Differences between LSEs and SLEs (ESTj vs. ESTp)

[Ezra]

You are assuming that my classes really weren't unfair and that I'm just make up an excuse to cheat. Well, that's wrong. A class that's unfair to me has the following:
a professor that doesn't teach anything well, the material on the tests are not given in the lectures, the professor doesn't know what he's talking about, the grading system is messed up.

I can understand this. I for one know I had a really fucking shit teacher for ICT in Year 10-11, and she got the sack when 95% of the class failed (including me). That really was down to poor leadership on her behalf. I know this because we had a supply teacher for a day, and did more work with her than for the whole year with this stupid, chaotic, unteacherlike woman. However, as I've just said, a few people passed, and they worked hard. The teacher tought nothing well, she had no idea what she was talking about, and the grading system was absolutely shite. (I did, btw, go to college, and complete the ICT key skills in about three weeks - that's three days; it was a lesson a week.) You shouldn't have cheated; either you should've worked harder or taken the shit you would have been dealt. The class is not 'unfair' in any way; there's no such things as an unfair class. You can't label an inanimate object as 'unfair'.

[Ezra]

This is partially true, I drank at social events for the sole purpose of cutting loose. I never drank that often to begin with though, but the last time I drank I blacked out. So I can relate to that as well. After experiencing alcohol poisoning for the first time (and having my friends gf show me a recording of me acting like a drunk), I lost what little interest I had in drinking. I've been repulsed by alcohol for almost 2 years now. That isn't to say that I'm never going to enjoy a glass of wine, I just haven't felt like it.

I find it very interesting how people react quite badly to footage of their drunkenness. Surely if one enjoys it one enjoy it, and it shouldn't be an issue. Yet it's as if people are actually shameful of how they appear, so they stop.

That is totally not true. I do not at all think cheating ESTjs are hard to come by in the least, ESTj seem to need and appreciate moral guidance IME.

Which is why they need the EII as a moral figurehead. You're right, there is nothing to suggest the LSE shouldn't cheat. I for one find the descriptions of the LSE off target. They're too MBTT ESTJ-focused. Also, as I explained a few pages back, LSEs want effectiveness, and often couldn't give a shit about 'doing it well' - that is a Enneagram 1 ESTJ thing; and there are different breeds of ESTJs in MBTT. Ghengis Khan was an ESTJ. Does that make him someone who wants to 'do it well'? Of course not. You've picked up on this idea here:

I think many of them actually do like cheating (it satisfies their Te desires to get things done quicker)

I must say that's quite of bit of information for you to pull out of such a small hole. Aren't you sore? Is there some sort of refractionary period after you access your treasure chest of information? Or have you been accessing it so often that you don't even feel it anymore? Well, at least no one can ever accuse you of being afraid to get your hands dirty.

aut0 - you ever considered SLE?

[Ezra]

ESTps are task oriented

They are indeed. Why do you think SLEs aren't task-orientated, SE?

It's quite common to be surprised by the actions of people in one's opposing quadra.

Good point. Let's all take note of that, kids.

ESTj-Si are quite different from ESTj-Te.

Do me a favour and explain how and why.

[lefty]

In the spirit of the day, I thought I'd add one more topic. (I put it here in Delta, even though it probably could have gone elsewhere.)

Would someone kindly explain to me the difference between the two? Both seem pushy, loud, and activity oriented. I know how they're theoretically different, but how would I differentiate IRL?

estjs are backstabbing lazy control freaks, and estps are hard working and task oriented and dont want to be bothered, but can also be the life of the party while an estj have cobbs up their asses and hate themselves and take it out on everybody else by being feircely passive aggressive.

lefty
enfj
4w5 p.s. i dont even know why im in this section.

It sounds like you were hurt by someone you see as ESTj. Obviously that is not type related.


As for Minde's question,
I am 1w9 LSE, and I assume these types are a little more rare then the prototypical flamboyant E8 and E3 type LSEs.
I would not say I am pushy, just a total hardass when it actually comes to business. I try to be reasonably lenient at times, however. I am definitely not loud.

it is type related.

lefy
enfj
4w5

[Ezra]

As for Minde's question,
I am 1w9 LSE, and I assume these types are a little more rare then the prototypical flamboyant E8 and E3 type LSEs.
I would not say I am pushy, just a total hardass when it actually comes to business. I try to be reasonably lenient at times, however. I am definitely not loud.

Note that the ESTJ in MBTT is more like the 1w9 or the 3w2 in descriptions than the 8. I think the 8 is much more likely to test ESTJ dichotomically as opposed to functionally, otherwise LSE would be a common type for 8 in socionics, and it isn't really. The descriptions of LSE fit 1w9/3w2 better than the 8, but I don't know about functions. What I do know is that MBTT has royally fucked up its whole method of testing (there's no way you can test dichotomically, and then refer to the functions for types - it doesn't work like that).

[aut0]

4) AUT0: Appreciating ethical advice does not make oneself ethical. The socionical explanation is that we're strong in Te and Si and our self-worth hangs on the success of those functions. We appreciate ethical advice in comparison to hating logical advice. That does not make us an ethical type. Of course... socionically ethical is way different from the meaning of the real-life word ethical. And that kind of ethics may, or may not be apparent in an individual ESTj according to the particular way their Te has formed.

Fair enough, I can understand that position.

This is partially true, I drank at social events for the sole purpose of cutting loose. I never drank that often to begin with though, but the last time I drank I blacked out. So I can relate to that as well. After experiencing alcohol poisoning for the first time (and having my friends gf show me a recording of me acting like a drunk), I lost what little interest I had in drinking. I've been repulsed by alcohol for almost 2 years now. That isn't to say that I'm never going to enjoy a glass of wine, I just haven't felt like it.

I find it very interesting how people react quite badly to footage of their drunkenness. Surely if one enjoys it one enjoy it, and it shouldn't be an issue. Yet it's as if people are actually shameful of how they appear, so they stop.

I wasn't ashamed of the video, I was only saying funny things. I just didn't like the idea of having no recollection of what I did. The alcohol poisoning played a small part in my repulsion as well.

aut0 - you ever considered SLE?

