LIEs We're lazier than you

[Steve]

lol @ the dynamic this thread. Strrrng I guess is in an impatient mood, but it seems pretty clear that you've been operating on reductionistic overconcretized attributions to functions and quadras. This is not MBTI, and whoever wrote the stuff about gammas being about business sense, Ni being lazy, etc is full of shit. It's incorrect. Alphas and Gammas can do the same thing, but their way of processing information and ordering it will differ significantly. The conclusions may be similar, but the process vastly different.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

His posts speak for themselves.

I'm not trying to hit your PoLR by asking for the facts..well maybe it is your PoLR but i'm not intentionally trying to rub it up.

Unless you can provide more than "his posts speak for themselves" then it's difficult to take what you say seriously. It just looks like you are trolling, no offence.

I've seen enough posts to gauge your level of understanding of information elements and the like. It's pretty easy to tell who understands this stuff. And like I said, I only pursue discussion with those I deem worth it.

Is there anyone on this forum you haven't trolled though? Despite that you seem to have your own subjective gauge of what is understanding. If you discussed constructively maybe it would help you understand or correct someone else's understanding and you wouldn't have to suffer so much on the forum.

[ArchonAlarion]

Reaction to Se is better evaluated via type and not quadra.

An Se ego type might react by becoming hostile or they might enjoy it and see it as what a situation needs.

It is also entirely dependent on context. In a battle scenario the currency is Se. However its ridiculous to use it in an intellectual debate.

If you seriously think that me getting annoyed when Strrrng does this makes me un-ILI... than what crazy-ass shit have you been lookin at?

[ArchonAlarion]

lol @ the dynamic this thread. Strrrng I guess is in an impatient mood, but it seems pretty clear that you've been operating on reductionistic overconcretized attributions to functions and quadras. This is not MBTI, and whoever wrote the stuff about gammas being about business sense, Ni being lazy, etc is full of shit. It's incorrect. Alphas and Gammas can do the same thing, but their way of processing information and ordering it will differ significantly. The conclusions may be similar, but the process vastly different.

I agree and if this was in reference to me than I apologize because thats not what I meant.

Also laziness is a package-deal word. So it could mean a number of things.

[strrrng]

I'm not trying to hit your PoLR by asking for the facts..well maybe it is your PoLR but i'm not intentionally trying to rub it up.

So Te is facts now? lol.

Unless you can provide more than "his posts speak for themselves" then it's difficult to take what you say seriously. It just looks like you are trolling, no offence.

I don't care about having people understand me. The ones who do, do so regardless of my delivery. The others don't matter to me.

Is there anyone on this forum you haven't trolled though? Despite that you seem to have your own subjective gauge of what is understanding. If you discussed constructively maybe it would help you understand or correct someone else's understanding and you wouldn't have to suffer so much on the forum.

There are plenty of people I haven't "trolled." I may have my own subjective gauge of understanding, but I have always proved able to defend my positions logically when so inclined. Also, constructive discussion is only useful to me if I see that there is intrinsic potential for it. If I don't think a person is worth it, but am in an impatient mood or something, I might behave like I did in this thread.

[strrrng]

Reaction to Se is better evaluated via type and not quadra.

An Se ego type might react by becoming hostile or they might enjoy it and see it as what a situation needs.

Not necessarily.

It is also entirely dependent on context. In a battle scenario the currency is Se. However its ridiculous to use it in an intellectual debate.

Se is the currency of battle? This is the shit I'm talking about. Where do you come up with this? It's over-simplified and erroneous.

If you seriously think that me getting annoyed when Strrrng does this makes me un-ILI... than what crazy-ass shit have you been lookin at?

You're not ILI, regardless of whether or not you get annoyed with me. Most of the people on this forum get annoyed with me at one point or another.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

My thoughts on this thread: discussing who is the laziest is a bit of fun and partially tongue in cheek. Also it is a work in progress as part of a discussion so it doesn't have to be all right straight away or every opinion meet someones version of a finished product and people, or rather person, coming into the thread screaming like they have come back from the pub and hollering for no need at their family is just a detractor from the discussion-even if somewhere amidst the babble they make a point or a just a half point here and there.

