Fi PoLR - Misunderstood

[PistolShrimp]

Good thread idea. Fi polr. Let's see... I think it can manifest itself in the following ways:

1. Someone dies and the Fi polr individual feels uneasy. What to say, do, how sensitive to be, what the relatives are feeling, what's expected of him emotionally. He requires help here and can only really offer practical assistance. Knows he's out of his league to comfort and simply leaves the situation altogether, feeling useless unless he's with a partner he can count on to fill that gap.

Yes; direct quote from my ILE guy:

"I'm kind of awkward around support in emotional hard times because, you guessed it *KAZOO* I CONFRONT IT WITH HUMOR. Which means, oh your grandfather died? What did he do? Oh I see, he was a barber. Life sure didn't CUT him slack. I literally am spending time sitting here thinking about other funny puns but I really can't come up with any and I don't feel like spending time to. lol fuck. point proven. PEOPLE DO NOT RESPOND WELL TO THIS. (I usually hold my tongue and snicker inside at funerals)."

[Radio]

Fi ≠ empathy. Every human being is capable of empathy, of feeling someone else's pain or suffering, if they're directly involved in a situation.

Fi is something else, it doesn't require direct involvement every time, once it has been experienced it's able to abstract the connections between emotions or feelings or values and then applies them to different scenarios, so for instance, you might see an Fi type defending people to allow them to believe whatever they want, or they might get emotional just watching people going through emotional pain remotely through tv or the internet, even though they don't believe in those things or have any idea what the people are feeling directly. Fi uses the abstracted connections as a reference point to approximate the value a concept might hold for someone else, or the emotional pain they might be going through.

The point of focus here when applied to Fi-polr isn't the end result, but the process that leads to it. I would define Fi-polr as being oblivious to these experiential, subtler connections between situations, concepts/ideas, people, interactions, events, and things, in lieu of solid, tangible connections that can be defined, drawn and tracked.

The difference between this definition and the one-word definition in the OP is that, it doesn't necessarily relate to being apathetic to subjective values (e.g. not caring for whether something holds personal significance for someone else and only focusing on the factual basis for their statements), but there's other facets of it as well, for instance:

I posted a thread some time ago, regarding smiles and their possible correlation with type. There, hkkmr defended to the ground that such a correlation could not exist, because it cannot be quantitatively broken apart into explicitly defined, tangible elements that may be checked true/false, yes/no. Look at Socionics for another butchered example of how the incredibly nuanced arena of social interaction is broken into mechanical exchange of lego-blocks.

Just two out of many.
Anyway, there you are.

[Gilly]

Fi ≠ empathy. Every human being is capable of empathy, of feeling someone else's pain or suffering, if they're directly involved in a situation.

Fi is something else, it doesn't require direct involvement every time, once it has been experienced it's able to abstract the connections between emotions or feelings or values and then applies them to different scenarios, so for instance, you might see an Fi type defending people to allow them to believe whatever they want, or they might get emotional just watching people going through emotional pain remotely through tv or the internet, even though they don't believe in those things or have any idea what the people are feeling directly. Fi uses the abstracted connections as a reference point to approximate the value a concept might hold for someone else, or the emotional pain they might be going through.

The point of focus here when applied to Fi-polr isn't the end result, but the process that leads to it. I would define Fi-polr as being oblivious to these experiential, subtler connections between situations, concepts/ideas, people, interactions, events, and things, in lieu of solid, tangible connections that can be defined, drawn and tracked.

The difference between this definition and the one-word definition in the OP is that, it doesn't necessarily relate to being apathetic to subjective values (e.g. not caring for whether something holds personal significance for someone else and only focusing on the factual basis for their statements), but there's other facets of it as well, for instance:

I posted a thread some time ago, regarding smiles and their possible correlation with type. There, hkkmr defended to the ground that such a correlation could not exist, because it cannot be quantitatively broken apart into explicitly defined, tangible elements that may be checked true/false, yes/no. Look at Socionics for another butchered example of how the incredibly nuanced arena of social interaction is broken into mechanical exchange of lego-blocks.

Just two out of many.
Anyway, there you are.

Yay, let's start with all of their shortcomings. Grrrreat.

[Absurd]

A lot of Fi polrs on this site.

[mu4]

PoLR functions are only relatively avoided(won't say oblivious) from a internal point of view.

However this is a "Point of Lease Resistance", so it is a hypersensitive function when receiving outside information. However Fi PoLR individuals develop coping mechanism to deal with this vulnerability and can be amoral and insensitive. It's not like Fi PoLR need to be amoral or insensitve but they may adopt systems of thought and ideas which allow them to avoid dealing with guilt. However, they will still responded to other information via their Super-ID.

People just generally deal with the world from areas they're more comfortable with, which would be Ego/ID functions.

Fi polr and Fe polr both share similar ego functions, so there may be a good deal of similarity in how things are dealt with. However, don't be worried that some things are the same. Functionally, Fe polrs are all introverts, Fi polrs are all extroverts, there is bound to be differences in how they expressed themselves, however these differences in expressions may be similar to another type in turn.

There are few unique associations that can be made with an individual or a type, and only when traits converge and exclude all other "suspects" can typing's and descriptions be completed.

