Let's see if you can VI me

[jewels]

+2, srsly.

EDIT: As for the topic at hand, I'm always a little skeptical of any one who both claims to be delta and also mentions their ability to manipulate or control others to the other's detriment. I mean unless you can explain to me a situation where guilt tripping the sin out of some one or deflating their ego is good for them *shrugs*

I agree. The vibe I'm getting is not delta at all. I'm still going with ENFj and possibly INFp.

ENFjs of course need time to recharge and maybe half of the ones I know thought they were introverted because of that (even though to an anyone else they are clearly an extrovert!)

Deltas can be manipulative in our own ways, but we strive to not be and feel really bad about it (it's one of the worst insults you can say to me anyway). I've never known an INFj to describe it that way. I don't see INFjs trying to manipulate. It's more just stating how they feel about something, and you can react however you want to what they're doing. Where as with Beta, there is an attempt to control the reaction the other person is having (which can be bad or good of course, just like anything).

[thePirate]

lol@your arrogance.

first off, infjs are fe ignoring. does that mean anything to you?

[Shagbag The Wizard]

lol@your arrogance.

first off, infjs are fe ignoring. does that mean anything to you?

Not sure how I'm being arrogant, but this is my understanding of Fe ignoring:

When lectured by another on the use of the ignoring function, the individual
sees it as superfluous information, for he or she knows how to use the function well, but chooses not to use it in favour of his or her more convenient base function.

.......

Usually the base function creates byproducts relating to the
ignoring function, but the way it describes such information is very carefully chosen to fit the view of the leading function.

A person limits the expression of this element in public (in favor of the base function), but sometimes uses it extensively in private, and can call upon it when necessary.

Functions - Wikisocion



Would appreciate if you can give examples of where I've used excessive .

[thePirate]

I don't see INFjs trying to manipulate. It's more just stating how they feel about something, and you can react however you want to what they're doing. Where as with Beta, there is an attempt to control the reaction the other person is having (which can be bad or good of course, just like anything).

Its funny that you associate Fe with manipulative behavior, yet not with Fi. According to your logic, I can just as easily say that Fi seeks to control evaluations(of a person) someone is having towards another, its manipulation of relationships. I have seen this used and cause alot of pain to people, so how you can paint manipulation like its just an Fe thing this is beyond me. I also resent you how you commented deltas dont strive to be manipulative(as if it sets delta apart from the other 'manipulative' quadras'), then found it amusing that you said 'but then we feel really bad about it' ( basically implying an awareness of your manipulative nature, which is in itself manipulative).


fi valuers are just as 'bad' if you want to look at it like that

[Marie84]

Its funny that you associate Fe with manipulative behavior, yet not with Fi. According to your logic, I can just as easily say that Fi seeks to control evaluations of a person someone is having towards another, its manipulation of relationships. I have seen this used and cause alot of pain to people, so how you can paint manipulation like its just an Fe thing this is beyond me. I also resent you how you commented deltas dont strive to be manipulative(as if it sets delta apart from the other 'manipulative' quadras'), then found it amusing that you said 'but then we feel really bad about it' ( basically implying an awareness of your manipulative nature, which is in itself manipulative).


fi valuers are just as 'bad' if you want to look at it like that

I agree. The IE's can be subjective, so to quadras that value certain ones they may not look, say, manipulative, but to others it does.
Fi can be cunning in the same way any IE can be, judging people and making them feel guilty and horrible about themselves, which is the "dark" side of Fi that maybe other Fi valuers don't see (without Socionics at least...)

For instance, I've also learned that most SLE's don't purposely try to be offensive and territorial, it's just a subconscious reaction to their ego block and that they don't necessarily appear this way to everybody else, which is partly due to seeing things through my own biased ego block

[thePirate]

Lol. The irony...

What happened to your "Betas are evil, Deltas are good"??

misconceptions and stereotypes, fuck me for learning. my lens is different now but if someone were to argue this I would try and pick my words carefully, theres truth to that statement. betas are more destructive by nature because we operate in a violent realm and mindstate more so than other quadras. wouldn't put the evil description on delta, thats for sure.

[Gilly]

Yeah, Deltas are that insidious, "I don't really exist" Big Brother-esque evil, while Betas are more the terrorist cell, guerilla warfare, fuck everything up kind of evil.

[thePirate]

I don't agree. Deltas are just as "evil" as Beta, only different.

I can agree with this. It does depend on how you measure destructiveness. I was using evil in the context as typically seen by society, beta actions, stances, and intents being more prelavent in-your-face. in terms of public opinion I would be shocked if someone choose delta to be more like that under this criteria

Yeah, Deltas are that insidious, "I don't really exist" Big Brother-esque evil, while Betas are more the terrorist cell, guerilla warfare, fuck everything up kind of evil.