Ezra, as you know, I highly value your knowledge of socionics. The thought of garnering the attention of someone so widely known and revered amongst socionists worldwide brings me unsurmountable joy. As such, I would like to respond to you in such a fashion that, I hope, leaves you with no doubts of my type.

Allow me to begin,

A;lkj ;alkjd ;lsdfbmb weroiuxcb as;f;lemm ab;lk. N;s;kb erkwe wesdfkjs fvvmekew vmwee wadslk envireerw asdfm. Memlkea;f vvneine eea;lkg xnmfieo;mkasm bbrkrl z;lkds mfebmb. MNve, amvlkee faeg eel, aefmrelkmgg. Me;lkwmf afelmlkwe a;klfnee;l mel;awef... Nnelwf, fbek;;jae nb;eklrj werbv;lkj ew;lknmfew; ;lkeeej; wenl;ew.

Eb;slkdf awefnlknje blkgee a;ewkmef bmn;e wef;ke. Dslkfe fewl;kje bgjk;lbhwer awe;flkj ewklfj;l bv;noibnr;r wel;rkjwer af;lekjf. Owef, we;klfje ;lfekjge we;lkjre f;wokjfw; vo;ivef w;ekfjw vbve;oijwe w;lkwe ;lkwjfew;lk wec;oiweco;. Lwefew wef;klwjefw aw;lfkjwfe, aw;elkjfelw fw;lkjfwfw ;alwkefjw;ef. Elkfwejl;fe fwe;lkjwefw w;alkeng;elknm boimvoim wel;krew;lrwj venmwoiwmf.

Bnvmew, we;flkjwef wef;lkjwefw f;oimvcoiwem. Orewkljl;jfe f;lknfb goijewfew ew;lkfwr cnio;enwj. Rwflkewjw wef;lkj, wef;lkjhw;ef vkjwef vfjhek kwkekek swe;lkjfe cmmewoo wemowme momeoew. Llkjfweewf wlkjfe ebhbnioem fbvbewel fjoewwem mwomwees. CBene fwnfb, wbewflje ichcheh wkckck elskhfh clkhe clhjce lwjklejrw.

Jclkjee

[implied]

3) It's easy to mistake an ESFj for an ESTj. Si+Fe is likely to cheat and to take the easy path. The whole point of being ESTj is to not spare trouble from oneself. They will not choose the easy path or they are not acting ESTj. But neither does taking the hard path translate to avoiding trouble by following rules in all situations. Unless the ESTj has choosen the following of those particular rules as the task itself. Anyway, the more Si and the less Te in the ESTj the more likely they are to stray in any particular way. ESTj-Si are quite different from ESTj-Te.

think this is important. smilingeyes, do you mind extrapolating on this? i have mistaken ESFj-Si for ESTj-Si at least once and at times i think it gets a bit blurry, what with the more involved in either party.

i would tend to politely disagree with megan on her personal experiences of ESTjs generally cheating and swindling. honestly, this runs entirely counter to what ESTjs are supposed to be about, right? not to say that any given person doesn't make ethical mistakes ever, but being outright rancorous and doing largely crooked things on a rather regular basis doth not an ESTj make, correct?

[UDP]

ESTj-Si are quite different from ESTj-Te.

Want to explain that difference?

[Rick]

All statements such as "X type likes to cheat," "X type is immoral," "X type is funny," "X type is a backstabber," "X type is narrowminded," etc. are purely subjective and have no meaning outside of the experience of the person saying it, or outside of their own type or quadra, or immediate social group. Each type has its code of honor, criteria for fairplay, moral understanding, etc. Individuals of a certain type must be judged against others of that type, and not by one's own subjective measures.

[implied]

All statements such as "X type likes to cheat," "X type is immoral," "X type is funny," "X type is a backstabber," "X type is narrowminded," etc. are purely subjective and have no meaning outside of the experience of the person saying it, or outside of their own type or quadra, or immediate social group. Each type has its code of honor, criteria for fairplay, moral understanding, etc. Individuals of a certain type must be judged against others of that type, and not by one's own subjective measures.

well, we're at least hoping people are somewhat beyond this. sometimes i think we need a placard.

[UDP]

We have to remember not everyone is on the same page. I do not pay enough attention to the forum to know who is knew or how much experience every person has, myself.

[Megan]

i would tend to politely disagree with megan on her personal experiences of ESTjs generally cheating and swindling. honestly, this runs entirely counter to]what ESTjs are supposed to be about, right? not to say that any given person doesn't make ethical mistakes ever, but being outright rancorous and doing largely crooked things on a rather regular basis doth not an ESTj make, correct?

I am not sure how you can disagree with a person's experience but anyway. I do not deal and will never deal much in the whole what this type is about or supposed to be thing. In my mind this type of thinking leads to the persistence of stereotypes which are not usually well challenged because someone will say XXXx type values this so they would never do good or bad like that. Some types who we associate here with certain great or bad qualities have representatives who are just not like that. There are ESTjs who are caring, great caregivers, supportive of the underdog etc but there are also some who are just not like that at all and can easily be seen as devious, consistently focused more on efficiency than honesty and so forth. Both of these types are still ESTj because / are their dominant functions, I really have no objective reason to believe that the ones with better qualities will be more common. What exactly function wise would I based this belief on? Neither Te nor Si automatically confers morally and ethics on a person as far as I know. Personality and morality are not strictly type related. Socionics is not a theory of one's personality nor morality and I do not know why people are stuck on seeing it as such. There are consistently shitty, dishonest people of every single type and from every single quadra. The only thing I can say to support the idea that ESTjs tend to not be immoral is that most people in general of any type from any quadra are not likely to be immoral in any case.

[implied]

i would tend to politely disagree with megan on her personal experiences of ESTjs generally cheating and swindling. honestly, this runs entirely counter to]what ESTjs are supposed to be about, right? not to say that any given person doesn't make ethical mistakes ever, but being outright rancorous and doing largely crooked things on a rather regular basis doth not an ESTj make, correct?