[Nowisthetime]

What do you think about this? What does Fi PoLR really mean??

I'm always linking to this article, so I'll do it again: http://en.socionics.ru/index.php?opt...251&Itemid=139

[Suz]

PoLR functions are only relatively avoided(won't say oblivious) from a internal point of view.

However this is a "Point of Lease Resistance", so it is a hypersensitive function when receiving outside information. However Fi PoLR individuals develop coping mechanism to deal with this vulnerability and can be amoral and insensitive. It's not like Fi PoLR need to be amoral or insensitve but they may adopt systems of thought and ideas which allow them to avoid dealing with guilt. However, they will still responded to other information via their Super-ID.

People just generally deal with the world from areas they're more comfortable with, which would be Ego/ID functions.

Fi polr and Fe polr both share similar ego functions, so there may be a good deal of similarity in how things are dealt with. However, don't be worried that some things are the same. Functionally, Fe polrs are all introverts, Fi polrs are all extroverts, there is bound to be differences in how they expressed themselves, however these differences in expressions may be similar to another type in turn.

There are few unique associations that can be made with an individual or a type, and only when traits converge and exclude all other "suspects" can typing's and descriptions be completed.

Along these lines, both Fi-POLRs and Fe-POLRs have weak Fe and weak Fi. They are self-conscious about both, in different ways. They want to be good at one, and are irritated by the other.

Of note, I have a 2nd aunt who, per my mom's descriptions, I think is an SLE (i've never met her myself though). My mom is appalled at how this 2nd aunt did not go to her own mother's funeral. The aunt's explanation is that nobody told her that her mother died until after the funeral, so as not to upset her. My mom doesn't buy it... she thinks the aunt just didn't want to upset herself by going to the funeral.

[lemontrees]

I think Fi PoLRs often have a tendency to feel a lot of guilt which they are not too aware of. I might be projecting as I feel as if I have hurt a lot of people. I think about it almost daily. I need Fe to tell me that I'm really not that horrible person I think I am. I still would repeat many of the offences I have done, maybe all but one.

I think this is true. I've seen my SLE best female friend behave this way; it's like she's very aware that certain things she does might be construed as "wrong," but she does them anyway not thinking or wanting to think that she's actually behaving wrongly, but then some part of her isn't sure and the slippery guilt just accumulates. This probably varies in severity depending on how complicated the person is...

Also something I've noticed is that Fi PoLRs will tend to appreciate those genuinely who don't think they are bad people, and will, in return, be quite good to such people.

I have also cut connections with my best friend (SEI) twice without obvious reason. But I was in love with her still so I think it might have been partly due to guilt and partly cos I cannot trust her to be close enough. The second time I did this, she called me and then suddenly burst into tears and we were friends once again as I realized that my presence matters to her so much and I felt needed.

Aww. So sad. The story about her calling again in tears is really cute, though. I hope you're getting to spend time with her these day...

[Aquagraph]

I've seen my SLE best female friend behave this way; it's like she's very aware that certain things she does might be construed as "wrong," but she does them anyway not thinking or wanting to think that she's actually behaving wrongly, but then some part of her isn't sure and the slippery guilt just accumulates. This probably varies in severity depending on how complicated the person is...

Yeah, that's it.

Also something I've noticed is that Fi PoLRs will tend to appreciate those genuinely who don't think they are bad people, and will, in return, be quite good to such people.

I find this true. I somehow assume Fe creatives to consider me good and towards them I am highly considerate, protective, honorable and nice.

Aww. So sad. The story about her calling again in tears is really cute, though. I hope you're getting to spend time with her these day...

Nah, she's not very sociable anymore because her new boyfriend I hooked up for her.

[NewBorn STAR]

fi porls are illuminated by nature

[Leader]

Fi Polr really is basically uneasiness expressing outwardly and/or exchanging intimate feelings or personal sentiments with others.

For example, if someone says I love you...the best you'd get out of me would be a probably smile and a nod. The very act of saying I love you back exposes my personal feelings, I just can't say it for some reason..it makes me feel vulnerable, "What could they do with this information...they could take advantage of me or misinterpret what I mean" and so on. I can show you that I like you by helping you out, giving gifts, etc, but to acknowledge and say it would be a crime.

Some of what redbaron said is on point. I value loyalty and if you betray me, which I cannot tolerate, than I lose respect for you. I invested my raw innocent feelings toward you and you manipulated me. However, deep down inside I trust no one, because at the end of the day most people are just selfish, every man for himself. It doesn't matter how close we are, my most intimate thoughts are only reserved for me. There is a level of baseline trust on the surface, i'll "trust" you with little things like holding an item of mine for example, but anything important i'll never give up. I also have trouble hating anyone, you would have to do something incredible to me for me to hate you. Its hard for me to dislike people, I dislike their actions instead. Even if everyone else hates that person for whatever reason, my personal feelings about that person are always on the neutral good side, this goes for everyone. You can do something bad to me, I might get irritated, but the very next minute im fine and laughing again...I can still like you, I just don't forgive and forget and lose -respect- for you. You lose value and become more and more inferior in my eyes.

