Introverted intuition Ni PoLR in ESEs-ESFjs

[Beautiful sky]

Word.

This all sounds like ego (ordering people around) and super-ego (failing to understand context).

weak

yeah, ego types seem to do this a lot. Perhaps suggests ego also.

you value

lol this is too

wonderful observation! That is actually LSI. LSI build a system of how things should be done in their head, if you interupt them, they will go back to step one and repeat themselves again, because, they have a system in their head and want people to follow that system therefore TiSe.

I would say that the boss is LSI; I was not too sure about the boss being LSE at first, because even though he did push for efficiency the mentality of the boss the mental working of the reasons why did not click with the type so I put "maybe" after my typing of it.

[Aiss]

This all sounds like ego (ordering people around) and super-ego (failing to understand context).

(...)

yeah, ego types seem to do this a lot. Perhaps suggests ego also.

I wouldn't be so sure about the first part. -demonstrative is more "bossy" in conventional meaning, explicit about it, often lack controls over it (unconscious function). It's like they do it compulsively and in small matters, where -egos are more about getting what they want. They order people around in different ways, or rather, are determined to go after their target and consciously apply pressure (not saying always successfully, but they tend to be good at it).

The other part I disagree with completely. The "connecting the dots" part of explanations is very thing, as others mentioned before. It's frustrating to ego to have overly explicit and repetitive - as described in the post you quote - explanations forced on them. Look at -PoLR description - it's very accurate on this point, unfortunately. One of the roots of my conflict with ESE.

I can't be entirely sure this person is ESE or LSE, never having met them, and I see how LSI or ESI would be an option, but I still think it's rather unlikely.

[Beautiful sky]

I wouldn't be so sure about the first part. -demonstrative is more "bossy" in conventional meaning, explicit about it, often lack controls over it (unconscious function). It's like they do it compulsively and in small matters, where -egos are more about getting what they want. They order people around in different ways, or rather, are determined to go after their target and consciously apply pressure (not saying always successfully, but they tend to be good at it).

The other part I disagree with completely. The "connecting the dots" part of explanations is very thing, as others mentioned before. It's frustrating to ego to have overly explicit and repetitive - as described in the post you quote - explanations forced on them. Look at -PoLR description - it's very accurate on this point, unfortunately. One of the roots of my conflict with ESE.

I can't be entirely sure this person is ESE or LSE, never having met them, and I see how LSI or ESI would be an option, but I still think it's rather unlikely.

No, he's perfectly correct about the type possibly being LSI with Se ego. This boss is controlling and bossy and pushy.

[Aiss]

No, he's perfectly correct about the type possibly being LSI with Se ego. This boss is controlling and bossy and pushy.

Except "bossy" and "pushy" are often a manifestation demonstrative . Demonstrative is as strong as leading, but you don't have control over it. That's something people adhering to stereotypes don't get; ego functions are used with skill and control (with obligatory mention of unbalanced individuals' exception), id functions are used or blocked with very little of either. egos tend to know how to use it. demonstrative is in comparison petty and unattractive (no offense to ESEs... you're welcome to retaliate if you have to take it personally). Of course, to types who don't value this element, ego will be unattractive/manipulative/selfish/something else and demonstrative pushiness won't be too much of a bother.

[Exodus]

Except "bossy" and "pushy" are often a manifestation demonstrative .

This sounds most like ego , actually. I don't see ego types as bossy at all; if they were I wouldn't like them.

[krieger]

Let's play "fight over whose conflictor this stupid person is".

[Exodus]

Let's play "fight over whose conflictor this stupid person is".

yeah, I'm sorry it seems that way but imo the typing is pretty clear. ESEs have their flaws, but everything in the description is related to valued .

PS I like plenty of types. I would say that this one is socially challenged or stupid or both.

[Aiss]

This sounds most like ego , actually. I don't see ego types as bossy at all; if they were I wouldn't like them.

Yeah, as I said, it doesn't bother in quite the same way. I'm annoyed by it in ESE, because it seems petty and pointless (it's already happening, you don't have to tell me to do it, I'm not stupid). Si-dominants don't show this, though.

Let's play "fight over whose conflictor this stupid person is".

yeah, I'm sorry it seems that way but imo the typing is pretty clear. ESEs have their flaws, but everything in the description is related to valued .

PS I like plenty of types. I would say that this one is socially challenged or stupid or both.

And my best friend is SEI. Do we really have to licitate in these terms?

I know ESE who's a bit like that (and I'm not the only one going by this thread), and while I think whatever type this particular person is, they're probably unhealthy, it's not typical for ego to focus on ordering people to do what they're already doing (well unless to stop them from doing it b/c it doesn't work for their purpose). gets people to do what's needed to achieve it's goals, not micromanages them.