[Tom]

I wonder just how much lazier than you I really am... I bet its lots.

Thank you for talking about the subject matter, but I will, unfortunately, have to continue with my theory.

Although I may appear to be an 'energetic' person, I'm really very lazy; if it can't be done with the least amount of energy used possible, it shouldn't be done (by myself in any case). blocked with means that not only is the person always thinking of different ways to do things, but also how to make it as efficient as possible.
EFFICIENT –adjective
1.performing or functioning in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort.
Accomplishment in this area stems from an overwhelming need to save () time ().

Save time. Savetime. .

I wouldn't over-simplify the quadras, nor have I done so. is "the" abrasive function; is "the" lazy fuction ("head in the clouds"/"doesn't wear deodorant because they can't be bothered to" ring any bells?).

Everyone has every function in them somewhere, but those who have certain functions in their ego behave differently then people who have other functions in their egos. I believe they call that theory 'Socionics'.

[ArchonAlarion]

The problem is that you are turning every single application of an element into mush.

YES Se is very useful in a battle. A battle is about physical dominance. No grand philosophical reasonings, no comfort seeking. Hard external pressure. What is actually, physically there. That information is key to combat.

There are of course many other useful things in battles, which use other IM elements. However Se is the most important.

Its like you are trying to turn absolutely every socionics concept on its head.


And you're not an IEI. See how easy that was?

[Tom]

Damn, you all post quickly...

Thank you Cyclops; your insight is, indeed, a boon.

[Tom]

Perhaps I should have clarified.

Please do! (And by please do, I mean please tell me what you mean exactly)

[Creepy-Cyclops]

So Te is facts now? lol.

You could read up the functions and find out which function is associated with facts, or you could continue coming across as facecious

I don't care about having people understand me. The ones who do, do so regardless of my delivery. The others don't matter to me.

Yeah. I only care about some people understanding me. I guess there are people who don't matter to me here as well.

There are plenty of people I haven't "trolled." I may have my own subjective gauge of understanding,

Who?

but I have always proved able to defend my positions logically when so inclined.

When someone decides to show you are not making valid points, I suppose those are the times when you are not "inclined"?

Also, constructive discussion is only useful to me if I see that there is intrinsic potential for it. If I don't think a person is worth it, but am in an impatient mood or something, I might behave like I did in this thread.

Sure, but it makes it harder to take you seriously, even if it is one of those times you are being serious, unfortunately. Well, you maybe not care, I don't know.

You still haven't provided any arguments btw, you've just sounded off what amounts to a lot of hot air. But that perhaps was your point, if so, feeling better?

[Tom]

Ahh, thanks (I'll take over any day). I wasn't sure if you were still disagreeing!

[ArchonAlarion]

Ni does in fact relate to physical inactivity (Se dual seeking)

Ni does in fact relate to not paying much attention to the pleasure/pain resulting from physical stimulus (Si role)

Ni types are prone to daydreaming (or spending large amounts of time reflecting on life, meanings, direction, or imagination).

If anyone has a problem with this speak up and correct my mistakes.

[strrrng]

You could read up the functions and find out which function is associated with facts, or you could continue coming across as facecious

Or I could go by what I know to be true through experience. I know that's a foreign concept to you delta ST's. Go read about that tendency in the wiki.

Yeah. I only care about some people understanding me. I guess there are people who don't matter to me here as well.

Yeah.

Who?When someone decides to show you are not making valid points, I suppose those are the times when you are not "inclined"? Sure, but it makes it harder to take you seriously, even if it is one of those times you are being serious, unfortunately. Well, you maybe not care, I don't know.

When I see some newbie who is abjectly deluded yet seemingly confident in his understanding, I most likely won't deem them worth it. And like I said, I'm not concerned with how people "take" me. What a repulsive idea. To focus on delivery, how I am acting in others' eyes. Nope. There are a handful of people here who get me, and they have never had any issues with my "style."

You still haven't provided any arguments btw, you've just sounded off what amounts to a lot of hot air. But that perhaps was your point, if so, feeling better?

I don't need to provide arguments. I just felt like mocking him. Carry on.