...The rest about not knowing how others feel about me, or not knowing what im feeling is wrong. Its easy to know what others are feeling about me, its just that acknowledging those feelings and how my feelings relate to theirs makes me uncomfortable. Yeah, I prefer direct, cut-to-the-chase, nonjudgmental Fe.

Also the saying things without knowing what will offend people isn't exactly true either. I usually know how people will react when I say things, my Ti is always looking for ways to work around and "manipulate" to my liking. I can always sugarcoat what im saying to make the person at ease which I do often, but its just that my Ti values truth over feelings, and I don't care much about morals because again as I said early before people are hypocrites. So if im saying something and its offensive, i'll know...and I may care if the person gets offended, but it won't stop me from telling the matter of fact (or what I believe to be) which I value over everything else.That's why it sounds like im bulldozing over people.

..Another thing on what redbaron said about if someone died.. Usually, when something that's supposed to be "sad" or emotional happens, my reactions will vary depending on how I feel about the situation. Like for example if someone gets hurt physically or emotionally, inside I i'll feel remorse...but outwardly you see my Ti which comes off as cold and insensitive. What im thinking is like, "Damn that's too bad...but meh...it happens everyday and they wouldn't give a damn about me if I died. So whatever, I just hope their family is alright though.", but what you actually hear is "Welp, thats life.", with either an expression of nonchalance or a smirk and laughter.

[1981slater]

Fi polr = being awesome

[1981slater]

2. Can't tell how others feel about him.

YES-WE-CAN

The point is that, we expect others to like us. Serious types can handle being disliked better than Fe valuers.

Needs outward signals like hugs, words, smiles.

and good sex after that

4. Sometimes says inappropriate things without intending to offend. Doesn't always know what's offensive, SAYS IT LIKE IT IS without shading. This can be very refreshing to some, or put-offish to others. And the fi polr person then gravitates towards those who aren't offended by him and opens up more as time goes on. He then stays away from people who look at him askance. It's just this handicap, almost, of not knowing what exactly is likely to hurt someone's feelings. It's not so much that he doesn't care (although that might be true also) but more that he just doesn't think about it, it doesn't occur to him that someone else might be that sensitive. Of course over time, he learns.

Someone who is like 150 Kg approaches a fi-polr and says "Do I look fat?" The fi polr answers: "Fat? Nope, but I THINK THAT THE AMAZON JUNGLE WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU COULD LOWER YOUR DAILY CALORIES CONSUMPTION, NEO" (ILE style);
and SLE would say "AAAARFGGHHH, A WHALE WHO CAN SPEAK!!!!!"

[Leader]

^

150 Kg Person: Do I look fat?

Me:

[JWC3]

Some Fi PoLR descriptions sound like they are about a psychopath.

I don't get that. I know SLEs and ILEs are not psychopaths (at least, not more than other types, and not because of their socionics type), so what gives?

Also, I have seen it here that Fi = empathy, which lends itself to the Fi PoLR = psychopath theme.

What do you think about this? What does Fi PoLR really mean??

Socionics is exaggerated to make a point. Pretty much anything in socionics, when taken at face value, is ultimately worthless and not applicable to reality in any practical way.

I don't find focusing on specifics like 'Fi PoLR' helpful and don't see the merit in connections like 'Fi = empathy'. Rather it's part of a message that needs to be examined as a whole.

[redbaron]

LOL!! Agee and Slater have the best responses in this thread. Agee, most excellent and nuanced! mine was far too simplistic.

[lemontrees]

Someone who is like 150 Kg approaches a fi-polr and says "Do I look fat?" The fi polr answers: "Fat? Nope, but I THINK THAT THE AMAZON JUNGLE WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU COULD LOWER YOUR DAILY CALORIES CONSUMPTION, NEO" (ILE style);
and SLE would say "AAAARFGGHHH, A WHALE WHO CAN SPEAK!!!!!"

I laughed out loud when I read this.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Fi polr people have a hard time knowing what their subjective preferences really are, they kind of bounce through life with a mediation/ambivalence around everything. Which is why they are duals with IEI and SEI, because those types are also that way. I have a hard time finding out what I truly want in life, I see the bright sides of people too much and I'm unsure who really has my back a lot. It's frustrating.

You're right, Fi polr as psychopathy makes no sense. Fi as 'empathy' is also crap. ESTps have the same level of compassion for humanity as IEI or there would be no compatibility. If anything, Fe is actually more empathetic; Fi is more selfish. I wish people understood the functions better, it's frustrating, but you have to be a very intelligent person and think deeply. Most people are dumb as rocks. They are more socially confident than me, way more, but they don't have the brains that I do. *sigh* Oh well you can't force anybody to learn or get this, they will understand when the time is right. Sorry I'm a little angry today.

[ambivalent existence]

I identify with nearly everything in this thread.

