How is Ti PoLR manifested in ENFps and ESFps?

[Slade]

It's not a hypothesis. It is practically accurate.

Dimensionality adds control because it increases accumulated experience from the added layers of perception. Otherwise why would the vulnerable function be considered the weakest and least under control one?

You are full of it.

Sorry, but it doesn't work this way. Also not sure why you are drawing a correlation between experience and control, one doesn't imply the presence of the other, nor do they necessarily have a reciprocal exchange. Higher dimensionality means that you can extract more information from less, and its information of a different nature than the other dimensions. The vulnerable function is considered this way due to multiple factors that determine its position in Model A (Mental/Vital, Valued/Unvalued, etc). Dimensionality does not play a part in this.

Look, just stop and think about this for one second. You do realize that the demonstrative is 4D and subconcious, right? So you are telling me you have more control over your subconscious than your conscious (Creative, 3D)? This is ridiculous. Seems like you might be the one having a problem adding 1+1. You might have just been more grating to those XEE's because, suprise surprise, you are kind of a cunt.

Wait,wait,wait: did @Myst delete this post? Because I can't believe we're seeing yet another lead miss the point when it was very obvious and well explained in the first place. Like, it just isn't possible, what's their for them, nitpicking on irrelevant mistakes? While deleting any evidence of their own glaring ones...Putting 1+1 together doesn't require .

Oh my God, I thought I was going crazy. But I see it now, so clearly

You know it's funny, you see Ti as nitpicking and reject any kind of logic thrown at you. Also all this harping on attitudes, and rejecting logic because the person's attitude towards you isn't what you want it to be. How are you Ti valuing again? Seriously, look into Ti PoLR. While you're at it, take a look at that Enneagram. There's so much anxiety and incoherence in your posts, its likely you another E-6 that thinks their an 8.

[LuckyOne]

@Myst

Good to know you have the same opinion on wasting time as mine: better to avoid it, so from on let's ignore each other. Should be easy enough, I'll leave you Egos to your own devices.

I still wanna thank you for displaying typical Ego reaction to me in this response, it just furthers confirms how unlike each other we are. I have a vastly different definition of what constitutes "personal insults" (or just "insult" for that matter), not to mention you @squark see me as "bitching" and "anxious", as I sit laughing here at what I call a very over the top and altered reaction from Myst. Really, I don't even know which button I pushed, but I'm glad I did

[niffer]

based on what Ti is, the definition of it within socionics, yes.

I was obviously not talking about Ti hierarchical or mathematical type linkages though. I mentioned that multiple times.

[Myst]

No, it's not about connections at all - the field functions are about connections, which Ne isn't.

Intuition is about connections, just a different kind of connection than what the introverted IEs have. Intuition is about the far-flung connections, perceived as associations, that cannot be reasoned out/arrived by Logic or by Ethics or directly seen by Sensing.

Niffer's idea was about the Ne type of connections.

"Putting together" btw is something every IE does as information processing. The type of information is what makes it Ti, Ne, etc. Logic organizing things is of course what the usual meaning of the word is about in everyday use.

[niffer]

Alright this Slade dude is just a troll. Don't feed him @LuckyOne .

You're nitpicking over the semantics of "control" here.

[Myst]

@Myst

Good to know you have the same opinion on wasting time as mine: better to avoid it, so from on let's ignore each other. Should be easy enough, I'll leave you Egos to your own devices.

I still wanna thank you for displaying typical Ego reaction to me in this response, it just furthers confirms how unlike each other we are. I have a vastly different definition of what constitutes "personal insults" (or just "insult" for that matter), not to mention you @squark see me as "bitching" and "anxious", as I sit laughing here at what I call a very over the top and altered reaction from Myst. Really, I don't even know which button I pushed, but I'm glad I did

You didn't press any buttons of mine. I simply don't have time figuring out where our communication results in so many misunderstandings. So don't be too glad too fast.

The things I highlighted were not insults, I didn't call them insults, just simply a personal direction that I have no interest in responding to on top of the misunderstandings. If you call that over the top... you have a strange definition of that, then.

I was right about Ep though. If you are adamant that you are no Ti ego then try on IEE, I guess maybe others were right about you having Ti PoLR.

[squark]

Ne is internal statics of objects, and perception of those effectively allows one to see the connections between different things.

eh, yes it's internal statics of objects, but that's not how it works. here: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...ation_elements

[LuckyOne]

You didn't press any buttons of mine. I simply don't have time figuring out where our communication results in so many misunderstandings. So don't be too glad too fast.