[Nowisthetime]

I'm impressed by how eager people here are at typing this person just from my very limited (and maybe flawed) description. I still think he is ESE.

If you are still interested I can add:

He is very energetic and enthusiastic.
His face looks open and his eyes awake.
He is almost demonstratively masculine. Not in a calm laid back way, more like shouting and swearing, using masculine language etc. Demonstrating his confidence in the situation. But the same time he seems soft and feminine being so emotional.
He can shout and scream, appearing angry, and then in the next minute he is joking and lighting up the atmosphere and everything is alright.
He jokes a lot.
He is quite concerned about security.
He changes a lot from day to day, depending on his mood. The workers often comment on his daily mood being good or bad.
He is sometimes referred to as the Duracell Bunny.

[buckland]

Yeah, as I said, it doesn't bother in quite the same way. I'm annoyed by it in ESE, because it seems petty and pointless (it's already happening, you don't have to tell me to do it, I'm not stupid). Si-dominants don't show this, though.

I know ESE who's a bit like that (and I'm not the only one going by this thread), and while I think whatever type this particular person is, they're probably unhealthy, it's not typical for ego to focus on ordering people to do what they're already doing (well unless to stop them from doing it b/c it doesn't work for their purpose). gets people to do what's needed to achieve it's goals, not micromanages them.

I agree with this. As much as I love ESEs, there is the tendency to over-emphasize everything and especially when in a hierarchical structure, it can be infuriating.

I have just finished this course which an ESE was effectively running, and she was a bulldozer in there. In every sense of it, she was bossy, pushy and sometimes just rude. It's amusing from my perspective but I could see the people visiting wanted to have a go at her, or on the other end thought she was ridiculous/comical. At the same time, whenever I pre-empted her asking me to do something and just went on and did it (no matter how obvious), she'd get incredibly impressed which again was amusing.

It may just be a caregiver thing, because that mentality must assume that you know more/are more capable than others. The extension of that is this sort of behaviour, where you're ensuring "the kids" aren't running amok.

[xerx]

it's not typical for ego to focus on ordering people to do what they're already doing (well unless to stop them from doing it b/c it doesn't work for their purpose). gets people to do what's needed to achieve it's goals, not micromanages them.

I believe this is true.

A very common manifestation of Se in Se-IJs is the need to control what other people are doing. That is, the need to impose order on the surroundings as seen through Fi or Ti.

But it's not something inherent to Se, just a way to protect their Ne PoLR. They impose their physical order to not have to deal with the amount of negative possibilities that can arise. They can be very security-minded and suspicious for the same reason.

Under predictable circumstances they're not very controlling (unless they're an arrogant and self-interested person).

SLEs and SEEs have more balanced Se - Ne so this should happens a bit less in their case.

[Beautiful sky]

I believe this is true.

A very common manifestation of Se in IJs is the need to control what other people are doing. That is, the need to impose order on the surroundings as seen through Fi or Ti.

But it's not something inherent to Se, just a way to protect their Ne PoLR. They impose their physical order to not have to deal with the amount of negative possibilities that can arise. They can be very security-minded and suspicious for the same reason.

They're not very controlling under predictable enough circumstances (unless they're an arrogant and self-interested person).

Not also just IJ though also with ESTj as well; but control in two ways; LSE would control work activity, not the person. The difference is that the person is a Se...Te is about work; Te would rather not control people but work activity.

[xerx]

Not also just IJ though also with ESTj as well; but control in two ways; LSE would control work activity, not the person. The difference is that the person is a Se...Te is about work; Te would rather not control people but work activity.

I never tried to imply anything about LSEs in my post.

[Beautiful sky]

I never implied anything about LSEs in my post.

I thought you were refering only to Ij types as being "controlling" just because they have Se ego.

[xerx]

I thought you were refering only to Ij types as being "controlling" just because they have Se ego.

Yes that's what you thought. But I don't see why you understood it that way.

[Beautiful sky]

Yes that's what you though. But I don't see why you understood it that way.

But don't we all control things or at least want control of things, I don't see how control is tied to Se?

[xerx]

I don't see how control is tied to Se?

Any function can be controlling and manipulative in its own way. But only Se is controlling in a direct "follow these orders" sense. Te is also controlling in a direct way, but it's more "you're an idiot for not following the facts."

Different types can use either depending on the circumstance.

But don't we all control things or at least want control of things,

Yes, but I try to minimize the amount of impact I have on other people's legitimate views if I have no way to disprove them. (I don't always succeed in assuaging the instinct). It's not enough enough to just offer my own positivist views, no matter how well they're argued.

I favor a kind of intellectual ecology until I'm 100% sure I'm right about an opinion, although I can never be 100% sure without delving into metaphysics, and then I become even less sure. All that is Ne related, [EDIT: but the metaphysics thing is a personal quirk].