What Aqua listed - "cold, emotionally detached, distrustful, inconsiderate, blunt, attachment issues, norm blindness", I'm basically all of those. (Though I don't appear cold when there is enough emotional charge.. especially if supplied by others. )

Also, I'm very inconsistent in this area. I try to be nice to everyone but I end up hurting people with my directness or with seemingly (not intentionally!) insensitive actions, which I will only notice if they explicitly tell/show. I usually try to avoid feeling guilt resulting from that but then sometimes it comes and I can't deal with it, feels like a strong external pressure that I do not want. I cannot have complete trust in people yet want it at times but seems impossible to achieve. I cannot judge my relationships consistently, I either think the other person feels close to me, likes me, or I will get paranoid and think they don't like me - the latter is my default. I try not to be a "sociopath", and I'm definitely not one, but at the same time hard to stay consistent with all the moral rules, sometimes it's easiest to just behave in a reserved way (such as when someone unrelated to me dies).

Well what is consistent... I always welcome acceptance expressed by other people and I'm very loyal to people who've expressed this towards me enough times in a direct enough way, in some emotional way is best.

Overall, I have to agree, PoLR is a source of a lot of frustration.

[Slacker]

Part 1 and 3 sound very Fe-polr to me, the other two seem to be more on the Fi-polr side.

#2 sounds vaguely Fe-PoLR to me, as far as not being able to tell how others feel about them, but then not so much about wanting lots of affirmations.

[glam]

I also have trouble hating anyone, you would have to do something incredible to me for me to hate you. Its hard for me to dislike people, I dislike their actions instead. Even if everyone else hates that person for whatever reason, my personal feelings about that person are always on the neutral good side, this goes for everyone. You can do something bad to me, I might get irritated, but the very next minute im fine and laughing again...I can still like you, I just don't forgive and forget and lose -respect- for you. You lose value and become more and more inferior in my eyes.

i am a lot like this.

[marooned]

how do you like but not respect someone? how do you like someone but see them as inferior? I think I can dislike someone but respect them, but if I don't respect them then I possibly don't like them either. I might feel I like them as a person (from a distance) or like being around them sometimes, but since I don't respect them and seem to see them as inferior, I guess that when it comes down to it, I don't really like them at all. Although I guess I might respect some things about them and not others... so if I feel I like them then it would be going hand-in-hand with what I respect about them. My disrespect then would perhaps mean I'm not really their friend. I could see them thinking, Look, you either respect me, or you don't."

Okay, I think it's easier to turn it around. If I know someone doesn't respect me or sees me as inferior (whether I am inferior or not) I tend to think they can't really like me in any serious way and that in many ways they are not truly my friend.

[ambivalent existence]

how do you like but not respect someone? how do you like someone but see them as inferior? I think I can dislike someone but respect them, but if I don't respect them then I possibly don't like them either. I might feel I like them as a person (from a distance) or like being around them sometimes, but since I don't respect them and seem to see them as inferior, I guess that when it comes down to it, I don't really like them at all. Although I guess I might respect some things about them and not others... so if I feel I like them then it would be going hand-in-hand with what I respect about them. My disrespect then would perhaps mean I'm not really their friend. I could see them thinking, Look, you either respect me, or you don't."

Okay, I think it's easier to turn it around. If I know someone doesn't respect me or sees me as inferior (whether I am inferior or not) I tend to think they can't really like me in any serious way and that in many ways they are not truly my friend.

well it's just Fi-PoLR inconsistency. I'm kind of like this myself.

btw, when it says "my personal feelings about that person are always on the neutral good side" - it just means not many feelings at all, but at least no strong negative ones either =P

[redbaron]

I have also cut connections with my best friend (SEI) twice without obvious reason. But I was in love with her still so I think it might have been partly due to guilt and partly cos I cannot trust her to be close enough. The second time I did this, she called me and then suddenly burst into tears and we were friends once again as I realized that my presence matters to her so much and I felt needed.

this is that woman you were talking about in the other thread. dammit, do not let her go.

[redbaron]

how do you like but not respect someone? how do you like someone but see them as inferior? I think I can dislike someone but respect them, but if I don't respect them then I possibly don't like them either. I might feel I like them as a person (from a distance) or like being around them sometimes, but since I don't respect them and seem to see them as inferior, I guess that when it comes down to it, I don't really like them at all. Although I guess I might respect some things about them and not others... so if I feel I like them then it would be going hand-in-hand with what I respect about them. My disrespect then would perhaps mean I'm not really their friend. I could see them thinking, Look, you either respect me, or you don't."

Okay, I think it's easier to turn it around. If I know someone doesn't respect me or sees me as inferior (whether I am inferior or not) I tend to think they can't really like me in any serious way and that in many ways they are not truly my friend.

yes I can respect some things about someone, but not others. For example, I highly respect the way my husband can job-hunt. WOW can he work his connections! He can land a job in any economy, any time. He interviews really well and he's a likable person. But wow there are ways that I really do not respect him. and I won't go into detail on that but I think once the respect is lost, even in one particular area, it's pretty hard to get back.

[redbaron]

#2 sounds vaguely Fe-PoLR to me, as far as not being able to tell how others feel about them, but then not so much about wanting lots of affirmations.

Yeah, Maybe that wasn't a good one to include. Because I know that the SLEs I know pretty much can tell how people feel about them, but it may be more that they're not sure about how THEY feel or how those feelings will interact or then what to do about it. I also think they can tend to test people regarding their relationship. If they're not exactly sure what the relationship is, they might do things to poke or prod and get a reaction out of the other one so that they have more information with which to work.

