So, I'm with you now

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[crazedrat]

And I think you're a twinkly, passive aggressive little elf / crackpot.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

People, if they don't like me in this thread, will be carrying a lasting impression about me. It will be in the form of a Fi judgment as a 'douchebag' or something of that nature. This judgment will not dissipate.
You don't understand the difference between Fe and Fi.
The 'General mood' of people towards me in this thread is a mix of Fe and Fi.

You were saying I was making a lasting judgement, ie its my post I said it so therefore I'm using Fi.

I can't speak for anyones judgement, but you're saying 'people', meaning everyone or just some, it doesn't matter your initial projection on to me was there, whether you like it now or otherwise.

[Beautiful sky]

I think that's a Fi thing. Fe doesn't make lasting judgments about me as a person. It only judges the immediate situation. Hence it being an extraverted function. Anyway, I don't want a tool like you clouding this discussion any further. There's nothing you could possibly contribute which is insightful, so please just fuck off.
My Fi does suck but I don't give a fuck about it. I just flat out assume if a person discriminates against me they're doing both of us a favor. So I relish people making those judgments, in a certain sense. It saves me time. They're doing the work for me - they're prudes, and they're going to avoid me from now on.

True.

No, you need Fe to give justification to Ti. Otherwise it just gets skipped over and ignored. Fe is the motivational factor. By using Fe you become aware of the conflict, then Ti shows how the conflict needs to be resolved. Ti can show a resolution on its own yes, but Fe demonstrates value. Otherwise you'd be left searching for value. Basically you're assuming a participant who's already invested in the discussion and has their mind wrapped around the issues.
Also, without Fe, Ti itself doesn't discriminate between important and irrelevant inconsistencies. You will sometimes see hardcore Ti types quote a thing and point out a ton of inconsistencies which don't really matter in the grand scheme of things. So with Fe I can chop through all that garbage and get straight to the point. It's very helpful, and it involves the use of both negative and positive emotional conveyances.

Can you give an example of this? The rest is really good.

You were saying I was making a lasting judgement, ie its my post I said it so therefore I'm using Fi.

I can't speak for anyones judgement, but you're saying 'people', meaning everyone or just some, it doesn't matter your initial projection on to me was there, whether you like it now or otherwise.

What is wrong with you? STOP

Who said you're Fi apart of Cyclops?

I personally think that:
- you're Fe
- I'm not Fi
- you're a fag



Edit: oh, and a joiner. A joiner fag

You STOP too please.

[Beautiful sky]

Attacking an Fe is not going to get them to engage in any sort of productive discussion and you guys are making fools of your lack of understanding.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Who said you're Fi apart of Cyclops?

Dude he's projecting his Fi all over the place, think about it regardless of w/e you think of my type.

OK, strrrng can be a bit risque at times, but I think it's fair to say he knows what he's doing with it and can, often is funny with it.

Never seen him so apparently 'worried' about Fi, or deal with it that way.

That is all.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Beautiful sky]

Don't you find it funny to hear crazedrat squeaking?

He's squeaking at people who are not using

[strrrng]

I understand that someone can mock someone and use reasoning in their attack; the issue is that you don't convince someone by saying their mental machine is too basic. (YOU'RE SO FUCKING DUMB!! SHUT UP!! SHUT THE FUCK UP!!) They either accept it and ignore trying to grasp what you're talking about because it's soooo high above them, or they just deal with your emotional explosion, or they stand up for their argument doggedly, like you are doggedly standing up for your own.

the thing is, if I simply mock someone, it's because I've already determined their mental unfitness and am delineating a boundary, for my own relief and entertainment. it's not something I feel needs to be justifiable, objectively. nor does it matter to me how they respond, as they are too dumb to comprehend, and potentially too stubborn to budge.

You convince someone with evidence to refute their claims.

not everyone is worth convincing; mockery is a gift that many people make themselves deserving of.

Additionally, if you're talking with valuing groups and not valuers, you're going to be dousing them with negative emotional explosions, when they prefer no volatile emotional displays (or few), even positive ones.

big deal. Fi valuers douse me with emotional sterility.