None of that precludes offering up hypotheses and conjectures.

[Beautiful sky]

"Control" is a bad word to tie to Se.
Acquire-maybe is a better word.

Bad choice of words is really misleading and inaccurate.

EXTRAVERTED SENSORY PERCEPTION
Extraverted Sensory Perception seeks the highest
intensity and completeness of experience derived from real
objects and physical activities, preferably, but not
necessarily pleasurable ones. There is no particular purpose
for these experiences. They, themselves, are the goals of
perception. Extraverted Sensory Perception strives to
possess objects, and since distinction between people and
objects is done by Conceiving functions, radical
Extraverted Sensory Perception strives to possess people
too.
Extraverted Sensory types are highly realistic. To
exist and to be attractive for Extraverted Sensory function,
objects have to be visible and tangible. The ones that
sparkle and shine brighter have higher chances of being
chosen by Extraverted Sensory Perception .

[xerx]

"Control" is a bad word to tie to Se.
Acquire-maybe is a better word.

Bad choice of words is really misleading and inaccurate.

When you acquire something that no one else can acquire and manipulate (like personal territory), acquire becomes another word for control.

[Beautiful sky]

When you acquire something that no one else can acquire (like personal territory), acquire becomes another word for control.

Not necessarily, you may want to acquire but not control and control but not acquire...

LSE- want to control the environment but not acquire the people
SLE -want to acquire the people but not control their environment.

People become objects.

I neither want to acquire nor possess people. I want them around but I don't "make" them or "push" them to stick around.

[xerx]

Not necessarily, you may want to acquire but not control and control but not acquire...

LSE- want to control the environment but not acquire the people
SLE -want to acquire the people but not control their environment.

People become objects.

Only somewhat sure what you're getting at with those type definitions, but:

LSE - want to control the environment but not control the people.
SLE - want to control the people but not control the environment.

control <==> acquire still works.

[Beautiful sky]

Only somewhat sure what you're getting at with those type definitions, but:

LSE - want to control the environment but not control the people.
SLE - want to control the people but not control the environment.

control <==> acquire still works.

symantic argument

[Blaze]

Only somewhat sure what you're getting at with those type definitions, but:

LSE - want to control the environment but not control the people.
SLE - want to control the people but not control the environment.

control <==> acquire still works.

reversed. SLE wants control of outcome/environment; LSE wants control of people.

[redbaron]

reversed. SLE wants control of outcome/environment; LSE wants control of people.

yes.

[Beautiful sky]

It's the same old Fi thing: "you acquired me" = "you earned my goodwill and I'll follow you".

Is that right, Maritsa?

Ownership of a person?
I don't think so. People shouldn't own each other. I want to be wanted not needed.

[crazedrat]

Ni polr in ESE is running around with your head cut off doing small tasks which really aren't necessary.

[redbaron]

Ni polr in ESE is running around with your head cut off doing small tasks which really aren't necessary.

ding-ding-ding. exactly.

[Blaze]

Ni polr in ESE is running around with your head cut off doing small tasks which really aren't necessary.

necessary according to what...or who.

[Blaze]

yes.

hmmmm just had a thought...could be a way to diagnose difference between Se leading vs Te leading. sometimes these two functions in the leading position look very much alike.

[matilda]

reversed. SLE wants control of outcome/environment; LSE wants control of people.

could you give an example of this?

[crazedrat]

necessary according to what...or who.

Let's pretend you work night shift. You have to go to work in a few hours. You've been complaining of how hard it is for you to make it through the night. You have about 5 hours to get some sleep before you go to work. Until now you've gotten no sleep. Instead of going to sleep you run errands which you could of easily done tomorrow on your day off. Your excuse: "They had to get done.". You end up getting no sleep and you're miserable your entire night at work. This is a real life example of an ESE doing something unnecessary and failing to manage time properly.

[xerx]

Let's pretend you work night shift. You have to go to work in a few hours. You've been complaining of how hard it is for you to make it through the night. You have about 5 hours to get some sleep before you go to work. Until now you've gotten no sleep. Instead of going to sleep you run errands which you could of easily done tomorrow on your day off. Your excuse: "They had to get done.". You end up getting no sleep and you're miserable your entire night at work. This is a real life example of an ESE doing something unnecessary and failing to manage time properly.

Yeah. Pretty good example of Ni ignoring too. I go out of my way to do exactly what you described. I'm all about pursuing my interests in the moment.

I think ESEs can learn to use to protect this aspect of their PoLR. Like by having all the necessary amenities available before-hand or something so time management is less of an important factor.

[Beautiful sky]

Yeah. Pretty good example of Ni ignoring too. I go out of my way to do exactly what you described. I'm all about pursuing my interests in the moment.

I think ESEs can learn to use to protect this aspect of their PoLR. Like by having all the necessary amenities available before-hand or something so time management is less of an important factor.