[Leader]

I identify with nearly everything in this thread.

What Aqua listed - "cold, emotionally detached, distrustful, inconsiderate, blunt, attachment issues, norm blindness", I'm basically all of those. (Though I don't appear cold when there is enough emotional charge.. especially if supplied by others. )

Also, I'm very inconsistent in this area. I try to be nice to everyone but I end up hurting people with my directness or with seemingly (not intentionally!) insensitive actions, which I will only notice if they explicitly tell/show. I usually try to avoid feeling guilt resulting from that but then sometimes it comes and I can't deal with it, feels like a strong external pressure that I do not want. I cannot have complete trust in people yet want it at times but seems impossible to achieve. I cannot judge my relationships consistently, I either think the other person feels close to me, likes me, or I will get paranoid and think they don't like me - the latter is my default. I try not to be a "sociopath", and I'm definitely not one, but at the same time hard to stay consistent with all the moral rules, sometimes it's easiest to just behave in a reserved way (such as when someone unrelated to me dies).

Well what is consistent... I always welcome acceptance expressed by other people and I'm very loyal to people who've expressed this towards me enough times in a direct enough way, in some emotional way is best.

Overall, I have to agree, PoLR is a source of a lot of frustration.

Fi Polr.

[JWC3]

Some Fi PoLR descriptions sound like they are about a psychopath.

I don't get that. I know SLEs and ILEs are not psychopaths (at least, not more than other types, and not because of their socionics type), so what gives?

Also, I have seen it here that Fi = empathy, which lends itself to the Fi PoLR = psychopath theme.

What do you think about this? What does Fi PoLR really mean??

I'm not sure how to describe Fi PoLR in and of itself but the way I most often see it played out is fairly well illustrated by my step-dad. I'm fairly certain he is SLE and when my father passed it wasn't so much that he didn't know what to say to me so much as he intended well but still said the wrong thing. He said "Well, at least you two weren't that close" and on the one hand he was right, which is why I don't slight him, but on the other hand I'm a fairly young fella who just lost his father... Not quite the right thing to say lol.

Fi PoLR is sort of a blind spot, even well intention-ed Fi PoLR types tend to not be able to effectively say something that the effected individual will value. No empathy means a fairly low chance of them offering insight into your specific situation, unless they've been through it themselves. Even then you're more likely to get the rationalization that made their loss make sense to them which is generally also not that comforting, that's what i think anyway.

Not psychopaths though. Often they really do mean well, they just get it wrong.

[JWC3]

---

I'm not sure how to describe Fi PoLR in and of itself but the way I most often see it played out is fairly well illustrated by my step-dad. I'm fairly certain he is SLE and when my father passed it wasn't so much that he didn't know what to say to me so much as he intended well but still said the wrong thing. He said "Well, at least you two weren't that close" and on the one hand he was right, which is why I don't slight him, but on the other hand I'm a fairly young fella who just lost his father... Not quite the right thing to say lol.

Fi PoLR is sort of a blind spot, even well intention-ed Fi PoLR types tend to not be able to effectively say something that the effected individual will value. No empathy means a fairly low chance of them offering insight into your specific situation, unless they've been through it themselves. Even then you're more likely to get the rationalization that made their loss make sense to them which is generally also not that comforting, that's what i think anyway.

Not psychopaths though. Often they really do mean well, they just get it wrong.

That scene in the big lebowski where paul newman's character tries to give donny a eulogy but ends up wrongfully talking about vietnam. Exactly like that.

[Beautiful sky]

I identify with nearly everything in this thread.

What Aqua listed - "cold, emotionally detached, distrustful, inconsiderate, blunt, attachment issues, norm blindness", I'm basically all of those. (Though I don't appear cold when there is enough emotional charge.. especially if supplied by others. )

Also, I'm very inconsistent in this area. I try to be nice to everyone but I end up hurting people with my directness or with seemingly (not intentionally!) insensitive actions, which I will only notice if they explicitly tell/show. It's rationality, I make him understand how I feel and it's cause and effect; "when I don't do this, it upsets her therefore if I don't want to upset her I will do this." I usually try to avoid feeling guilt resulting from that but then sometimes it comes and I can't deal with it, feels like a strong external pressure that I do not want. I cannot have complete trust in people yet want it at times but seems impossible to achieve. I cannot judge my relationships consistently, I either think the other person feels close to me, likes me, or I will get paranoid and think they don't like me - the latter is my default. I try not to be a "sociopath", and I'm definitely not one, but at the same time hard to stay consistent with all the moral rules, sometimes it's easiest to just behave in a reserved way (such as when someone unrelated to me dies).

Well what is consistent... I always welcome acceptance expressed by other people and I'm very loyal to people who've expressed this towards me enough times in a direct enough way, in some emotional way is best.

Overall, I have to agree, PoLR is a source of a lot of frustration.