Lol, it was funny learning the difference. Their manipulation always seemed like minor annoyances to me compared to how Fe/Ti types do it, so I never really put much thought into it. Sneaky bastards

[crazedrat]

I actually think this guy is INFj. There are sides to Delta ... I've seen them in my INFj sister. She will always swear her intentions are the best (to the point of absurdity, when all reality points to the opposite. The word best should be replaced with self serving in her dictionary). Not so different from how I see this guy justifying his intentions. Also observe the interaction between him and mimosa.. the argument for beta is, from what i can tell, a misapplication of the concept of Fe ignoring. Honestly, the way he annoys me couldn't come from a beta ... Even theasspirate didn't annoy me in this manner. he annoys me on an informational level. I don't even have a legitimate reason to be annoyed by him..

[Shagbag The Wizard]

@ Shagbag: I didn't mean to offend you,

No worries. It is in fact quite impossible to offend me.

The most you will get out of me is mild bemusement. (If I seemed harsh, that was meant to be taken as sarcastic rather than scathing).

[jewels]

Lol. The irony...

What happened to your "Betas are evil, Deltas are good"??

@ jewels and marie : Fe manipulates reactions - it is a dynamic function, that's why it can manipulate - it adapts to what happens externally. The accepted way for Fe to manipulate, is when it "helps" the receiver.

As for Fi, it is static, and I would rather call it a "selfish" function than a "manipulative" one (I use a negative word, to match the one used for Fe). The accepted way for Fi to be selfish, is when it helps the Fi-ego make emotional choices - for example to know when it's time to break out of a relationship that is affecting them in a negative way.

Yeah that's what I was attempting to describe, but didn't do a very good job of it. Really, one isn't better than the other. I couldn't find a way to describe Fi, but I think what you wrote is true.

[Lobo]

Shagbag's type... Hmm, this will be interesting. I say summon Maritsa.

I know I'm not helping, but there's too much to read in this thread. I might get to it later.

[The Greeter]

As for Fi, it is static, and I would rather call it a "selfish" function than a "manipulative" one (I use a negative word, to match the one used for Fe). The accepted way for Fi to be selfish, is when it helps the Fi-ego make emotional choices - for example to know when it's time to break out of a relationship that is affecting them in a negative way.

I'm surprised no one has contended this view.

Knowing when it's time to break out of a relationship is not Fi; knowing that the relationship is breaking is Fi. Subtle difference, I know, but I think it is important nevertheless. More importantly, relationships are not based solely on the benefits or the detriment to the Fi-ego. It must consider all the parties involved (a field considers connections between objects). Fi also evaluates a relationship outside itself, that is, bonds between two or more people, none of whom include themselves.

"Selfish" is the incorrect negative association to Fi but it has the ability to be manipulative in its own right. If the user desires it, Fi can maintain, change, improve or destroy relationships.

[Shagbag The Wizard]

Knowing when it's time to break out of a relationship is not Fi; knowing that the relationship is breaking is Fi.

Nice. This perfectly describes my recent break-up with IEI ex.

In spite of loving each other we both kind of knew on some level that it wasn't gonna work out, but neither of us could gather the balls to say it out loud or take the necessary action to end it.

Well, eventually I was the one to take the initiative after months of procrastination and dancing around the issue.

[Shagbag The Wizard]

The judgement Fi makes is highly subjective, and the more different you are from the well, the harder it will judge you, as it has no "taste" of who you are. You will be poison in the eyes of Fi.

I like the analogy, it's pretty accurate, except for the part about "the more different you are, the harder you will be judged".


This may be nitpicking, but just to clarify:


We are always evaluating others according to our base ethical system. This may or may not lead to actually "judging" them. This will depend entirely on the personal beliefs of the EII.


What I'm saying is that, with EIIs it always comes back to their ethical agenda, whatever that may be. All of our inputs and outputs are informed by and modified by this.

If our belief system includes a moral imperative to "not judge others", we will categorically avoid judging others as a matter of principle, and we will actively attempt to instill these values in others.

Alternatively, we may be fundamentalists, in which case we feel a moral imperative to judge others "for their own good" (of course) and persuade them to leave their ways for our "better ways".


The point is.....both will look at someone and ask: what can I do to bring this person (or myself) more in line with my base value system.


Just wanted to clarify that it's not just about deciding which wells are poision or not. We may still drink from a poisonous well if our ethics tell us it is the "higher way".

I've often forced myself to endure unpleasant relations / situations because of some overriding ethical imperative which leaves me happy for having accomplished it in spite of the hardship suffered.

If I'm not mistaken, this is something EIIs have in common? (confirmation needed)