The things I highlighted were not insults, I didn't call them insults, just simply a personal direction that I have no interest in responding to on top of the misunderstandings.

I was right about Ep though. Try on IEE, I guess maybe others were right about you having Ti PoLR.

Says the one who keeps mistaking me referring to other users as refering to herself.

This part was about you:

@Myst

Good to know you have the same opinion on wasting time as mine: better to avoid it, so from on let's ignore each other. Should be easy enough, I'll leave you Egos to your own devices.

I still wanna thank you for displaying typical Ego reaction to me in this response, it just furthers confirms how unlike each other we are.

See how it starts out with me mentioning your name, yeah.

Now this part right here, was bout @squark:

I have a vastly different definition of what constitutes "personal insults" (or just "insult" for that matter), not to mention you @squark see me as "bitching" and "anxious",

See how I say "you squark" in it? Is it clear now, or do you need more help?


I know can say this is a typical " Ego" tactic: when wanting to discredit someone you can't see eye to eye, accuse them of being PoLR, that covers everything!

[Slade]

Alright this Slade dude is just a troll. Don't feed him @LuckyOne .

You're nitpicking over the semantics of "control" here.

This is hilarious, considering you just finished complaining about how many ad hominems XEE's throw just a few pages ago . The hypocrisy in this thread is rich.

[niffer]

eh, yes it's internal statics of objects, but that's not how it works. here: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...ation_elements

...Yes it is LOL. Linking me away to basic knowledge won't do you any good here. Know when to pull out the white flag, jesus.

[Myst]

eh, yes it's internal statics of objects, but that's not how it works. here: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...ation_elements

Yeah Ne is weird in that it's discrete Static IE but it does still see the intuitive associations to see the internal structure of objects (not Ti structure!).

[squark]

...Yes it is LOL. Linking me away to basic knowledge won't do you any good here. Know when to pull out the white flag, jesus.

Just read it. It's not my job to teach you.

[niffer]

This is hilarious, considering you just finished complaining about how many ad hominems XEE's throw just a few pages ago . The hypocrisy in this thread is rich.

An ad hominem is like "you are a troll, therefore you are wrong". What I'm saying is "you are a troll", and "you are wrong (and here's why)", separately. That's not ad hominem, and thus not hypocrisy.

You jumped in here not knowing anyone, hurling insults in an aggressive tone, saying people must be x Polr, calling them anxious CP 6... and obviously knowing a lot about the theory but with a trolly "lulz msg me with type opinions" in your sig, not to mention your "I'm a shady ass person" avatar. Please do SOMETHING, ANYTHING that isn't convincing of you being a troll.

[Myst]

Says the one who keeps mistaking me referring to other users as refring to herself.

Huh? What's this non-sequitur? Wait, don't answer, not important.

This part was about you:

I know it was about me. And?

See how I say "you squark" in it? Is it clear now, or do you need more help?

It was already clear.

Are you tired or something, since you misunderstand every single line of mine now. This goes beyond Conflict relations.

Really, leave it, I'm not interested in this fruitless exchange.

I know can say this is a typical " Ego" tactic: when wanting to discredit someone you can't see eye to eye, accuse them of being PoLR, that covers everything!

No, I don't actually know which Ep you are but I put IEE back in the options due to issues in communication and especially with you insisting you are not Ti ego. Others also insist, which on its own isn't enough of a reason for me to type you as that, but it's interesting.

And I did not mention Ti PoLR to discredit you. Stop the paranoia bs...

[squark]

Yeah Ne is weird in that it's discrete Static IE but it does still see the intuitive associations to see the internal structure of objects (not Ti structure!).

Not really, it's more like alternatives than associations. The connections and associations come through either Fi with IEEs or with Ti for ILEs.

[Myst]

Not really, it's more like alternatives than associations. The connections and associations come through either Fi with IEEs or with Ti for ILEs.

How do you see alternatives without associating though?

Again, Intuition is about that, seeing those very far associations.

[Bertrand]

Alright this Slade dude is just a troll. Don't feed him @LuckyOne .

You're nitpicking over the semantics of "control" here.

I had a brief urge to separate out the substantive content from the ethical abuse and it was like 10% if-then style rational thinking and 90% ethical posturing. worthless

the very next post throwing ad hom accusations at someone else was just the cherry on top

[niffer]

Not really, it's more like alternatives than associations. The connections and associations come through either Fi with IEEs or with Ti for ILEs.