Similarity is that LSE can be considerate, but they have to be led to being considerate; for example, if I tell the LSE that they are not contributing to cleaning, I will never have to tell them twice, they will work in my needs to their plans and will even go overboard in arranging ways to be more considerate because they value how I see them and they are concerned about what people think of them. This is a huge difference between LSE and SLE, just for contrasting purposes. They don't have Fi PoLR because they will do Fi things at their own volition once led to that direction; as I can be led to do things in a regimented manner once led in that direction.

[ambivalent existence]

Similarity is that LSE can be considerate, but they have to be led to being considerate; for example, if I tell the LSE that they are not contributing to cleaning, I will never have to tell them twice, they will work in my needs to their plans and will even go overboard in arranging ways to be more considerate because they value how I see them and they are concerned about what people think of them. This is a huge difference between LSE and SLE, just for contrasting purposes. They don't have Fi PoLR because they will do Fi things at their own volition once led to that direction; as I can be led to do things in a regimented manner once led in that direction.

I see. nice idea about contrasting PoLR and suggestive. I'm not suggestible to Fi in this way you described.

[Creepy-male]

Some Fi PoLR descriptions sound like they are about a psychopath.

I don't get that. I know SLEs and ILEs are not psychopaths (at least, not more than other types, and not because of their socionics type), so what gives?

Also, I have seen it here that Fi = empathy, which lends itself to the Fi PoLR = psychopath theme.

What do you think about this? What does Fi PoLR really mean??

You have begun excavating the bullshit that propagates on this forum... just wait tell someone talks to you about how Se = badass, tough, strong.

[Creepy-male]

PoLR functions are only relatively avoided(won't say oblivious) from a internal point of view.

However this is a "Point of Lease Resistance", so it is a hypersensitive function when receiving outside information. However Fi PoLR individuals develop coping mechanism to deal with this vulnerability and can be amoral and insensitive. It's not like Fi PoLR need to be amoral or insensitve but they may adopt systems of thought and ideas which allow them to avoid dealing with guilt. However, they will still responded to other information via their Super-ID.

People just generally deal with the world from areas they're more comfortable with, which would be Ego/ID functions.

Fi polr and Fe polr both share similar ego functions, so there may be a good deal of similarity in how things are dealt with. However, don't be worried that some things are the same. Functionally, Fe polrs are all introverts, Fi polrs are all extroverts, there is bound to be differences in how they expressed themselves, however these differences in expressions may be similar to another type in turn.

There are few unique associations that can be made with an individual or a type, and only when traits converge and exclude all other "suspects" can typing's and descriptions be completed.

Yes I tend to agree that there is a difference between the internal/functional point of view and the expression of these traits. I think it would be interesting if more people talked about the vehicles for how the internal functions manifest themselves in behavior. In other words, the instrument for measuring functions from behavior. This is probably where most confusion and inaccuracy comes from.

To confound things even further how does one actually measure a function -- it is not a directly observable thing like behavior? At some level the entire groundwork of the theory is based on certain implicit definitions of what these "vehicles" are.

My personal feelings on this are that various people have developed separate systems and understandings of these "vehicles". Some base them off community consensus, others off of papers such as Jung Psychological Types, and others based off of personal practice. In fact its probably a combination -- people converge socially with others if their personal practice is compatible with others and their own personal practice is largely influenced by material they may have read -- articles, papers, websites, or other intellectual material.

[Beautiful sky]

Also, the PoLR appreciates the company of that type because the person (or me, in this case) is relieve from thinking or taking on tasks related to their (my) suggestive function, when a dual is not around to supplement for the suggestive function, hence making the SLE, my conflictor relation, very appealing to me in the short term.

[Beautiful sky]

Fi Polr really is basically uneasiness expressing outwardly and/or exchanging intimate feelings or personal sentiments with others.

I am the exact opposite. I adore personal sentiments and word of affection/comfort. That's one of the ways in which I am good at providing what I consider to be "loving support" in my relationship(s). Believe it or not this is a part of a "deal breaker" for me. I find that both SLI and and LSE are quite affectionate, even though some of my duals say "I'm not touchy feely" they do get there after encouragement to be that way; I want people to react emotionally, that tells me they want and need my support and when they get my support, I want them to feel comfortable with getting it and want more of it.

For example, if someone says I love you...the best you'd get out of me would be a probably smile and a nod. The very act of saying I love you back exposes my personal feelings, I just can't say it for some reason..it makes me feel vulnerable, "What could they do with this information...they could take advantage of me or misinterpret what I mean" and so on. I can show you that I like you by helping you out, giving gifts, etc, but to acknowledge and say it would be a crime.

Here as well. I can't say "I love you enough" and can't hear "I love you" enough, complimented with kisses and physical affection.

Some of what redbaron said is on point. I value loyalty and if you betray me, which I cannot tolerate, than I lose respect for you. I invested my raw innocent feelings toward you and you manipulated me. However, deep down inside I trust no one, because at the end of the day most people are just selfish, every man for himself. It doesn't matter how close we are, my most intimate thoughts are only reserved for me. There is a level of baseline trust on the surface, i'll "trust" you with little things like holding an item of mine for example, but anything important i'll never give up. I also have trouble hating anyone, you would have to do something incredible to me for me to hate you. Its hard for me to dislike people, I dislike their actions instead. Even if everyone else hates that person for whatever reason, my personal feelings about that person are always on the neutral good side, this goes for everyone. You can do something bad to me, I might get irritated, but the very next minute im fine and laughing again...I can still like you, I just don't forgive and forget and lose -respect- for you. You lose value and become more and more inferior in my eyes.

