I'd like to know all about how an IEI polr function ofwould supposedly manifest itself.
IEI Extroverted Thinking Te Polr (INFp)
I'd like to know all about how an IEI polr function of
It means you are eternally bound to maudlin idealism.
4w3-5w6-8w7
"It means you are eternally bound to maudlin idealism."
Hahaha. Anywhere I can get a more in-depth description?
You definitely won't get one from a Te-polr!
4w3-5w6-8w7
Here is the IEIs Te description from a source that I like.
from socionics.ws/wiki
When confronted with a large body of factual information with which they are unacquainted, IEIs will often hesitate and refrain from saying anything so as to avoid appearing unknowledgeable or potentially embarrassing themselves. They may feel threatened and vacillate if pressured into producing critical evaluations of factual information or statistics; they may feel as though they do not know what to do with this type of information, and often prefer to rely on their internal conceptual framework use their understanding of the relevant processes to evaluate a situation. They may also be wary of basing their beliefs or actions on facts from outside sources, instead preferring to rely on their own insights. These behaviors can sometimes lead to confusion and lack of clarity, as they may have difficulty clearly explaining and underscoring the information pertinent their ideas.
They are often unconcerned with optimizing productivity or efficiency. They may generally try to avoid evaluating cost-effectiveness of resources, and are often not apt at making such discriminations. They may see persons who focus extensively on practical matters as boring and inanimate. They deeply dislike and can avoid tedious and disinteresting tasks that involve attention to detail and pragmatic focus, such as managing one's finances. They usually are exhausted by these tasks; they have no interest in and little idea how to do them, and often find it difficult to focus. They may be petulant and unresponsive in encounters with individuals who try to mobilize them into productive tasks, and may feel that such individuals are bossy and contemptible.
They may seem overly dreamy, lost in their own enterprises, and generally oblivious to the nature of the mundane tasks that surround them.
they don't manage money very well. they hate routine tasks and blow them off. they prefer an out of the box thinking style rather than a go by the book way to do things.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
i know types who are not Te polr who have all those characteristicsOriginally Posted by Blaze
prolly so. keepin it real though. sometimes those descriptions on the wiki get overly analytical.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Is this what it means?I thought "keep it real" meant "be yourself"!
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
It fits me. I never want to go anywhere involving finances, if I get money it would be more for some celebrity thing benefiting others, a lot of IEIs get paid that way. I also am really sweet and caring so people will take care of me in that regard, because it bores me to death. A lot of people think I'm avoiding responsibility or something but no, it's just too draining lol. Why should I focus my attention in that area when I get much more improvement focusing on my strengths? It's a misnomer to think improving weaknesses helps you, maximizing strength is the only thing that works.
Yeah I'd marry for money because I have enough love to give both of us, so if somebody wants to focus on the money while I give the love, to me that's just a natural balance. It amuses me that people think I'm a golddigger but nah. It's just a natural balance that works. Society says it's unfair to make women stay at home (when they don't want to), well it's just as unfair to make men work when it doesn't naturally mesh with their personality and what they have to offer.
I agree 100%
4w3-5w6-8w7
Looking at it more abstractly, I'd say Te polr is an unwillingness to be bound by the Te "potential causalities" that result from the Fi state.
Meaning that Fi has a limiting quality to it; "Based on what I intuited/felt from the state of things there are such and such appropriate actions."
(Delta NF's give me a very prescriptive vibe)
Te polr's dont need this shit. The Te is too situationally specific and based on some inherent essence in situations that merry types simply cannot perceive.
Te polr's look for an abstract and static guide that is universal: "Oh, this kind of situation is playing out. I know how things work based on the factors I can point to, and through this, I can assume that the person has x motivation."
Te polr's feel limited and constrained by Te. It feels arbitrary and based on axioms (Fi), which cannot be specified or universalized.
The end is nigh
Ehhhh *gives 'so so hands'* to Jake. I guessssss. Idk.
its okay. You're the Te polr after all...