[Steve]

I agree and if this was in reference to me than I apologize because thats not what I meant.

Also laziness is a package-deal word. So it could mean a number of things.

Understood. What did you mean by it, and how do you see it being at all relevant to Ni?

Also I can't help but notice there are things about you that remind me of myself in that you seem to organize things into these self-contained abstractions and bounce around from one to the other, while talking about the connection between them through an externally defined framework.

Maybe describe some of the things you enjoy doing and why you enjoy doing them, and I can show you how I see your functions influencing it.

[Lotus]

Ni does in fact relate to physical inactivity (Se dual seeking)

Ni does in fact relate to not paying much attention to the pleasure/pain resulting from physical stimulus (Si role)

Ni types are prone to daydreaming (or spending large amounts of time reflecting on life, meanings, direction, or imagination).

If anyone has a problem with this speak up and correct my mistakes.

Physical inactivity is related to laziness, not your information metabolism.

[Tom]

Well, obviously; thank you very much for the clarification, and I wholly agree.

While this thread hasn't quite accomplished what I wanted, it appears to have been a good excercise.

I was just too lazy to guess this would happen I suppose... /waitsforontopicresponse...

[strrrng]

Physical inactivity is related to laziness, not your information metabolism.

Oh no. Now I have no excuse.

[Steve]

Well, I personally think IM has a lot to do with the natural inclination towards activity or inactivity. I mean, Ni (and intuitives by a long shot, generally) are more inclined to work within their heads as that is where their 'world' is located. It only makes sense that they would choose inactivity to think than be physically engaged (lifestyle obviously depends, like if they are really into sports or something, but generally, I doubt it).

This is along the lines of the original Jungian idea of sensing vs intuition but I'm not sure how much of it applies to socionics - and if it did, there is a difference as to how Ne types vs Ni types relate to the physical world.

[Lotus]

Well, I personally think IM has a lot to do with the natural inclination towards activity or inactivity. I mean, Ni (and intuitives by a long shot, generally) are more inclined to work within their heads as that is where their 'world' is located. It only makes sense that they would choose inactivity to think than be physically engaged (lifestyle obviously depends, like if they are really into sports or something, but generally, I doubt it).

I think that's a stereotype from MBTI. has nothing to do with physical inactivity.

[Steve]

I agree that there is a difference with Ne and Ni and was close to saying it. For instance, usually ENxps seem rather active and more 'physical' than Ni (mostly those with Ni base), but to be expected, their minds (to me) seem to be elsewhere than their physical surroundings and perhaps that was partially the point I was trying to make.

I'd further clarify like for example with myself, I'm acutely aware of my physical surroundings, but it's on a more general holistic theme that underpins the experience. I only focus on the minute details as they relate to the central theme of my physical experience.

[Tom]

is how your quadra functions (when Sensing is involved). Therein lies a large difference between Alpha and Gamma Ns; you (and Delta) have and , while we (and Beta) have and .
You've defined Alpha N very well; I would say that Gamma almost completely disregards phisical comfort, forgetting the present moment almost entirely (Beta at least has to let them in on the current moment). I might guess that Delta has a lower tolerance for the present moment, due to ; It would be very interesting to hear someone more experienced and better-researched expound on this, no?

[Steve]

I think I see what you are saying, but can you detail that experience with a specific example?

Thanks.

The Si/Se preference still holds for Ne/Ni. I, like other Si types process the physical environment as part of a continuum of experience, where certain physical stimuli are considered relevant and others are not. Whereas someone like strrrng processes physical stimulus as a raw, localized impulse. As Se seeking he looks for someone to guide that awareness and looks for that "stimulus - here".

As Si seeking I look for someone to provide a more refined concentration and well-defined flow to jump onto. I have a very strong Si awareness, but it's through a static NeTi perspective, resulting in a much more generalized and spread out Si awareness than an Si ego type.

[ArchonAlarion]

Would you agree that Si/Se relates primarily to physical things and Ni/Ne primarily to non-physical things?

I just dont see an Ni being as physically active or aware as Se/Si types.

And I see people (including myself) who do not care much about physical experiences, have a tough time "just doing it," and can remain "in their heads" for a long time.