I am not sure how you can disagree with a person's experience but anyway. I do not deal and will never deal much in the whole what this type is about or supposed to be thing. In my mind this type of thinking leads to the persistence of stereotypes which are not usually well challenged because someone will say XXXx type values this so they would never do good or bad like that.

Some types who we associate here with certain great or bad qualities have representatives who are just not like that. There are ESTjs who are caring, great caregivers, supportive of the underdog etc but there are also some who are just not like that at all and can easily be seen as devious, consistently focused more on efficiency than honesty and so forth. Both of these types are still ESTj because / are their dominant functions, I really have no objective reason to believe that the ones with better qualities will be more common. What exactly function wise would I based this belief on? Neither Te nor Si automatically confers morally and ethics on a person as far as I know. Personality and morality are not strictly type related. Socionics is not a theory of one's personality nor morality and I do not know why people are stuck on seeing it as such. There are consistently shitty, dishonest people of every single type and from every single quadra. The only thing I can say to support the idea that ESTjs tend to not be immoral is that most people in general of any type from any quadra are not likely to be immoral in any case.

no, because i don't really buy that ethical types never do "bad things" either, i'm on the very same page as you as far as that's concerned -- it's not any more right to assume that the ESFj or even the INFj will be less likely to swindle than the ESTj just by nature of being F. that's just as much crap as claiming that in your own experiences that more ESTjs are swindlers and crooks than not. the only reason i back that i do believe that an ESTj may be less likely is that they are the dual of the INFj, and thus they're subconsciously, according to theory, looking for someone with some combination of and , not and to gloss things over and create a positive emotional atmosphere above anything else. let me repeat that i do not believe that is strictly morals, either, but i understand that ESTjs aren't really in requirement of super strict moral policing. maybe anndelise has more to say on this, she defines it something loosely like attraction vs repulsion, but that's debatable as well. anyhow, we can compare experiences all day long and have completely different perceptions still, but in my own experiences, the biggest "crimes" i have really seen out of ESTjs are these basically inconsequential crimes where they do stupid shit when they get drunk. my impression strictly from reading the text is that they are not dudes who get a huge kick out of beating their wives to a pulp or cheating on tests routinely. no one is really trying to idealize ESTjs here imo. i still don't think your one ESTj friend (who, we don't even know if he's ESTj - we don't have piles of proof that you "know what you're talking about" either) is a really good example of the whole.

[Ezra]

Allow me to begin,

A;lkj ;alkjd ;lsdfbmb weroiuxcb as;f;lemm ab;lk. N;s;kb erkwe wesdfkjs fvvmekew vmwee wadslk envireerw asdfm. Memlkea;f vvneine eea;lkg xnmfieo;mkasm bbrkrl z;lkds mfebmb. MNve, amvlkee faeg eel, aefmrelkmgg. Me;lkwmf afelmlkwe a;klfnee;l mel;awef... Nnelwf, fbek;;jae nb;eklrj werbv;lkj ew;lknmfew; ;lkeeej; wenl;ew.

Eb;slkdf awefnlknje blkgee a;ewkmef bmn;e wef;ke. Dslkfe fewl;kje bgjk;lbhwer awe;flkj ewklfj;l bv;noibnr;r wel;rkjwer af;lekjf. Owef, we;klfje ;lfekjge we;lkjre f;wokjfw; vo;ivef w;ekfjw vbve;oijwe w;lkwe ;lkwjfew;lk wec;oiweco;. Lwefew wef;klwjefw aw;lfkjwfe, aw;elkjfelw fw;lkjfwfw ;alwkefjw;ef. Elkfwejl;fe fwe;lkjwefw w;alkeng;elknm boimvoim wel;krew;lrwj venmwoiwmf.

Bnvmew, we;flkjwef wef;lkjwefw f;oimvcoiwem. Orewkljl;jfe f;lknfb goijewfew ew;lkfwr cnio;enwj. Rwflkewjw wef;lkj, wef;lkjhw;ef vkjwef vfjhek kwkekek swe;lkjfe cmmewoo wemowme momeoew. Llkjfweewf wlkjfe ebhbnioem fbvbewel fjoewwem mwomwees. CBene fwnfb, wbewflje ichcheh wkckck elskhfh clkhe clhjce lwjklejrw.

Jclkjee

Let's see. This demonstrates pure bullshit.

It hurts my feelings when I try to help you, and you reject me and my ideas. Please help me to help you and help yourself. Do you understand that this is how I react to what you say, and that different people react differently to what you say? I can't take it when you say things like to me. It doesn't make sense to me. It just feels like you disrespect me, and the one thing I despise more is loss of respect.

[aut0]

Let's see. This demonstrates pure bullshit.

It hurts my feelings when I try to help you, and you reject me and my ideas. Please help me to help you and help yourself. Do you understand that this is how I react to what you say, and that different people react differently to what you say? I can't take it when you say things like to me. It doesn't make sense to me. It just feels like you disrespect me, and the one thing I despise more is loss of respect.

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings princess, here, I bought you this tiara to go with that pretty pink dress you're wearing.

Kind of funny that you're using Fe though, which comes off as manipulation to me. Sorry, maybe I wasn't supposed to catch the "If you're LSE, you'll be annoyed by this" line before you edited it out.

FAIL

[Ezra]

Let's see. This demonstrates pure bullshit.

It hurts my feelings when I try to help you, and you reject me and my ideas. Please help me to help you and help yourself. Do you understand that this is how I react to what you say, and that different people react differently to what you say? I can't take it when you say things like to me. It doesn't make sense to me. It just feels like you disrespect me, and the one thing I despise more is loss of respect.

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings princess, here, I bought you this tiara to go with that pretty pink dress you're wearing.

Kind of funny that you're using Fe though, which comes off as manipulation to me. Sorry, maybe I wasn't supposed to catch the "If you're LSE, you'll be annoyed by this" line before you edited it out.

FAIL

This proves you're not Fi Dual seeking. You evidently don't give a shit when you genuinely have hurt someone by rejecting them. Fi PoLR.

SLE it is. Welcome to the clan, brother.

Don't ever try and claim you're LSE again you motherfucker.