(not to derail thread, but this might explain more, bnd http://forum.socionix.com/index.php?showtopic=3096&st=0)
The end is nigh
Yes, exactly.
I don't always think it's that we can't perceive it – I find myself able to deal with Fi information relatively easy, in terms of translating it through my valued functions. It's more that I couldn't give the slightest shit about some top-down established set of actions that originate from some obscure core state, given that I naturally see actions in a latent, divergent manner.Te polr's dont need this shit. The Te is too situationally specific and based on some inherent essence in situations that merry types simply cannot perceive.
This sounds about right, although I think the word "universal" has some negative connotations. IxFps seem the most bent on understanding the basic rules, as their natural state revolves around passively receiving information on underlying processes... basically, I can winnow out a sequence of someone's actions to a tee, but where I sometimes err, is in drawing the more general ideas around it... messing up in this realm is aggravating, because it alters my ability to deduce their motivations with more simplicity... however, I can still spot commonalities between the internal causal processes in actions, and via Ni synthesis, can abstract them past a context, hence anticipation.Te polr's look for an abstract and static guide that is universal: "Oh, this kind of situation is playing out. I know how things work based on the factors I can point to, and through this, I can assume that the person has x motivation."
^that should answer the original question lol...
Te doesn't feel as arbitrary as Fi tbh... Fi conflicts with my agenda, which I would argue is the "least" arbitrary function to a person... so it's like, "how can you simply draw these personal delineations on intrinsic content and quality, when there are these other aspects?"... also consider that IPs are the harmonizers of quadras, and so will be the least inclined to condense things. Te just feels redundant to me, a sequential addition equation that never touches the underlying roots of something... whateverTe polr's feel limited and constrained by Te. It feels arbitrary and based on axioms (Fi), which cannot be specified or universalized.
4w3-5w6-8w7
ah okay, that makes sense. I might have added how I feel about Te and Fi, which would obviously be a bit different from the perspective of IXFp.
The end is nigh
yeah, that merry/serious thread is really good... I think the basic delineation comes down to something like:
Fi/Te: If x is a certain type of person, they will act in certain ways.
vs.
Ti/Fe: If x acts in certain ways, they are a certain type of person.
Essentially, as you mentioned Jake, Fi establishes individual-specific assessments that don't exist outside of the subjective frame of reference, and Te serves as tensor-like beacons for these internal states (think of an internal reverberation in the human body which induces the entire muscular-skeletal chain to react in a directly observable way... that's Fi/Te in a nutshell)... it's hard to alter them, because it would require shifting the Fi'er's entire frame of reference. Conversely, Fe/Ti'ers assess people more inductively... observing the variations in latent activity and generating structural parameters to subsume the patterns underneath... and it's more detached, a bit more about interpersonal leverage than core maintenance (back to the human body metaphor, it would be more like isolating specific movements as observable entities, and "intuiting" the latent energy behind them, then comparing and categorizing said thing based on its more general relation to the other latent patterns observed, hence you have an interconnected chain of variant actions that find coherence on fundamental rules, i.e. the basics of the human body's functioning).
4w3-5w6-8w7
Yeah, I think I read it... and tom did the bull-in-a-china-shop act again, right? lol. If that wasn't a good example of the idea at hand...
4w3-5w6-8w7
exxaccttttlyyyyyyyyyy.
okay cool, new things to consider.
*goes on walk*
The end is nigh
lol yes this happens frequently.
The end is nigh
"Potential" means "Internal" to me (making "potential causalities" "internal dynamics")... in fact this whole post sounds like the difference betweenand
to me (with maybe a little
thrown in). You're comparing yourself with ENTj?
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
Potential can be applied to basically all the elements, but fits best with internal statics. Dynamic is the actualized energy of what was formerly in a static (potential) state."Potential" means "Internal" to me (making "potential causalities" "internal dynamics")... in fact this whole post sounds like the difference between
Fi is similar to Ne, remember...