"Taking text as an indicator of someone's emotional" state is ALL they can do. You're not on your webcams on the forum. What are they supposed to do, read your nonexistent facial expressions or missing body language?

it's basically the difference between inferring things in a situational context and making judgments. you can't just look at, say, crazed's reactivity and assume some 1:1 correlation, i.e. he's a hostile dick. actually, this thread has been a shining example of idiocy, in that regard. his reactions always stem from frustration at a lack of intelligence/reasoning in others, and are more or less breaking points. but the people here glossed over the words and assessed him in a biased manner because it didn't feel good to them. emotions don't take priority. understanding this, allows more versatility in communication and interpretation.

and this is only one example.

[Creepy-cinq]

Hesitating to post again for fear of awakening the hornet's nest, I do have to agree moving from ESE to SLI is fairly extreme. I think the figuratively 'hydrophobic' relationship with is important in determining whether one is SLI.

Wikisocion describes polr as below. VixenDogFox, do you relate to this, and how so. It would be interesting to hear from other SLIs as to whether this is accurate or not.


"SLIs feel insecure and tense in situations with loud emotional displays — whether positive or negative — as well as in any situations expecting vocal displays of feelings and passions. Therefore, SLIs try to ignore anything relating to their vulnerable function. However, it becomes most prominent when they cannot properly organise the sensations, actions, and movements of their physical world. When this happens, they will feel hopelessness and extreme loss.

SLIs prefer to have lots of time to get to know people so that they can let out their hidden passions in a safe and friendly environment where no one will judge them. These passions are tender and must be treated with respect. If they are told they are not passionate enough or are too passionate, they will take offence and hide their emotions from that person in the future. They find it offensive when people assume things about their emotional state based on their expressions, because they find such inferences are too often wrong. Instead of explaining to the person how they are actually feeling, they will get annoyed and push the person away. If an SLI feels comfortable with a person, he can go on and on about his feelings, explaining them in-depth - not anything related to his present Image:symbol_e.gif state but instead Image:symbol_r.gif opinions about people he knows and, more often than not, what he finds irritating about them (which is perhaps related to Image:symbol_s.gif).

SLIs see no reason to get worked up about things. They tend to condemn people who do not control their emotional displays and "fly off the handle." They believe that people should think first about the effect their words and emotions will have on other people rather than just spilling out negative or potentially hurtful feelings as they feel like it. If someone has chewed them out in an emotional way just once, they tend to hold this incident against the person for years. To them such behavior is unnecessarily demeaning and malicious.

SLIs extremely dislike socialising (particularly amongst large groups) because they are incapable of creating and sustaining a wide range of emotions for people. They are also quite unable to deal with the painful and complicated job of organising the unpredictable emotions that they can receive from so many people at any one given time. Consequently, SLIs are often reclusive and socially unengaged despite being rather comfortable around a few people they have learned and when having one-on-one conversations on subjects in which they are knowledgeable. "

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Crispy]

The functional revise page on wikisocion has never been retrieved since the crash, so I don't know where to find the info, but there must be some in depth +/- page somewhere on the interbutts. But it looked something like this:

Alpha NT / Delta ST : Blah blah blah, they use - which appears as a need to be mean to people. Blah blah blah.

I wish I could find the page but I do relate very much to this need. I could be described as an IRL troll sometimes

If the preceding is true: VDF, do you relate with needing to be outwardly mean to people?

@ WarriorLibrarian - Found it

The Creators/Systematizers (-Ti/+Te in ego, -Fe/+Fi agenda) INTj; ENTp; ISTp; ESTj
This group is the producers of ideas in the world. The intuitive types introduce and implement new and extraordinary ideas. The sensing types attempt to produce and implement ways to be economical. This group can be very analytical, they analyze the situation and put the best idea into production. This group tries to break things apart and analyze them as them are at their deepest core. This group can be very rude, as its their functional need to be sarcastic and mean to people. In the intuitive types though, social anxiety can get in the way of this. This group wants to love and be happy. This group has a hard time appearing happy to the people around them. They are hardly ever completely nice to people.