You wouldn't see the intuitive information to make those connections in the first place without Ne though...

[LuckyOne]

Huh? What's this non-sequitur? Wait, don't answer, not important.




I know it was about me. And?




It was already clear.

Are you tired or something, since you misunderstand every single line of mine now. This goes beyond Conflict relations.

Really, leave it, I'm not interested in this fruitless exchange.




No, I don't actually know which Ep you are but I put IEE back in the options due to issues in communication and especially with you insisting you are not Ti ego. Others also insist, which on its own isn't enough of a reason for me to type you as that, but it's interesting.

And I did not mention Ti PoLR to discredit you. Stop the paranoia bs...

I love how you misunderstand every reference I make, and yet accuses me of the same. Really, I was wrong, there must be a connection.

I applaud how you stick to your guns even when there's nothing to back it, accusing me of making claims about you when they were directed to someone else, then backpedaling and saying you knew all along Wait, is this you admitting you're trolling? Don't answer it, not important

No I'm chilled, got my feet up and I'm sitting on ice tea, you?

You're not interested, yet you can't help but respond. That's very...non contradictory

[Slade]

An ad hominem is like "you are a troll, therefore you are wrong". What I'm saying is "you are a troll", and "you are wrong (and here's why)", separately. That's not ad hominem, and thus not hypocrisy.

You jumped in here not knowing anyone, hurling insults in an aggressive tone, saying people must be x Polr, calling them anxious CP 6... and obviously knowing a lot about the theory but with a trolly "lulz msg me with type opinions" in your sig, not to mention your "I'm a shady ass person" avatar. Please do SOMETHING, ANYTHING that isn't convincing of you being a troll.

It doesn't matter if you separate them or not, the first sentence in your response was to call me a troll. This makes it an ad hominem. The whole point of an ad hominem is to cast doubt on an argument through jabs at a person's character or motives, which you did. This post is also you continuing to do it, while claiming you aren't.

I'd ask you to be transparent about what it is that you are doing. If you have problems with aggressive tones, don't use them yourself, or learn to take what you dish out. You cant be a bitch then play the victim card. That doesn't fly.

I also don't see how its relevant if I'm a troll or not, I presented a point, it's either wrong or not, and the pathetic response of 'focusing too much on semantics' is irrelevant to that point. Discuss the point itself, or don't, but don't pretend like you are.

[squark]

How do you see alternatives without associating though?

Again, Intuition is about that, seeing those very far associations.

An association is "this is like this other thing" - that's simple categorization and falls under Ti or Fi, or it can be "this thing leads to this thing" which is dynamic and falls to Ni or Si. An alternative is "what else could this be/do" and that doesn't depend on classifying something, nor does it depend on being connected to something in a dynamic way.

[Myst]

I love how you misunderstand every reference I make, and yet accuses me of the same. Really, I was wrong, there must be a connection.

I applaud how you stick to your guns even when there's nothing to back it, accusing me of making claims about you when they were directed to someone else, then backpedaling and saying you knew all along Wait, is this you admitting you're trolling? Don't answer it, not important

No I'm chilled, got my feet up and I'm sitting on ice tea, you?

You're not interested, yet you can't help but respond. That's very...non contradictory

You don't sound chilled at all.

I did not misunderstand your references. You don't have to believe me, I don't really care, also don't care about the rest of the nonsense for motivations you tried to read into my lines. See ya.

[niffer]

It doesn't matter if you separate them or not, the first sentence in your response was to call me a troll. This makes it an ad hominem. The whole point of an ad hominem is to cast doubt on an argument through jabs at a person's character or motives, which you did. This post is also you continuing to do it, while claiming you aren't.

I'd ask you to be transparent about what it is that you are doing. If you have problems with aggressive tones, don't use them yourself, or learn to take what you dish out. You cant be a bitch then play the victim card. That doesn't fly.

I also don't see how its relevant if I'm a troll or not, I presented a point, it's either wrong or not, and the pathetic response of 'focusing too much on semantics' is irrelevant to that point. Discuss the point itself, or don't, but don't pretend like you are.

The enlightening opinions of a troll.