The end is nigh
ah walks... the eternal generators of insight
yeah... internal static functions... they're like receptors or something, like resting charges touching each other to gauge relative states... although they diverge where Fi condenses energy and Ne diverges off of nodes...Potential can be applied to basically all the elements, but fits best with internal statics. Dynamic is the actualized energy of what was formerly in a static (potential) state.
Fi is similar to Ne, remember...
interesting stuff
4w3-5w6-8w7
Fair enough... but this doesn't explain why you called Te "potential causalities."
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari
This is a translation of Te-vulnerable discussion from russian-speaking socionics forums: http://socionik.com/thread/11317.html
Posted by LanaGor (type IEI):
"I decided to share this because all too often I have encountered strange ideas about type IEI on this forum that depicted them as deliberate and principled slackers, deadbeats, and spendthrifts. One gets the impression that the IEI's "painful" Te get mistaken for self-indulgence and a penchant for laziness that allows them to work in a slipshod negligent manner, or to not work at all, to spend all of their money going into debt - and even be proud of this! As if Yesenin is saying: "This is simply the kind of creature that I am, with painful business logic, so what do you want from me now? I cannot, don't want to, and I will not do this!" Meanwhile, it has also been my observations that the presence of such statements in typing questionnaires usually indicate some different type from TIM IEI.
Let's take a look at the Socionics reference material.
What is painful (vulnerable) Extraverted Logic?
E. Filatova: "in the sphere of exerting influence … this person is most vulnerable, acts with uncertainty, often feels plagued by doubt, and in most severe cases - an inferiority complex."
A. Ausra: "Block SUPEREGO IEI: Si Te. This block of superego is the social conformity, informational block. This is the block of social expectations, in implementation of which the person tries to do what is already expected of him or her by society. It is means of reproduction of an objective picture of the external reality, the block of orientation in objective reality. The "conscience" of a person.
The object of orientation. The object of orientation in the external world for such a person is space and the sensations that this space evokes: the well-being of a person."
E. Filatova: "Reality is - primary. It consists of the fact that in order to survive people have to work efficiently and effectively, creating material wealth, and that the value of any idea lies in the possibility of its practical realization."
Thus, we have that the "vulnerable" function is associated with the performance expected of a person by other people, with greatest vulnerability, suspiciousness, complexes, and even one's conscience. In the case of IEI-slacker, how could it be then that "vulnerable" Te is presented with such bravado and demonstrative indifference? Perhaps too many people who dabble in socionics are not accustomed to reading and putting together what they have read to notice such contradictions. It says: "uncertainty, vigilant suspicion, personal inferiority complex" - and not the reverse: "Let's put this on display for everyone!"
When a person is faced with pressure to their painful function i.e. forced to somehow give a report here, evaluate himself and others, make assessments and evaluations, no bravado gets put forward, alas, not even for purpose of self-defense. One cannot make a "shield of nonchalance" from >painful< function. Therefore, if you have someone sitting in their workplace, shooting paper airplanes at the ceiling, and to questions about work calmly replying "I don't feel like it", "I can't make myself do this now", and especially "I'm Yesenin, I have painful business logic" - don't hurry to type such a person as a Te PoLR type, because they likely don't have painful Te.
Painful Te cannot be equated with a chronic inability to work. These are different things, and the relationship between them for an IEI is such that when an IEI encounters problems at work, his conscience starts to seriously bother him or her, and the IEI will never calmly relate to having problems with work. Availability of nearby dual saves only by minimizing the problems themselves but never by relieving them completely, once and for all.
"Still, - some will object to me - even "certified" IEIs will refer to themselves as idlers quite frankly!" This is indeed so. Let us see in which cases the IEI tends to consider him/herself a bum.
- When work brings the IEI pleasure personally. Then this is no work at all - this is entertainment. And entertainment is not a real job.