[FDG]

My boss is ESTj. He used to be suspicious of me when I were able to work very fast (in emergency situations), but nowadays after an year of knowing each other, he trusts me, knowing that I can get results very quickly and he has to adjust the details or tell me what I have missed/have to change. Still, it wasn't that easy at the start.

[aut0]

This proves you're not Fi Dual seeking. You evidently don't give a shit when you genuinely have hurt someone by rejecting them. Fi PoLR.

SLE it is. Welcome to the clan, brother.

Don't ever try and claim you're LSE again you motherfucker.

The truth is finally revealed! I don't know how I could've missed it for so long, and it's all thanks to you Ezra. Your brazen knowledge of socionics has saved me! I can see now, that this is why you're so revered amongst your peers. Never again will I doubt you.

[Ezra]

This proves you're not Fi Dual seeking. You evidently don't give a shit when you genuinely have hurt someone by rejecting them. Fi PoLR.

SLE it is. Welcome to the clan, brother.

Don't ever try and claim you're LSE again you motherfucker.

The truth is finally revealed! I don't know how I could've missed it for so long, and it's all thanks to you Ezra. Your brazen knowledge of socionics has saved me! I can see now, that this is why you're so revered amongst your peers. Never again will I doubt you.

Well done; you're beginning to understand the fundamentals.

[Minde]

Three things, in the order that they appeared in my head:

1) Wow, I think this is the first time an old thread of mine got resurfaced by someone other than me. Interesting.

2) Character is not the same as personality. The way that the goodness in a person manifests may be related to type, but not the presence or absence of good.

3)

The same was true for comic books. My brother had them and had banned me from his collection. So... I devised a technique by which I could read stuff in his room while he was away and have time to put the comic book back in its place and get away from his room in the time it took him to close the garage door which was the first audible hint of his coming home and opening the front door by which time he could hear that I was running and something strange was happening. I don't think he caught on to what I was doing. Anyway, I didn't habitually read all of his collection, I didn't think I had a right to do that. Rather there was one particular large comic collection book that was so pretty I had to immerse myself in it time and again. I felt an overriding need and did what I felt I had to do to fulfill it. This attitude of "by any means possible" is pretty darn typical of the ESTj. My brother OTOH didn't really have a particular reason to not allow me to read the comics in the first place. I didn't cause them any harm when I read them in secret and he never noticed it. He just felt he should act strongly in the subject or something like that.

There may be non-socionic related reasons for that. One in particular comes to mind.

[Megan]

no, because i don't really buy that ethical types never do "bad things" either, i'm on the very same page as you as far as that's concerned -- it's not any more right to assume that the ESFj or even the INFj will be less likely to swindle than the ESTj just by nature of being F.

I agree, I do not think ethical types are necessarily any more moral than logical types.

that's just as much crap as claiming that in your own experiences that more ESTjs are swindlers and crooks than not.

Well I actually never said most of them are likely to be swindlers and crooks. If you have seen that in any of my posts then please show me where. I really cannot say most ESTjs are crooks are swindlers but some most certainly are. The point is that someone here in comparing ESTjs to ESTps have said that ESTps are more likely to be cheaters and that ESTjs crooks are hard to come by and I will say again that that is just not true. Why should it be? and based on my experiences now working in an environment with a lot of ESTjs I can see that some but not all of them tend to perticipate in certain types of dishonest actions for efficiency and convienece purposes. For some reason I honestly did not expect this type of thing from them especially because they often seem to want to be seen as nice or good people on the surface.

the only reason i back that i do believe that an ESTj may be less likely is that they are the dual of the INFj, and thus they're subconsciously, according to theory, looking for someone with some combination of and , not and to gloss things over and create a positive emotional atmosphere above anything else.

IMO especially with is not solely or even about creating a positive atmosphere though this can be debated. I think it is one of the stereotypes created by the hating/misunderstanding crowd. Almost any person here will tell you that delta types are often really shocked when they try to address uncomfortable subjects in their presence(ask Kristina). A lot about is about the unspoken and unexpressed. It is actually the opposite of what some people here believe, / types tend to be more expressive with their feelings and just seem more willing to deal with uncomfortable issues openly. / tends to be a bit different IME.

let me repeat that i do not believe that is strictly morals, either, but i understand that ESTjs aren't really in requirement of super strict moral policing. maybe anndelise has more to say on this, she defines it something loosely like attraction vs repulsion, but that's debatable as well.

The problem here is that there are some INFjs who are dishonest and cheating too. It is not that all INFjs are pure and innocent and therefore cannot be the dual of cheats. Having / does not mean that a person will be honest. At least one description of INFjs says that cheating is actually something some of them do even though they might not even be good at it. Here there is a popular belief that all INFjs are just truly innocent and honest and the poor defenceless conflictor of the big bad ESTp bully when this also is not true. I have been coming into a few (again not all) INFjs who are into the idea that at least one INFj here has blatantly expressed and that is that if something seems hard and unfair then it is ok to break the rules. I speculate that the polr seems to make some INFjs very unresilient under difficulties and hardships and so due to a combination of and values they will often try and find a comfortable way around the obstacles which frequently results in what others even from delta and surrounding quadras see as dishonest. Now I know that some people here will disagree with this but it is really something that I have seen, it is not personal. I honestly just do not see the point of us coming here everyday making villians out of some people and angels out of others when there is no basis in theory or in reality for this. Nothing new and productive is going to come out of holding on to some of these baseless even silly stereotypes/ideas.

anyhow, we can compare experiences all day long and have completely different perceptions still, but in my own experiences, the biggest "crimes" i have really seen out of ESTjs are these basically inconsequential crimes where they do stupid shit when they get drunk. my impression strictly from reading the text is that they are not dudes who get a huge kick out of beating their wives to a pulp or cheating on tests routinely. no one is really trying to idealize ESTjs here imo. i still don't think your one ESTj friend (who, we don't even know if he's ESTj - we don't have piles of proof that you "know what you're talking about" either) is a really good example of the whole.