[Myst]

An association is "this is like this other thing" - that's simple categorization and falls under Ti or Fi, or it can be "this thing leads to this thing" which is dynamic and falls to Ni or Si. An alternative is "what else could this be/do" and that doesn't depend on classifying something, nor does it depend on being connected to something in a dynamic way.

"This is like this other thing" isn't specific to Ti/Fi. This is too general to say what IE it is.

To be able to ask and see what else this could be, you have to associate, too. Also to see the internal (Ne) structure of objects. Classifying in the logical way is different and definitely doesn't need far-flung associating.

[LuckyOne]

You don't sound chilled at all.

I did not misunderstand your references. You don't have to believe me, I don't really care, also don't care about the rest of the nonsense for motivations you tried to read into my lines. See ya.

"Sound"? I thought you had pulled the "communication through the internet can cause misreading" card before, or does it only apply to other people?

But you're technically right, my aircon isn't functioning properly, so I'm not chilled I'm warm, hence the ice tea!

Nah we won't be seeing each other again, since you'll be on ignore.

Goodbye is more appropriate

[niffer]

An association is "this is like this other thing" - that's simple categorization and falls under Ti or Fi, or it can be "this thing leads to this thing" which is dynamic and falls to Ni or Si. An alternative is "what else could this be/do" and that doesn't depend on classifying something, nor does it depend on being connected to something in a dynamic way.

.................................................. .....

You can't connect "Thing A's internal statics of objects" to "Thing B's internal statics of objects" using Ti, Fi or whatever you want, WITHOUT NE. These are the only types of "connections" I was talking about in my post, and it makes sense to just say connections here in a non-mathematical sense, because these are the only kind of connections/associations one could really be making in this context. Of course, you might've needed some Ne to easily parse what I meant? Myst had no trouble inferring that though it looks like, even though English isn't her first language. This is Ne polr-ception.

[Bertrand]

.................................................. .....
This is Ne polr-ception.

I love it when this happens, its really hitting on something deep about how PoLRs tend to self refer and reinforce themselves--I see it all the time with Te PoLR and IEI. I imagine people look at me the same way with Fe, etc

[niffer]

@Slade I had mentioned control being in the sense of refined output; having a handle on information pertaining to the function. I did not mean control in the sense of conscious manipulation. What I said originally about Ti and people's reaction to Ti at different dimensionalities was effectively accurate in my experience. You came in hurling insults with a shit attitude, so you got them in return. If I have to deviate from my regular principles to call you out for being a fucking troll, so be it.

[Myst]

"Sound"? I thought you had pulled the "communication through the internet can cause misreading" card before, or does it only apply to other people?

But you're technically right, my aircon isn't functioning properly, so I'm not chilled I'm warm, hence the ice tea!

Nah we won't be seeing each other again, since you'll be on ignore.

Goodbye is more appropriate

I'm glad if you actually finally put me on ignore instead of this bullshitting.

[niffer]

I love it when this happens, its really hitting on something deep about how PoLRs tend to self refer and reinforce themselves--I see it all the time with Te PoLR and IEI. I imagine people look at me the same way with Fe, etc

Definitely lots of potential for food for thought here. I think a thread about this would be really interesting personally.

[LuckyOne]

I love it when this happens, its really hitting on something deep about how PoLRs tend to self refer and reinforce themselves--I see it all the time with Te PoLR and IEI. I imagine people look at me the same way with Fe, etc

This is what I've been getting too, and it's fascinating. Like prosopagnosia, but in a non physical sense.

Definitely lots of potential for food for thought here. I think a thread about this would be really interesting personally.

I'm in

[Myst]

I love it when this happens, its really hitting on something deep about how PoLRs tend to self refer and reinforce themselves--I see it all the time with Te PoLR and IEI. I imagine people look at me the same way with Fe, etc

What do you mean by the PoLR doing self-referring and reinforcing of itself? Interested in the Ne PoLR version especially.

[niffer]

[squark]

.................................................. .....

You can't connect "Thing A's internal statics of objects" to "Thing B's internal statics of objects" using Ti, Fi or whatever you want, WITHOUT NE. These are the only types of "connections" I was talking about in my post, and it makes sense to just say connections here in a non-mathematical sense, because these are the only kind of connections/associations one could really be making in this context. Of course, you might've needed some Ne to easily parse what I meant? Myst had no trouble inferring that though it looks like, even though English isn't her first language. This is Ne polr-ception.

