Fi suggestive/dual-seeking of LSEs-ESTjs and LIEs-ENTjs

[Joy]

do ExTjs find their dual's Fi attactive because it provides a sense of family?

[Expat]

do ExTjs find their dual's Fi attactive because it provides a sense of family?

It provides a sense of bonding.

[Joy]

do ExTjs find themselves sorta missing that sense of family (wishing it was there) in the absence of their dual?

[UDP]

Being really bad at understanding someone's relationship to you?

Even in terms of working in groups at school and stuff, I can socialize and exchange information. But when it comes to any sort of personal thing, friendships, relationships, and so on..... it is just something that does not come easily to me.

[Elro]

Being really bad at understanding someone's relationship to you?

How so?

[Joy]

It's weak Fi in general, I believe.

[UDP]

Being really bad at understanding someone's relationship to you?

How so?

Like, how they see you. Acquaintance, close friend, good friend. Relationship status.


Like sometimes when our executive board would do things, there would be a bunch of alpha Fe and Si, but I never really felt like I was a part of it. Particularly in the after - work sort of get togethers. Or like, recently, someone from another organization called, and, I was not sure if she was interested in seeing me because she wanted to talk about what we are doing next semester, of if she just wanted to see me because she is nice like that (alpha SF), or what. I relate to people professionally well - like if there is something and there is a task to do, it does not bother me to call or talk to anyone, or anything like that. But personally, it is difficult in what to make of things.



What would be an indication of Fi dual seeking then?

[olduser]

I'd say it puts you in an Fi quadra. Fe types don't tend to care as much about their closeness and defining relationships to others, they care more about keeping a nice atmosphere, and having friends for the sake of interaction, laughs, gossip, etc. Which doesn't mean they are superficial, they just aren't the sort of people that have close-close friends in a traditional sense. Fi and Ti are the traditional close friend sort of people. Ti people form close friendships because of some strived logical ideal and consistency(like the SeTi and TiSe macho guy stereotype unites some Ti types). Fi people like close friendships where nothing is kept secret and they each know their place with eachother, and with others(and this is open for discussion and analysis). Te forms friendships superficially like Fe, but it's more for goals/activities(your Te friend probably tells you a lot about his progress in his activity undertakings, your Fe friend tells you a lot about how they are getting along with others, and how billy said such and such, and how he was 'acting'). A Te person will be your friend because you do activities together. Comparitively, Fe types will be friends because they help easily flow in the atmosphere and exressiveness.

i hope that helps, and i hope others have input. I don't know how irrational functions work with friendships.

[UDP]

Fi and Ti are the traditional close friend sort of people. Ti people form close friendships because of some strived logical ideal and consistency(like the SeTi and TiSe macho guy stereotype unites some Ti types). Fi people like close friendships where nothing is kept secret and they each know their place with eachother, and with others(and this is open for discussion and analysis). Te forms friendships superficially like Fe, but it's more for goals/activities(your Te friend probably tells you a lot about his progress in his activity undertakings, your Fe friend tells you a lot about how they are getting along with others, and how billy said such and such, and how he was 'acting'). A Te person will be your friend because you do activities together. Comparitively, Fe types will be friends because they help easily flow in the atmosphere and exressiveness.

Yeah I think that totally makes me Te leading and Fi seeking. My friends always here about my 'progress' or lack there of, etc. My thoughts on it. And I like Fi people who want to know everything about me (only some people, I would not want everyone knowing everything about me, of course). But someone who wants that closeness, etc.

Yes, that did help, I believe.

[olduser]

i could be wrong though- keep that in mind. I could have Te and Ti mixed up or some datas are applicable to more than the proposed rational function or maybe not type related. that is why i wish more people would provide input/critique. Perhaps better formatting would help.

[UDP]

Formatting the title? Or the question?

Yeah. I am looking for more input to. The people may not be online.


(aside: I have been looking at types for myself, and I am fairly sure I am not alpha/beta/fe/merry - but rather gamma/delta/fi/serious)

[Expat]

Like, how they see you. Acquaintance, close friend, good friend. Relationship status.


Like sometimes when our executive board would do things, there would be a bunch of alpha Fe and Si, but I never really felt like I was a part of it. Particularly in the after - work sort of get togethers. Or like, recently, someone from another organization called, and, I was not sure if she was interested in seeing me because she wanted to talk about what we are doing next semester, of if she just wanted to see me because she is nice like that (alpha SF), or what. I relate to people professionally well - like if there is something and there is a task to do, it does not bother me to call or talk to anyone, or anything like that. But personally, it is difficult in what to make of things.



What would be an indication of Fi dual seeking then?

As Joy said, it's an indication of weak Fi generally. I don't agree with all of heath's points.

[tcaudilllg]

Well I should be a bit more descriptive. The way I look at Fi is that it's not just a lack of understanding, but more a lack of confidence. Understanding and Fi to me is not necessary. Someone with Weak Fi can be very perceptive of feeling, even someone's true feeling. But for someone with weak Fi, there is no confidence.

"Feelings don't last, they will abandon, I cannot trust..."

With Weak Fi, relationships with acquaintances are easy, but the closer it gets, the less confidence.