They try this by keeping calendars and reading necessary things before hand or reading books on what Te does naturally which is on books on efficiency and time management.

[Blaze]

Let's pretend you work night shift. You have to go to work in a few hours. You've been complaining of how hard it is for you to make it through the night. You have about 5 hours to get some sleep before you go to work. Until now you've gotten no sleep. Instead of going to sleep you run errands which you could of easily done tomorrow on your day off. Your excuse: "They had to get done.". You end up getting no sleep and you're miserable your entire night at work. This is a real life example of an ESE doing something unnecessary and failing to manage time properly.

if you say so i believe it. with creative Si though, i have a hard time picturing ESE not being in touch with their bodily needs. sounds more like EIE, not paying attention to body needs. i've seen EIE's do this. could also be LSE, not driven by people needs but task needs. i've seen my mother do this: the Te outweighs the Si. ESE i would think would self sacrifice for a person, but not necessarily for a task. theoretically of course.

i know what you mean about their Ni polr though...they do waste energy on minutia, that's why they need LII. or ILE! :-)

[crazedrat]

Your speculation here is meaningless.

[Blaze]

could you give an example of this?

yes i will try. SLE will get people to work by working really hard themselves and setting the example. they will also negotiate, they will find something that the person wants and make a trade off: i'll give you this is you do this work. the goal is important....along the way, SLE recognizes that people cannot be forced to do things; they have to want to do it. they will also watch people, notice what motivates people, and put them in positions they want to be in so they do work.

like my SLE ex, says to my daughter, "hey i'll give you a quarter for every worm you find" while they get ready to go fishing. daughter dances off happily trying to find worms.

LSE wants people to be hard working and efficient like they are. they will directly pressure you to work without an immediate reward. they will use guilt, nag, cajole. they are very hard working and efficient themselves and they think everyone should be that way. they have a huge surplus of energy to expend, while SLE being EP has energy but not so so much of it. i guess i wanna say that LSE will use the stick and the carrot, while SLE uses the carrot only and sets the example.

it's almost like SLE recognizes and accepts the IP way of life....whereas LSE is against it.

when i think about it though LSE prolly can get IJ types to move better than SLE can.

to be honest i can work with either type, but it's a little more fun to work with an SLE. prolly due to temperament.

[Blaze]

Your speculation here is meaningless.

hahaha meaningless to you since you are stupid.

my point is that your example is a good one for how somebody mismanages their time. whether that person is ESE or not is entirely dependent on your assessment, which doesn't make sense from a theoretical socionics standpoint. but whatever, if you can't take it i understand.

[Aiss]

theoretically of course.

In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.

To be serious, yes, ESEs seem to me exactly how crazedrat described. Maybe example with neglecting their basic needs, such as sleep, isn't the most natural given Si-valuing, but I've seen the same pattern many times - like suddenly realizing the trip they were planning for months is only five days away and running to start packing... completely forgetting they've guests coming in a few minutes. That's a real life situation. (I might have been the one who unwisely pointed out that it is only five days, in response to referring to it as a distant future. But five days still leave a lot of time to pack!)

[Blaze]

In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.

To be serious, yes, ESEs seem to me exactly how crazedrat described. Maybe example with neglecting their basic needs, such as sleep, isn't the most natural given Si-valuing, but I've seen the same pattern many times - like suddenly realizing the trip they were planning for months is only five days away and running to start packing... completely forgetting they've guests coming in a few minutes. That's a real life situation. (I might have been the one who unwisely pointed out that it is only five days, in response to referring to it as a distant future. But five days still leave a lot of time to pack!)

yes! and further still...you can make a case in any direction with this stupid theory. you can say oh this person is that way because of Ni polr...or Ni dual seeking...or Ni hidden agenda. no wait that's not it, you have their type wrong, they must be this type or that type, that explains everything.

anybody we don't like...we just make them our conflict and note that their behaviors must be their polr. and anybody that makes a different suggestion is publically ridiculed. if we are not successful with a public ridicule, then we can always get our butt buddies to help us de-fame somebody. that's the kind of forum we live in today Aiss. no offense against you here...just pointing out what i see clearly.

[Rubicon]

LSE wants people to be hard working and efficient like they are. they will directly pressure you to work without an immediate reward. they will use guilt, nag, cajole. they are very hard working and efficient themselves and they think everyone should be that way. they have a huge surplus of energy to expend, while SLE being EP has energy but not so so much of it. i guess i wanna say that LSE will use the stick and the carrot, while SLE uses the carrot only and sets the example.

Yeah.. that fits with the way my LSE dad operates. :-p Works you all day, then at the end of the day he's all happy with you, but you're all grumpy for having being worked for no reason other than "it's good to work"... so heh. Ok I should just speak for myself.