There is a lot of good and a lot of bad that texts/descriptions do not say about the types, then I do not think there has even been a beta socionist to give another perspective and understanding of that quadra and delta. There is at least one person here who has had attempts made by an ESTjs to physically abuse them. I know of another person who I strongly believe to be ESTj who abuses his wife and then buys her flowers and candy and continues pretending to be this marvellous carer and supportive husband. These are the sort of ESTjs who have the tendency to believe that nobody should say no to them because I guess in a way they were created for people who would probably not say no to them much or ever. Again, It is more likely that most ESTjs are not mean and abusive but some of them are and I see no point and truth in believing that they are all just great and rarely ever do wrong or that immoral ESTjs are rare compared to immoral other types. They are just not morally superior to any other type. Whether or not the people being typed as ESTjs are really such it should nevertheless be evident that they are in no way ethically superior to any other type based even on the theoretical alone.

i have really seen out of ESTjs are these basically inconsequential crimes where they do stupid shit when they get drunk.

My belief that some ESTjs are cheats is not based on my experience with one ESTj. Like I said, I work in a kind of caregivery enviroment which has a lot of ESTjs and ESFjs and the most senior of my three bosses is an ESTj who happens to be an honest, caring human IMO. Some ESTjs do stupid shit even when they are not drunk and I really would not think that being drunk is a good enough reason for perpetuating crap upon others anyway. To understand where some ESTjs go wrong you have to look at the alignment of all their funtions IMO. They have an polr and that tends to be the source of a lot of the stupid dishonest things they do because they just do not see future consequences that well and when you try to show it to them they often just shot you down with arguments that basically amounts to "nobody knows what will happen in the future". That coupled with what I guess must be an drive for efficiency and an need for convience plus an hidden agenda need "to be perfect" often places them in difficult moral positions. Even if one thinks that / is linked to morality, ESTjs do not have strong and they do not value , they are actually seeking precisely because they value it but do not have good use of it themselves. The way I have found to deal with my manager when he appears to be about to do some stupid shit is not to mention future consquences to him but to provide some sort of attractive alternative to what he wants to do. My guess is that this would be something like what an INFj would provide for him to help him stay out of trouble and protect the polr.

[aut0]

Megan, a lot of what you wrote makes sense. My insults to you were because I felt like what you wrote was a personal attack on my character. Sorry about going off on you.

I'm going to agree that it's common sense that any type can be good or bad, it makes no sense that one type will always do the right thing and another the wrong, there are far too many variables involved for that to be accurate. I didn't feel like seeing that when I was pissed off though, I tend to have a one track mind when I'm angry.

[Lobo]

Megan, you just like to keep spitting out nonsense about other people don't you? I know I said that I wasn't going to keep posting here, but I underestimated your capabilities of making up things.

The problem here is that there are some INFjs who are dishonest and cheating too. It is not that all INFjs are pure and innocent and therefore cannot be the dual of cheats. Having / does not mean that a person will be honest. At least one description of INFjs says that cheating is actually something some of them do even though they might not even be good at it. Here there is a popular belief that all INFjs are just truly innocent and honest and the poor defenceless conflictor of the big bad ESTp bully when this also is not true. I have been coming into a few (again not all) INFjs who are into the idea that at least one INFj here has blatantly expressed and that is that if something seems hard and unfair then it is ok to break the rules. I speculate that the polr seems to make some INFjs very unresilient under difficulties and hardships and so due to a combination of and values they will often try and find a comfortable way around the obstacles which frequently results in what others even from delta and surrounding quadras see as dishonest. Now I know that some people here will disagree with this but it is really something that I have seen, it is not personal. I honestly just do not see the point of us coming here everyday making villians out of some people and angels out of others when there is no basis in theory or in reality for this. Nothing new and productive is going to come out of holding on to some of these baseless even silly stereotypes/ideas.

You seem to tell people to "show me where I've posted" such and such as a way of claiming consistency, when you really don't apply that to yourself don't you? I NEVER said that it's ok to break the rules, even though the "rules" can be something to question. I mentioned that I "have" cheated when I thought the class was unfair, and the only reason I said that was that even though I believe that ESTps are cheaters, it doesn't mean that an INFj like myself has not done so. Also, I don't look down upon ESTps for this or say that they are "bad," before you assume this too. Then you go on in the paragraph above (referring to me), saying that the polr does this and that it makes some INFj's unresilient under difficulties and hardships, and that it's the reason I cheated? You are coming off as very ignorant. Also, those people who judge what I did was wrong without even knowing any circumstances should mind your own business (I had a stronger phrase though for this). What pisses me off is how you, Megan, judge me for having being honest about something I have done as if you haven't done anything wrong yourself. I just have the balls to say it. I would be so embarrased in judging someone when I have done wrong as well. You really do have a serious issue in that you underestimate others, and that you think you are superior in your "ethics." I don't lecture others (only advice) and I expect the same, if not, then I fail to respect you.

Btw, I cannot relate to the polr thing you mentioned. Might be if you're talking about physical hardship, which even then, applies more to when I was a child. Also, all the cold-hearted , analytical way of how you talk about other people really annoys me. It's as if you're exaggerating it on purpose.

[implied]

think i'm in the boat with aut0 on this. reading your first few posts sounds like a straight up character attack. i mean after a certain point whatever is useful about these stories just regresses to office gossip bullshit. i figure you wanted to present an alternate point of view based on your experience with the people you've typed as ESTjs. i mean, people do bad things and are far from infallible, for god's sake. i just think that many pages of posts could have been simplfied down to "people make mistakes," or "people of many types are capable of doing vile things," instead of including a long story on ESTj researcher. although that certainly helped pack a punch. sometimes a hammer works better than a tap on the shoulder though!

[Megan]

think i'm in the boat with aut0 on this. reading your first few posts sounds like a straight up character attack. i mean after a certain point whatever is useful about these stories just regresses to office gossip bullshit. i figure you wanted to present an alternate point of view based on your experience with the people you've typed as ESTjs. i mean, people do bad things and are far from infallible, for god's sake. i just think that many pages of posts could have been simplfied down to "people make mistakes," or "people of many types are capable of doing vile things," instead of including a long story on ESTj researcher. although that certainly helped pack a punch. sometimes a hammer works better than a tap on the shoulder though!

