they have processed it through their Fi at some point, such as the cases where they personally can relate.
Yeah, I can see that being the case.
-PoLR:
I just think of Fe-polrs as kind of untactful. Shrug. Like they just say things because they're true (or because they perceive them to be true). They may sometimes be aware of the emotional impact they know they will cause (especially ILIs, I assume), simply because they have caused said impact before, but they will not consciously consider that as a factor in whether or not to say what's on their mind (I think that they may have some awareness/enjoyment of inflicting emotional pain or giving emotional pleasure, but it is one floor below top-of-mind in almost all cases, even though it may be willed just as strongly). Fi-polrs are the same way, except Fe-polrs say things in sort of a dry, "I just observed this" way, and Fi-polrs say things in a, "just admit it, this is the only thing that makes sense," way.
Or maybe it's more accurate to say that Fe-polrs are ignorant as to the Fe gestural content of what they're saying, the implied content, as opposed to the explicit content. Like, if an Fe-polr describes something that you do wrong as wrong, they are merely noting a fact. But they are ignoring the implied gestural content: criticizing me implies that you judge me, dislike me, find me insufficient---it constitutes a slight, not necessarily by content, but by form. When you say, "you did that wrong," it is not the fact or content that I am taking issue with (I may know very well that I did it wrong), but rather the gesture, the form. It's the difference between "Is that your choice?" and "You look very stupid when you do that line reading." The actual content is not all that different. But the form (which implies another sort of content) is very different. Fe-polrs don't necessarily pick up those differences in form. Fi-polrs can be trained to pick up on differences in form, but perhaps have issues with content? I dunno, that would be neat. Anyway, Fe-egos, being naturally diplomatic, only use blunt forms with the intention of giving offense, and so they assume, when they see that form, that offense is intended (and sometimes it is, but, as stated, the offense is not the top-of-mind purpose of the Te-valuer's statement).
Eh. I often feel this way too though. If you didn't earn the emotion fairly, don't try to cheat to get me to feel sad, when your story was just really stupid. I think that Fe-polrs are likely to feel this way more often though. Like I dunno, I have a higher tolerance, so if it's something that I've already bought into mostly, I'm willing to make up the gap for it out of respect of its sheet likeability. Like Disney movies (except Toy Story 3, which earned its emotionality as far as I'm concerned). Up wasn't *actually* as sad as the music suggested---but I was willing to overlook it, because the emotional music assisted me in feeling a feeling I wanted to feel, even if the movie was not a perfectly sufficient ground for said feeling. Fe-polrs are probably less likely/willing to grant that sort of suspension of disbelief.For instance I dislike movie scores in which the composer and director attempt to engender a hoped-for emotional response in me that the film has failed to produce. The music intrudes upon my personal experience of the characters as they're portrayed and seeks to impose a "correct" feeling toward them that is dictated by the director. No doubt some find this emotional steering welcome but to me it feels as if I'm being subjected to a cheap instrument of coercion by moviemakers who fall short of true artistry.
So you know: slightly type related, but not absolutely (like everything else).
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Tact is generally an afterthought. If it's prioritized then it's usually deliberated upon too much to be timely and the result is often stilted and weird.
This breaks down a few different ways for me:They may sometimes be aware of the emotional impact they know they will cause (especially ILIs, I assume), simply because they have caused said impact before, but they will not consciously consider that as a factor in whether or not to say what's on their mind
- Interest in factuality overrides interpersonal considerations.
- A knack for homing in on defects leads me to opine on unmentionables.
- An attraction to disquieting subjects makes me more comfortable with them than my weaker-stomached interlocutors might like.
- A quick risk calculation made before uttering risque or otherwise dicey comments errs on the side of "oops".
- Risk calculation is bypassed and toes are stepped on inadvertently.
- I push buttons to gauge responses, sometimes alienating people in the process.
- Attempts at mending fences with more appeals to facts and logic rather than simple contrition only compounds the original offense.
- I dislike a motherfucker and will gladly use any pretext to twist his teats.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
I like this thread on Fe POLR
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=30025
Examine siuntal's paranoid complaint following your previous post for the answer.
LIISeeCold, what happened to your now-deleted post about EIEs h4xing ILIs via vulnerable Fe? I'd allocated a space for it in my bullshit grinder.
Last edited by Korpsy Knievel; 04-23-2011 at 02:19 AM.
Fe Polr makes you cool
It was a self-absorbed little rant. I later realized it was probably too devious for the thread topic, I still have it though.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
Scene from Problem Child and parrot.gif are the best parts of this thread.
The post disappeared too soon to allow it a proper read. I've got extensive relevant experience to compare with your theorizin'z, so if it's worth debating then start a new thread and whip it out.
Watch yourself, now. Stand back.
Damn I just realized why Supervision is so effective. It's fucking brainwashing.
For example:
ENFjs control the INTp withreactions which brainwash the INTp by hitting the weak
/
My EIE instructor introduced me to existentialism and caught my worldview off-guard with some life-questioning questions and ideas, especially suicide(I swear at the time I thought he was the Devil, dude had a real nasty look, like a serpent; I also thought he was too pushy with ideas I considered delicate.
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
Wow, because of reading this thread, I'm going to start using the f-word without censoring it. It's about time. What would I do without the f-word? It expresses so many subtle nuances of feeling when no other word will do. Being Fe-PoLR myself, I'm too ashamed to say it now as a demonstration of my commitment to using it. I'll have to save it for later when I'm really upset about something. It will just sound really lame unless I sincerely mean it.
For me, being Fe-PoLR means... sounding really lame on the rare occasions when I try to express a feeling directly. I can't just push a button and make an emotion come out on purpose. It's easier for me as a female, though. Men are probably even more uncomfortable about expressing feelings.
Yay, staged video. Let's pretend it's real. If cop-caller is Fe-PoLR he's probably SLI and thinks it'd be funny to see the "iPhone" dealer locked up. If you'd said "spot the Fe-PoLR" I'd have said that the inexpressive blonde guy with his hands in his pockets was ILI.
Oh, you are reading minds. Awesome, I can't do that ...
Yes, looks like Fe polr to me. I can't imagine that guy laughing.
don't watch youtuber attention whore vids.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