This makes SLE very attractive to me; their consistency and external show, verbally included, of their firmness in their character, moral values.

...The rest about not knowing how others feel about me, or not knowing what im feeling is wrong. Its easy to know what others are feeling about me, its just that acknowledging those feelings and how my feelings relate to theirs makes me uncomfortable. Yeah, I prefer direct, cut-to-the-chase, nonjudgmental Fe.

This is also an attractive trait about an SLE to me; that they are comfortable judging "this is wrong."

Also the saying things without knowing what will offend people isn't exactly true either. I usually know how people will react when I say things, my Ti is always looking for ways to work around and "manipulate" to my liking. I can always sugarcoat what im saying to make the person at ease which I do often, but its just that my Ti values truth over feelings, and I don't care much about morals because again as I said early before people are hypocrites. So if im saying something and its offensive, i'll know...and I may care if the person gets offended, but it won't stop me from telling the matter of fact (or what I believe to be) which I value over everything else.That's why it sounds like im bulldozing over people.

LSE don't know how people will react initially, they find out through feeling guilty about what they say; this is why an LSE needs a patient partner to understand that their "reactions" or emotional reactions are just subconscious disconnect from the blunt and objectively accurate statements they make with little regard for how a person will feel when they say it.

..Another thing on what redbaron said about if someone died.. Usually, when something that's supposed to be "sad" or emotional happens, my reactions will vary depending on how I feel about the situation. Like for example if someone gets hurt physically or emotionally, inside I i'll feel remorse...but outwardly you see my Ti which comes off as cold and insensitive. What im thinking is like, "Damn that's too bad...but meh...it happens everyday and they wouldn't give a damn about me if I died. So whatever, I just hope their family is alright though.", but what you actually hear is "Welp, thats life.", with either an expression of nonchalance or a smirk and laughter.

This is another opposite and unattractive trait of SLE to me; I prefer proper behavior in social situations which is something both LSE and LSI do. I understand though why an SLE does this, it's because they are trying to diffuse tension, but in my preference, I would rather tension be defused in private; I think that SLE is much more confident and less concerned about how they come off because they have the will to change perceptions of people or to figure out what they want to be seen when and how.

[strangeling]

I take a different stance on how this is all viewed because I don't think separating the two completely has much use in understanding someone's psyche, in terms of reality. If this was true, ILEs and SLEs would be the equivalent of a psychopath and all the personality types would represent a mental illness because they are defined by not growing beyond their ego.

What I mean is that I think a type's superego is something they do utilize and understand to a degree, but for some reason or another there is a proclivity to subjugate it in favor of the ego; so ILEs and SLEs can have a fair understanding of Fi, but end up channeling it through their Ti. Actually, more precisely, it would be Fe that they are channeling through Ti, but because there is a dynamic understanding of the emotional atmosphere that is understood (Fe) and driving their ego (Ti), what ends up happening is that their values end up aligning much more effectively with Ti, making Fi appear as inferior and of poorer quality to rely on and implement; when they see Fi, it will come off as inappropriate or malignantly aligned with their overall situations in life. So they do have Fi and use and understand it, but in terms of values in thinking, we have a different story. The PoLR descriptions seem to be extreme.

I guess I don't really like the PoLR descriptions then because we aren't trying to understand an individual person through the model, but trying to fit them to the model.

What do you think about this idea?

[ScarlettLux]

1. Someone dies and the Fi polr individual feels uneasy. What to say, do, how sensitive to be, what the relatives are feeling, what's expected of him emotionally. He requires help here and can only really offer practical assistance. Knows he's out of his league to comfort and simply leaves the situation altogether, feeling useless unless he's with a partner he can count on to fill that gap.

2. Can't tell how others feel about him. Needs outward signals like hugs, words, smiles. If he doesn't get these, he either waits for more information or goes elsewhere. Just doesn't have confidence of others' feelings towards him. And sometimes isn't sure of his own feelings. Questions himself in this area. Likes it when someone else tells him how they feel because he can then fall in line with that, or not. Gets confused easily about relationships unless things are spelled out.

3. Values loyalty. Once he has a friend he really trusts, he expects that friendship to last forever (at least from his end). Almost like an all-or-nothing type of thing. He either trusts that person, or he doesn't.

4. Sometimes says inappropriate things without intending to offend. Doesn't always know what's offensive, SAYS IT LIKE IT IS without shading. This can be very refreshing to some, or put-offish to others. And the fi polr person then gravitates towards those who aren't offended by him and opens up more as time goes on. He then stays away from people who look at him askance. It's just this handicap, almost, of not knowing what exactly is likely to hurt someone's feelings. It's not so much that he doesn't care (although that might be true also) but more that he just doesn't think about it, it doesn't occur to him that someone else might be that sensitive. Of course over time, he learns.