Well what it sounds like and what it is are two different things, If you are ESTj or maybe even INFj/delta then I guess it could be seen as an attack. I maybe crazy but not crazy enough yet to assume that the whole entire ESTj population are a bunch of crooks and cheaters. I will not however back down from my position that there are indeed ESTjs who lie and cheat, I also do not believe that ESTjs are any less likely to cheat than ESTps though they may do it for different reasons. Both types feel justified and do defend themselves when they have done something "outside the rules". Most people who do something dishonest usually have what they see as a valid reason for their behavior. If you have some argument beyond the whole ESTjs are not supposed to be like that thing or that I am a very mean person who is attacking the poor little ESTjs then I am willing to listen.

[Megan]

Megan, a lot of what you wrote makes sense. My insults to you were because I felt like what you wrote was a personal attack on my character. Sorry about going off on you.

I'm going to agree that it's common sense that any type can be good or bad, it makes no sense that one type will always do the right thing and another the wrong, there are far too many variables involved for that to be accurate. I didn't feel like seeing that when I was pissed off though, I tend to have a one track mind when I'm angry.

I am glad that you can be objective enough to now see that my arguments and experiences were not meant as a personal attack on you or the whole entire ESTj population. And yes it is only common sense that every type has representatives that do dishonest things some times. I have never nor will never see delta types as being morally better than any other types though some (not all) deltas seem very invested in seeing themselves that way and certain people who probably have not given enough thought to the issue believe and spread that idea.

Sereno, I do not know if you have noticed but the very things you have accused me of are the very things you are now doing...look very closely. This is funny/ironic because the very thing that you came into this thread accusing ESTps of is the same that you in your own words admitted doing. Note that I may have questioned your actions (I sometimes even question my own actions too) but up until now I still have no desire to attack you as a person or your whole character. I wonder if you might be willing to do the same for me, it really does not matter much either way. You are probably proving my point as to the character of some INFjs more than you even know.

hkkmr, I more or less share your observations on the ESTj/ESTp reason for cheating issue.

Oh and implied, I hope you do not take any of my disagreements with you personally either, they are not meant as such.

[snegledmaca]

Megan, have you considered the posibility that it may be correct, that LSE-s are far less likely to be "cheats" and SLE-s are very likely to be "cheats", in that it's deltas that establish the criteria for determining who is and isn't a "cheat", by which, SLE-s by being themselves end up being inferior, or "cheats"? That way it makes perfect sense that those who make the rules end up being in a better position. It's like, how SLE-s might say LSE-s are boring, not fun and so on. By their criteria the LSE-s really are boring, not fun etc.

[Megan]

Megan, have you considered the posibility that it may be correct, that LSE-s are far less likely to be "cheats" and SLE-s are very likely to be "cheats", in that it's deltas that establish the criteria for determining who is and isn't a "cheat", by which, SLE-s by being themselves end up being inferior, or "cheats"? That way it makes perfect sense that those who make the rules end up being in a better position. It's like, how SLE-s might say LSE-s are boring, not fun and so on. By their criteria the LSE-s really are boring, not fun etc.

It is interesting that you should say that because this is one possiblity that floated about in my mind but one I did not directly address, and hkkmr mentioned. Yes, if deltas have made the "rules" then it is true that SLE's would probably not like to follow them. The same can be said for beta "rules" and delta compliance. However, some ESTjs do break rules which even people in their own quadra appear to regard as unethical as well. There are "rules" which people of both quadra might regard as worthwhile yet some people of those quadras just do not follow at times. There are perhaps very few if any universal rules and ideas of ethics/morality and that has to be taken into consideration as well. However, as one example only I think most honest people of both delta and beta would regard what the ESTj doctor did which basically amounted to falsifying evidence on behalf of a drug company's product as unethical. Though maybe some deltas would be better able to identify with his reasons even if though don't agree or support it. That last sentence is only speculation though.

It would be interesting to find out if other deltas feel like Sereno that if an exam or course is hard/unfair then cheating becomes an option to pursue. My guess is that there are people from both delta and beta who would see that as not a viable/good option as well as those who would pursue "cheating" to to deal with the problem.

[snegledmaca]

It would be interesting to find out if other deltas feel like Sereno that if an exam or course is hard/unfair then cheating becomes an option to pursue.

Well, for contrast, I, as a beta, see cheating on tests as an exercise in resourcefulness. I personally don't cheat but find the various complex methods and their variations people develop thoroughly amusing and a tribute to cleverness. They cross the point when it stops being just cheating and you really have to be truly skilled and able to pull off what they did. Personally, I find cheating on tests in school as something entirely normal and am always amused by how westerners or people from the far east consider it as something horrid. There is no inherent goodness or wrongness about it. The only person you could possibly fuck up is yourself so by cheating you are accepting the consequences and are basically exercising you liberty, freedom of choice. But that could be because of my culture where the mentality is cheat but don't get caught.

[Lobo]

Megan

Sereno, I do not know if you have noticed but the very things you have accused me of are the very things you are now doing...look very closely. This is funny/ironic because the very thing that you came into this thread accusing ESTps of is the same that you in your own words admitted doing.

Obviously, that is the whole reason I said it. Can you please actually read these lines? This is my last attempt at you understanding what I wrote:

I NEVER said that it's ok to break the rules, even though the "rules" can be something to question. I mentioned that I "have" cheated when I thought the class was unfair, and the only reason I said that was that even though I believe that ESTps are cheaters, it doesn't mean that an INFj like myself has not done so. Also, I don't look down upon ESTps for this or say that they are "bad," before you assume this too.

--

Note that I may have questioned your actions (I sometimes even question my own actions too) but up until now I still have no desire to attack you as a person or your whole character. I wonder if you might be willing to do the same for me, it really does not matter much either way. You are probably proving my point as to the character of some INFjs more than you even know.