- When work is given to the IEI with great difficulty. Then this, too, is not work, but some kind of incompetent amateur stumblng around, that another person could have done faster and better.
- When work falls into the category "everybody does it, and even more," for example, cooking dinner, cleaning up one's home, going to the store, doing homework with your child, going to the fitness center.
- When the IEI is resting (for what is he tired from? would have been better if he was tired from real work ...).
- When the IEI is engaged in various urgent matters (but needs to do something else, for those other things present as more serious matters, seriously).
- When the IEI does something that doesn't bring results, for example, studying foreign language without much success, not being able to "discipline" the noisy neighbors, not getting his kid earn good grades in school, trying to lose weight without success, etc.
- When the IEI is underpaid.
- When the IEI is overpaid.
- ... and so on.
To put it simply: when does the IEI NOT consider himself a slacker?
Only in one case: When there is somebody else who lets the IEI understand (not simply describe!) the meaning and benefit of his work. As well as delineates a framework when activities and work can be stopped, or put aside, and when he has have every right to relax.
And if we are considering the painful function, then we have to consider it in the context of the entire Superego block i.e. in conjunction with role Si. In this case, the role function is working against the person. In particular, the IEI finds it extremely difficult to recognize his or her right to elementary tiredness. This right the IEI can only get from outside, from society around him or her: in the best case - from a dual, in the worst case - from own body, quite simply, falling from exhaustion (or even from sickness).
Painful Te is also unable to assess the costs of labor, particularly new type of labor. Therefore, the IEI finds it extremely difficult to give up on something (from shame), as well as to agree to something (what if he/she can't manage it?)
Evaluating the quality of accomplished works also very difficult. "There is no limit to perfection" - to IEI this are not empty words, but a call to action and the source of constant alarm and anxiety: is my work of sufficient quality or should it be better?
Even more difficult - the question of Yesenin's salary. A particularly problematic situation is when IEI's manager believes that IEI's labor costs so much, while his friends, family members, and close people assure him/her that this is too little, and say "go and demand more". In such a situation, a person can simply get sick.
And finally, the sacramental: "How do I get myself work and make money?!"
I think that all people experience such states and feelings, when one doesn't want to work on anything, especially people working in creative fields. But it is precisely painful Te in conjunction with role Si that makes Yesenins see a big problem in it, that brings them to anguish and despair.
What I want to say by all of this?
Only one thing. Painful Extroverted Logic - is an always agonizing conscience about one's own (in)activity. It is constant subjective undervaluation of one's own labor; it is eternal uncertainty in one's own performance at work; it is an inability to take a break with a clean heart and soul. It is a fundamental inability to say "I will not!" when you are being asked to do something that you don't know how to do well (especially asked "nicely"). For difficulties and poor results you will blame precisely yourself, remembering your entire life and blaming yourself for being too lethargic and insufficiently active, blaming yourself for being incapable and never learning the necessary skills, because you could have studied the material more or learned a foreign language at least to the level of corrector. And the idea that it should have been the fault of the professor for not teaching the material well, or the person who dumped all this foreign text editing on you, does not even come into your head, and even if it forms, you will feel painfully uncertain and ashamed about it ...
Thus, if you are hoping to type yourself as IEI and then simply sit back and casually tell about your problems at work, with salary, with budgeting and finances, and then type yourself into IEI, pointing out how this is your painful Te, then ... then maybe it makes sense to look yourself in another, more suitable TIM?**"
**Especially type EIE, that has a more nonchalant and casual experience of Te as their role and not "painful" function.
Last edited by silke; 05-23-2018 at 11:56 PM.
<33. nope, not te polr.
i've wondered if its ni because ne is supposed to be about "objective" conceptualizations, it was ni egos who helped me understand the concept when i didn't, and its common for alpha nts here to talk about the theory more like its hard science. but this doesn't hold true across the board and maybe its just a matter of intelligence.