Uh... this just all sounds like me to be honest

[ambivalent existence]

1. Someone dies and the Fi polr individual feels uneasy. What to say, do, how sensitive to be, what the relatives are feeling, what's expected of him emotionally. He requires help here and can only really offer practical assistance. Knows he's out of his league to comfort and simply leaves the situation altogether, feeling useless unless he's with a partner he can count on to fill that gap.

2. Can't tell how others feel about him. Needs outward signals like hugs, words, smiles. If he doesn't get these, he either waits for more information or goes elsewhere. Just doesn't have confidence of others' feelings towards him. And sometimes isn't sure of his own feelings. Questions himself in this area. Likes it when someone else tells him how they feel because he can then fall in line with that, or not. Gets confused easily about relationships unless things are spelled out.

3. Values loyalty. Once he has a friend he really trusts, he expects that friendship to last forever (at least from his end). Almost like an all-or-nothing type of thing. He either trusts that person, or he doesn't.

4. Sometimes says inappropriate things without intending to offend. Doesn't always know what's offensive, SAYS IT LIKE IT IS without shading. This can be very refreshing to some, or put-offish to others. And the fi polr person then gravitates towards those who aren't offended by him and opens up more as time goes on. He then stays away from people who look at him askance. It's just this handicap, almost, of not knowing what exactly is likely to hurt someone's feelings. It's not so much that he doesn't care (although that might be true also) but more that he just doesn't think about it, it doesn't occur to him that someone else might be that sensitive. Of course over time, he learns.

Uh... this just all sounds like me to be honest

and do you actually have a lot of issues in practice arising from this?

btw, all the "sometimes" and "not always" crap should be removed.

[Aquagraph]

What do you think about this idea?

I think that Fi PoLRs don't necessarily have a fair understanding of but even if they have it wouldn't be their primary modus operandi. Usually this leads to less practice leads to weaker skills on Fi side of things. I'm digesting what this theory you told would mean in practice but I like it.

[silke]

This was taken from School of Systemic Socionics forum, which IMO is right on the ball:

One way to understand the PoLR of any given type is to figure out what the Leading function of their conflicting type is about. What kind of attitude/orientation does the 1st function of the "conflictor" type have? That's exactly the kind of information/attitude the PoLR person will be oblivious towards.

Thus, to figure out what the Fi PoLR of ESTp is all about consider what EII's Fi does. INFj's Fi comes with a + sign and it highlights the most positive potential in introverted attitudes. This exact thing that the INFjs "hone in" so easily is the same one that the ESTp completely ignores by the virtue of their TIM.

On the example of ENTp and ISFj here is what -Fi PolR looks like:
While the ISFj remembers the slights, misgivings, and grievances in personal attitudes and intentions, the ENTp is wholly not mindful of this and easily forgets this type of information:


Posted by an ILE (link)

"Fi in Dons is 1-dimensional i.e. relations either exist or they don’t. Relations are either very good, sincere, open – or they are reserved, dry, impersonal. There is no middle ground. The transition between the two states is extremely painful, especially from + to -. Therefore it is so important for us to make sure that we are accepted and loved. In order to know in which category to include someone – either as a friend or someone we don’t care about. No, not an enemy – enemies don’t exist in our world. That is not the case in principle, by definition.
There are friends - and acquaintances. Well, and strangers, of course.
We can write off a person as a friend fairly quickly, and as a rule, this rarely changes. I.e. it’s not even that important if we communicate at all, but the person will remain on the “shelf” with the label "friend."
That's why we forgive truly, permanently. For us, an offence is simply moving the person from friend to "simply acquaintances", and forgiveness - to move him back to a friend. Therefore, the past is automatically erased and there is no resentment at all. With a rare exception: when a person is somewhere in between, that is, he’s not really a friend and not quite an acquaintance. Then tension can build up for as long as there is this uncertainty."

(-Fi Polr : ILE "Don Quixote")

Posted by an ESI for contrast (link)

"Regarding rancor and remembering wrongdoings — on one hand, slights I remember forever, but only as a "fact of grievance". On the other, it is not a given that I will resent them and dream about revenge — I can peacefully interact with the offender. I will simply mentally note that he treated me poorly, so either this is a bad person or he is negatively predisposed towards me. Both of these are useful and important for me pieces of information that should not be forgotten.

In this sense, I remember all the bad things, even the minor ones, and for my entire life. Good things I may forget. Because for me this is not as important — if you forget that a person has treated you well, it is less dangerous than forgetting that he or she has treated your poorly, and is capable of all sorts of malicious behavior.

By the way, here's one more thing: I acutely feel poor attitudes — towards myself or between other people. I can see it right away and I am never wrong in this. But when it comes to good relations I orient rather poorly ... Two days ago my boyfriend introduced my girl-friend to his friend. I watched the couple the entire evening, but couldn't discern if his friend liked her or not. There were no signs of negative attitude, that's for sure, but I couldn't estimate the degree of good relations either.

I show a negative attitude towards someone when interacting with them spoils my mood. In such cases, I can forget about the benefits of interaction and about the negative consequences of conflict. If a person drives the me to depression, I cannot hide my antipathy for him."

(−Fi, mental, during uncertainty in Ne : ESI "Dreiser")