Question your own actions and not mine, unless you have an honest desire to understand them. Even so, my friends and family are the only ones who I trust for this. By the way, it is obvious that there are always exceptions to the rule. Trying to prove that some people are different from the norm is redundant. Will you find INFj that are cheaters? Sure. Will you find INFj that are murderers? Though unlikely, there is still the possiblity. I don't know what is to gain in trying to prove that there are exceptions to the rule.

snegledmaca Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 2:10 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Megan wrote:
It would be interesting to find out if other deltas feel like Sereno that if an exam or course is hard/unfair then cheating becomes an option to pursue.


Well, for contrast, I, as a beta, see cheating on tests as an exercise in resourcefulness. I personally don't cheat but find the various complex methods and their variations people develop thoroughly amusing and a tribute to cleverness. They cross the point when it stops being just cheating and you really have to be truly skilled and able to pull off what they did. Personally, I find cheating on tests in school as something entirely normal and am always amused by how westerners or people from the far east consider it as something horrid. There is no inherent goodness or wrongness about it. The only person you could possibly fuck up is yourself so by cheating you are accepting the consequences and are basically exercising you liberty, freedom of choice. But that could be because of my culture where the mentality is cheat but don't get caught.

I agree entirely with this statement, unless by cheating you mess other people in some way. Also when I have cheated, its always with someone I know, and we help each other out. By the way, I'm not trying to justify my cheating.

I think that it is dumb to think that an ESTp will not cheat in a situation where they cannot be caught. And, if they don't cheat, I think it is more in proving that they can do it, rather than it is "unethical" for them to do it. Maybe ESTps should try and comment on this thread.

[implied]

It would be interesting to find out if other deltas feel like Sereno that if an exam or course is hard/unfair then cheating becomes an option to pursue.

Well, for contrast, I, as a beta, see cheating on tests as an exercise in resourcefulness. I personally don't cheat but find the various complex methods and their variations people develop thoroughly amusing and a tribute to cleverness. They cross the point when it stops being just cheating and you really have to be truly skilled and able to pull off what they did. Personally, I find cheating on tests in school as something entirely normal and am always amused by how westerners or people from the far east consider it as something horrid. There is no inherent goodness or wrongness about it. The only person you could possibly fuck up is yourself so by cheating you are accepting the consequences and are basically exercising you liberty, freedom of choice. But that could be because of my culture where the mentality is cheat but don't get caught.

yeah, i agree with you. even in europe (spain) i got earfuls of "everybody cheats, what on earth is wrong with you?" from other students. there is a point where you really /can't/ cheat on tests and things, though. for instance, some of the tests i grade to test english as a second language are pretty much impossible to cheat on and any "faking" you could possibly do is so obvious it's embarrassing and nearly insulting to the intelligence of the people in control of the tests. i think if someone pulled off cheating and got away with it, i'd be almost proud hah.


megan -- smilingeyes made some really good points a few pages back and you didn't really address them. what's convincing evidence outside the theory? what can i do besides give you counterexample after counterexample of "ESTjs i have known" that are considered upstanding and moral members of the community versus ESTps who are not? and if they're so seasoned in cheating, how would we know anyway? my guess is that they would have honed it into some sort of science that they do without thinking about heh. you said this guy did cheated forever before anyone ever found out. i mean, if you're going to ignore whatever you disagree with and not even consider that other people may have different views on this for various reasons, it's not even worth arguing. i don't even have a clue as to what you consider "cheating" or "immoral" or "unethical" behavior and what you consider ethical -- maybe more examples of what sorts of cheating you're talking about that is common among ESTjs vs ESTps. as this is such a potentially broad topic, i don't think it's a realistic task to ask someone to prove you wrong heh. quite honestly i'd rather spend my time reading babyraping jokes in the beta forum than proving this.

[snegledmaca]

I agree entirely with this statement, unless by cheating you mess other people in some way. Also when I have cheated, its always with someone I know, and we help each other out. By the way, I'm not trying to justify my cheating.

Justify? You act as if cheating is inherently wrong. Cheating is an action with consequences (As in, it's situational) and to justify the act you have to only justify the consequence of the action. Or what I am trying to say is that each cheating is unique and specific to a give situation (As are all actions with consequence, not a single action is inherently wrong (Well, not unless it with certainty caries a "bad" consequence)). I guess you could say I'm an advocate of situational ethics .

I also think it's admirable that you tried to help your classmates. (Here that's the norm, helping people, but I think there it's an act of character)

I think that it is dumb to think that an ESTp will not cheat in a situation where they cannot be caught. And, if they don't cheat, I think it is more in proving that they can do it, rather than it is "unethical" for them to do it. Maybe ESTps should try and comment on this thread.

No, dumb is to cheat when it caries active consequences upon others. In situations where the consequences are restricted solely to themselves I'd say it's neither dumb nor not dumb but more of a situational thing. If the person is prepared the negative consequences outweigh the positive so it could be said it's actually dumb to cheat while if the person will fail with their inherent knowledge then not cheating could be said to be dumb.

It would be interesting to find out if other deltas feel like Sereno that if an exam or course is hard/unfair then cheating becomes an option to pursue.

Well, for contrast, I, as a beta, see cheating on tests as an exercise in resourcefulness. I personally don't cheat but find the various complex methods and their variations people develop thoroughly amusing and a tribute to cleverness. They cross the point when it stops being just cheating and you really have to be truly skilled and able to pull off what they did. Personally, I find cheating on tests in school as something entirely normal and am always amused by how westerners or people from the far east consider it as something horrid. There is no inherent goodness or wrongness about it. The only person you could possibly fuck up is yourself so by cheating you are accepting the consequences and are basically exercising you liberty, freedom of choice. But that could be because of my culture where the mentality is cheat but don't get caught.

yeah, i agree with you. even in europe (spain) i got earfuls of "everybody cheats, what on earth is wrong with you?" from other students. there is a point where you really /can't/ cheat on tests and things, though. for instance, some of the tests i grade to test english as a second language are pretty much impossible to cheat on and any "faking" you could possibly do is so obvious it's embarrassing and nearly insulting to the intelligence of the people in control of the tests. i think if someone pulled off cheating and got away with it, i'd be almost proud hah.