So where am I goin wrong?

[strrrng]

Would you agree that Si/Se relates primarily to physical things and Ni/Ne primarily to non-physical things?

I just dont see an Ni being as physically active or aware as Se/Si types.

And I see people (including myself) who do not care much about physical experiences, have a tough time "just doing it," and can remain "in their heads" for a long time.

So where am I goin wrong?

That division isn't wrong on a general level, but the words "physical" and "non-physical" have too many connotations and manifestations across various contexts to be used as a sort of top-down label for the functions. Ni and Ne definitely both focus on abstract qualities of things, whether it be processes or variables, while Se and Si tend to focus on more explicit data. But it's better to compare functions like Ne and Se, Ni and Si, etc. because they operate within the same realm. For the aforementioned, the focuses are on objects' content and traits (Se and Ne), and subjective processes (Si and Ni).

[Joy]

I've recently come to think of rest and leisure as the means to an end (work being the end) instead of the opposite. Granted, in the past I saw this on a very large scale... five or ten years of very hard work and sacrifice being the means to a lifetime of security and freedom.

I now understand that security and freedom are internal conditions, not external circumstances. One who is internally enslaved and insecure can never find lasting circumstances of security and freedom. One who practices self-mastery on the other hand, cannot loose his/her freedom or security as the result of circumstances, no matter what they are.

[FDG]

I've recently come to think of rest and leisure as the means to an end (work being the end) instead of the opposite.

Eh, why not about thinking of them just as an end in itself.

[misutii]

Gamma NT laziness is more of an absolute laziness; we really just hate to do anything. We want it done with as little effort as possible; our immense sense of laziness drives efficiency in all that we do. While the laziness of an ISTp is more of a comfort thing (they would rather not do anything in order to remain comfortable; laidback is a good term), laziness for an ILI or a LIE is true in most every aspect of the world. This doesn't mean we will do nothing, even though in many instances we will not (if we see something as an over exertion, we simply will not, hence our hatred of menial tasks/chores/etc.).

Si laziness stems more from a reluctance to give up comfort (which means that they can do a lot if kept comfortable), while the combination of Te/Ni makes laziness more of an artform, trying to expend the least amount of energy possible in everything they do.

I see this but I'd confidently wager that Beta NF laziness takes the artform of laziness to next extreme. Where as most Gamma NTs, between bouts of laziness, actually have to work and make their own money (because other people won't altruistically provide it for them) so they can be lazy, Beta NFs have the benefit of which makes other people that work and have money want to give that money to Beta NFs, especially when Beta NFs smile. PoLR ensures that the money is quickly is wasted in such an innocent manner that there's no issue with giving more. It's like a mother theresa charity. Is it any coincidence that Beta STs are amongst the most industrious workoholics of the socion? And is it not also true that a Beta ST just isn't what they could be if they lack a Beta NF to monetarily patronize? Of course if you don't know us well we won't seem like lazy bums because then we'd only get quarters and couldn't afford our nicotine addictions.

[07490]

I see this but I'd confidently wager that Beta NF laziness takes the artform of laziness to next extreme. Where as most Gamma NTs, between bouts of laziness, actually have to work and make their own money (because other people won't altruistically provide it for them) so they can be lazy, Beta NFs have the benefit of which makes other people that work and have money want to give that money to Beta NFs, especially when Beta NFs smile. PoLR ensures that the money is quickly is wasted in such an innocent manner that there's no issue with giving more. It's like a mother theresa charity. Is it any coincidence that Beta STs are amongst the most industrious workoholics of the socion? And is it not also true that a Beta ST just isn't what they could be if they lack a Beta NF to monetarily patronize? Of course if you don't know us well we won't seem like lazy bums because then we'd only get quarters and couldn't afford our nicotine addictions.

I really have to laugh at this. more so becuase how you said it.

[Ezra]

I think he wants some SLE to give him some gay love.

Maybe you'd be up to the task?

Damn Alphas.

Who doesn't?

[Creepy-male]

Who doesn't?

Other alphas <3

[Ezra]

Other alphas <3

I severely doubt your claim.