Let's simplify this for you. Internal statics of objects we'll bring to a single word: potential. Now, to compare the potential of one thing to the potential of something else you have to use a field element: Ni, Si, Ti or Fi. Only field elements connect anything. Obviously you aren't going to compare the potentials of two things if you don't even look at their potentials - that's a given, and nobody is arguing that. However, making any kind of connection of anything with anything requires a field element. Object elements do not connect anything. Myst was lumping Ni and Ne together as "intuition" imo. Ni does make connections - it's a field element. Ne does not. Just read the link I gave you, maybe it'll help. Or don't. Whatever.

[Mr inappropriate]

This thread is a good example of Ti-PoLR manifestations. Uncontrolled emotionality and hysterical reactions to logical discussion sustaining over ... 1 minute .
The guys number of posts has nothing to do with the point s/he makes but that is the focus in answering. Not Ti for sure. Te HA wanting more proof rather than things making sense.
Niffer - SEE-Fi

More weak Ti from the other chinese. Just a couple of days ago, she was posting about how Ti creatives deal with Ti PoLR with being so sure .. 2days later she becomes Ti Suggestive herself

[Beautiful sky]

When they are in the mode of emotional worrying for someone it is difficult for them to detach and do detached analysis of the situation. Ti polr may also translate into inability to handle analysis directed at them as it touches sensitive nature of SEE

For example:

A friend tells an IEE a car bomb was set in their city and appeared on the news
IEE worries about the friend and calls them in a panic "oh no don't go to work. Stay home."

The friend may have work or live away from the actual center of the bomb where the emergency may not have much affect on their day to day doings. But again emotion for a friend masks analysis. This is where EII do better at Ti and ask the friend "how far is it from you?" The friend may say 20miles and EII would say "go about your business " lol

[niffer]

When they are in the mode of emotional worrying for someone it is difficult for them to detach and do detached analysis of the situation

This is the most even-minded comment in this entire thread so far.

[niffer]

Let's simplify this for you. Internal statics of objects we'll bring to a single word: potential. Now, to compare the potential of one thing to the potential of something else you have to use a field element: Ni, Si, Ti or Fi. Only field elements connect anything. Obviously you aren't going to compare the potentials of two things if you don't even look at their potentials - that's a given, and nobody is arguing that. However, making any kind of connection of anything with anything requires a field element. Object elements do not connect anything. Myst was lumping Ni and Ne together as "intuition" imo. Ni does make connections - it's a field element. Ne does not. Just read the link I gave you, maybe it'll help. Or don't. Whatever.

at last!

I've read this article before. I already know about this. "Obviously you aren't going to compare the potentials of two things if you don't even look at their potentials - that's a given, and nobody is arguing that." Good, this was my only point. Maybe you take issue to the use of the term "connections" in the way I did, but seeing "connections", "potential", "associations", are all effectively the exact same thing here. I said it helps in "making" or "seeing" connections, not that Ne itself only does the connecting necessarily. This is why Ne polrs have trouble seeing the context that everyone else is seeing so obviously, all the time, which happened over and over in this thread. It's like they're playing a join-dot game, and they see all the dots, but they can't see the full image. They know how to draw the dots (using Ni), but they can't draw them without seeing the full picture (using Ne). This is what makes them reluctant to draw the dots / make those connections in this sense in the first place.

[niffer]

@LuckyOne is Korean like you @Mr inappropriate .

[squark]

at last!

I've read this article before. I already know about this. "Obviously you aren't going to compare the potentials of two things if you don't even look at their potentials - that's a given, and nobody is arguing that." Good, this was my only point. Maybe you take issue to the use of the term "connections" in the way I did, but seeing "connections", "potential", "associations", are all effectively the exact same thing here. I said it helps in "making" or "seeing" connections, not that Ne itself only does the connecting necessarily. This is why Ne polrs have trouble seeing the context that everyone else is seeing so obviously, all the time, which happened over and over in this thread. It's like they're playing a join-dot game, and they see all the dots, but they can't see the full image. They know how to draw the dots (using Ni), but they can't draw them without seeing the full picture (using Ne). This is what makes them reluctant to draw the dots / make those connections in this sense in the first place.

Fucking hell. You're still not getting it. No, potentials are not associations, nor are they connections, and "connecting-the-dots" absolutely requires a field element. For reference, LSIs are stronger in both Ni and Ti than SLEs are, both of which are field elements, and field elements are needed for context and making connections. I'm not going to reply anymore, this is just sad.