This reminds me of a friend of mine and his cheating techniques. He'd get away with the craziest stuff. He once glues some stuff to the bottom of his shoe and kind of lifted his leg over his other leg so that the guy next to him could get the answers. But yeah, there are some classes that are nearly impossible to cheat. Oh, I just remembered the most bizarre and I couldn't believe it moment when cheating. SO we had the test and just before any test I like to go through my notebooks and cram just a little more into that temporary memory. In class that is. And she handed me the test probably expecting me to remove my notebook. But I didn't. I kept it open. And through the test I would read the questions and browse through the notebook and find the answer. But this wasn't the bizarre part, the bizarre part was that she was sitting not a meter in front of me. I was in the first bench and her bench and mine were joined and I was facing her directly with nothing obstructing the filed of view. And she kept constantly looking through the classroom warning others and at other times staring at this spot in front of her. I simply could not believe it. Lol, thank good for inferior sensing.

quite honestly i'd rather spend my time reading babyraping jokes in the beta forum than proving this.

Hey! Offensive! And besides the biggest "babyrape" genre protagonist is DJ so... it's you gammas that are the "wicked ones" :wink: .

[Ezra]

Justify? You act as if cheating is inherently wrong.

Fear the wrath of the Humanitarian.

[Megan]

Summary
Sereno, I cannot respond to you at this time you seem to me to be very hostile, personal and emotional and I do not think we are going to get anywhere while I am seeing you like that. This topic is not really that important quite frankly.

implied, please try and read this post carefully as it summarizes what I am trying to say that might not be very clear to you as yet, I have no reason to believe that you are an unreasonable person so I guess I have not found a way to communicate with you well. I would never draw upon the whole "ESTjs I know" argument to prove anything. I merely mentioned that I knew dishonest ESTjs and provided only one or two examples of such, time and space would not permit me to provide more examples and I do not even believe that the main relevance of what I am trying to say rests upon those two people who probably aren't even ESTjs anyway though I strongly think they are based their excessive and dominant use of Te/Si. My typing is beside the point as common sense (according to Aut0 ) would indicate that people of every type from every quadra do crap things from time to time. That of course includes ESTjs.

Now I came into this thread not to discuss the morality of cheating, the causes of addiction or any other such things though the discussion led down that path at times and like I said we all do dishonest things which are perhaps far worst than cheating in an exam but what I am unsettled by is what I subjectively see as a lack of personal responsibility for ones actions and the blaming of external conditions for what one does that is "dishonest" and self-destructive. I merely said in other words that the external conditions would not drive everyone to cheat in a difficult exam therefore the variable that is most likely to have caused the behavior is oneself and one's own internal personal view of morality and cheating and even ones ability to cope with difficulties and what ones sees as unfair. I cannot see how any person can live up to their own morals or rules all the time but I also believe that we must take responsiblity for the things we do and any addictions we might have etc and not blame external conditions for them or even make excuses for them. This is only my personal view of those matters.


The main argument is that Sereno here wrote that ESTps are often cheats and that ESTj cheats are hard to come by as a way to differentiate the two types as per the topic's creator's original question. I am saying and I will continue to say that this is a very poor method for distinguishing the two types. I am also saying that there is no basis for such an assumption or judgement based on socionics theory or even my own reality and that of others. I have tried to establish from you what would cause ESTjs to be less likely to cheat and what you have said is that ESTjs are not suppose to be the type of people that do that.

My mind was open to be challenged on my view that there is no real reason why ESTps would be more dishonest than ESTjs and I hoped to have an alternative view forwarded that would would be devoid of stereotypes and show theoretically or realistically why it would be that ESTjs are just more honest than ESTps. To that effect sneg and hkkmr at least made interesting points though not necessarily supportive of ESTjs or ESTps.

The whole argument that ESTjs are not supposed (the exact word you used)to be like that just does not seem like a very good argument to me and so I am continuing to hold the view that there is no real reason or theoretical function based evidence pointing to the possibility or reality that ESTjs are less likely to cheat than ESTps. Thats all really.

[Minde]

Justify? You act as if cheating is inherently wrong.

Fear the wrath of the Humanitarian.

And what do you think our wrath would look like?

Anyway, I've been accused of cheating. Not for breaking rules, but for using them to my own advantage. (Usually in some sort of game or competitive situation - when I do similar things elsewhere people don't usually mind since I'm often doing it for their benefit.) I don't enjoy having my morals judged, so I immediately stop trying to do whatever it was I was trying to do, baffled, mildly offended, and losing whatever enthusiasm I had.

[Ezra]

Justify? You act as if cheating is inherently wrong.

Fear the wrath of the Humanitarian.

And what do you think our wrath would look like?

I really don't know to be honest. My picture of the EII is now non-existent. I think EIIs are so rare in this world. My dad is either EII or IEI. This friend of mine I thought was EII, but it turns out he's an IEI. Actually, I'm going to get people to type my parents now. Have a look.

Will you do me a favour, Minde? Tell me some EII celebrities.

[aut0]

Justify? You act as if cheating is inherently wrong.

Fear the wrath of the Humanitarian.

And what do you think our wrath would look like?

[GVideo]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4430762344195533410&q=bear+roaring&total=37&start= 0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0[/GVideo]

Probably a little scarier IRL, you can't feel as safe in person.

[Christy B]

Justify? You act as if cheating is inherently wrong.

Fear the wrath of the Humanitarian.

And what do you think our wrath would look like?

[GVideo]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4430762344195533410&q=bear+roaring&total=37&start= 0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0[/GVideo]

Probably a little scarier IRL, you can't feel as safe in person.

That bear is so cute!!! : )

[Minde]

[GVideo]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4430762344195533410&q=bear+roaring&total=37&start= 0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0[/GVideo]

Probably a little scarier IRL, you can't feel as safe in person.

That bear is so cute!!! : )

No kidding! Scary? Poor thing looks like he's entertaining a dentist.

[Minde]

Will you do me a favour, Minde? Tell me some EII celebrities.

I'd love to, but I don't think I'm the best person for the job. For one, I'm not interested in enough celebrities to know their personalities. For another, I'm not confident yet typing even the people I do know well.