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 02:29 AM.
Te PoLRs are efficient in things that in the large scope of Efficiency don´t need to be efficient or to put it that way they are efficient were it is the least efficient to do so. Unecessary Efficiency leads to a waste of Resources which in the greater picture is the opposite of Efficiency.
I could hit you with the data, but i wouldnt believe it.I'd like to know all about how an IEI polr function of
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
<---- starts seeing quotes and references goes zzzzzzz halfway through the post. Starts feeling self conscious because it doesn't really sound nice to jump in a topic with a "TLDR" but still does for bah... just feels right... gosh I had to go shopping today I'm out of toilet paper... actually have been for a few days, thanks god there's plenty of paper napkins in the kitchen... "hey lilith, how about me and dad come over to see you?" "well okay, if you still have a map of what my appartment should look like and you don't mind not walking on the papers scattered on the floor and won't stumble into stuff... heck, I didn't do the dishes"... "hey lilith, what are we eating for dinner tonight?" "hmmm take out?"... "lilith your desk looks like a landfill and the company president is going to be here in 1 hour!" *grabs stuff and throws it in the locker" .... "lilith, everything I'm asking you is to schedule your work" two weeks later with piles of work on the desk "hey sir, I got an idea, how about you tell me what to do when?"
just some maybe extremized examples ontop of my mind
Sharpen a sword too much and it becomes brittle, just as sharpening a sword too little keeps it blunt.
Maximizing strengths has its advantages, but alone its flimsy and you have nothing when it breaks. Te is a horrible function to put absolutely no work into.
Abstractions aside, personally, i feel the merit in improving weaknesses is just that. You improve your weaknesses. Flushing yourself out is benificial to those around you and anything unchecked is something unmonitored. The shadow functions still manifest, and without improvement they are destructive.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
Do any IEIs actually relate the descriptions where, under Te-PoLR, it talks about wastefulness and not being good with money?
I think that may partially be an sp-thing?
...then again I am both sp-last *and* Te-PoLR, sometimes I can't tell which is which... ;___;
Not wasteful but used to be very reckless with my money.
Fast money = easy come, easy go
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Are you referring to the instinctual variant? If so, I'm Sp-first and I am VERY careful with money, and I abhor waste.
Money's not easy to come by here so it doesn't leave my pocket, except on laundry day
I am extremely wasteful and bad with money. I like buying myself pretty things, nothing especially complex about itI simply want to enjoy present moments as much as possible and not worry about the future. But I have a healthy feeling when enough is enough and when I have to start saving if I want to survive. I also feel like I will always somehow make it and everything will work out fine financially, even if it looks like I'm doomed. I don't like worrying about something as trivial as money, although ironically it means a lot more to me than I would like to admit (I would kinda kill myself if I was dirt-poor, as bad as it sounds). Although I've always been self-sufficient throughout my life, I would not oppose if someone would take care of money for me, if he really felt like it
. It just seems so...time-consuming to me. I've also never really understood world economy, stock markets, the circulation of money ...not that I'm not capable of understanding it, but it just feels like my brain rejects the very idea of remembering anything about such a dull topic (no offense to anyone
) . Which is why I sometimes feel like a dimwit when talking to some LSE's or LIE's.
I am extremely wasteful and bad with money. I like buying myself pretty things, nothing especially complex about it
http://esocionika.com/index.php?page...ry=6&article=3
IEI
Nothing brings me more pleasure than counting the income and the expenses. I know everything about the current deals in town. I dedicate my time only to practical and tangible things.
I will not spend any money on that useless pendant! Neither am I going to spend the money on the cool drawing set as I can't draw! Now, where did all my money go?..
kinda off topic fuckin sue
best polr function is Fi fuck relationship
Chairman mao vs Deng Xiaoping
IEI vs LIE
Understand Mao's idealism in communism vs Deng's pragmatism, that lead him to destroy socialism essentially
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