Just as someone who has great intelligence can be insecure in that intelligence, someone of great emotional awareness can be completely paralyzed by it.

Hey... do you think the difference between strong and weak could be enduring vs temporary? That would mean that one actually looks at different manifestations of the elements given their function's weakness or strength....

Have you already had this thought?

trends seem to me equally temporary. However an dominant might say they are just new cases of the same collective theme.

Yeah I think that's it. It's a matter of time. I guess a vulnerable type would say, "well that's how it is now; it may not be that way later."

So now is that what "strong" versus "weak" means? If that's the case, then does that mean strength's effects are not -- should not -- be measured as a continuum? ...This will help my typing efforts in general, I think. Could be possible to make a concrete determination of the function order's logical justification given this data....

[tcaudilllg]

If a person latches on to a temporary feeling as true, then they will be disappointed when the person who has this feeling eventually rejects it in favor of a deeper, time-transient feeling. (like rapport) The pain of the disappointment is a reminder not to use as base. The same goes for : if an INTj believes a collective feeling experience will last, then they will be disappointed unless they receive additional direction from ESFj, who *knows* what is not only popular, but indeed what will *remain* popular. It is our disappointments that create the subjective impetus to put our strong elements before our weak elements. However, the disappointments all owe to people who use our weak elements strongly. (I've learned this from painful experience.)

[Beautiful sky]

Is it Fi dual seeking to shamefully not tolerate certain things in other individuals based on stereotypes that you believe that they may have/posses and voicing these thought in hopes that an Fi will come and say things like "that's not good/bad, right/wrong"?

But at the same time knowing that you have a certain sense of nobleness to you and that you are willing to help others...this would be both Fi valuing and Fi Dual seeking correct?

Do Fi dual seeking people make strange and out of place comments to elicit Fi response?

My understanding of my Fi is that it is ethics and ethics of relationships. Pretty much that is the voice of my conscience and my true personal beliefs about others. Because my introverted ethics is very well developed, I have this need to be moral and correct in my actions to do good things for people and to be conscientious about my sayings, deeds, and actions and when I have not been, I realize the harm that I have incurred and am quick to respond (taking action) to mend or heal bonds between people and myself, and not to forsake humanity.

Someone with an underdeveloped might do anything necessary to reach a goal. Maybe also betraying friends or other highly immoral actions, but someone who values it may say or do things that are out of line but feel ashamed for them but in the same sense, may need a certain sense of guidance?

Also, I've noticed that eventhough ESTp's may value a certain set of morals like being a good person and following some set of values, that they do not value such things as strict honesty.

Is what I'm talking about Fi dual seeking?

[MatthewZ]

Maritsa, after several months of your presence on this forum, many users here have begun to doubt the exist of -DS. It's simply befuddling to think that anyone could possibly seek your behavior. It may produce an anomaly within the mathematically precise Socion, but many of us on this forum see it fitting.

It's simply not productive to comment on such a preposterous idea that only exists in idealized theory. Proverbially, "no one likes you."

I, however, have done you the courtesy of pointing this out. Perhaps it will bring you one step closer to joining the enlightened masses.

[Beautiful sky]

Maritsa, after several months of your presence on this forum, many users here have begun to doubt the exist of -DS. It's simply befuddling to think that anyone could possibly seek your behavior. It may produce an anomaly within the mathematically precise Socion, but many of us on this forum see it fitting.

It's simply not productive to comment on such a preposterous idea that only exists in idealized theory. Proverbially, "no one likes you."

I, however, have done you the courtesy of pointing this out. Perhaps it will bring you one step closer to joining the enlightened masses.

Why don't you just say that it can't be answered?

[MatthewZ]

Why don't you just say that it can't be answered?

It can be answered; an incorrect premise can be followed to a logical conclusion. However, why would we explore a system we already know is false?

[Beautiful sky]

Well, the story goes that when an LSE gets flustered about some thing they can't deal with they seek out relationships to relate their problems to, not being able to judge the value of these relations, as in who they are talking to and what importance these people really have in the scope of having added value to their relationship experience.

Have you experienced an LSE who seeks out all kinds of people to pour out their thoughts about events that bother them?

Rod Novichkov described the neurosis best in:

When Extraverted Intellectual Conception takes over the person and pushes out other functions. Pushed out Introverted Emotional Conception
may spring back in a form of compulsive relationships that don’t let go, obsessive feelings and sentiments that interfere with the everyday life.

Have you experienced a desperate LSE seek out all sorts of people to relate to in their neurosis?

[esq]

I can't judge the value of ideas. I can be excessively cautious when presenting my ideas. Or otherwise I will present immature ideas recklessly. I can't tell whether the listener will value my input.

I also can't judge the value of potential relationships. I withhold intimacy because I can't read what people want in the long term. My feelings are volatile and I doubt any feelings I had in the past.

[golden]

I think I have seen an EII do this.

[Beautiful sky]

I think I have seen an EII do this.

EII are extremely picky and purposeful about their choice of relations.

[Beautiful sky]

That was my 1st thought as well.

Ashton, I call a friend a relation, someone who when I advertise I'm sick, will run over to give me a cup of water. Try that next time you call someone a friend and let me see how many respondents you get.

[Narc]

I vent my problems to people I know on the internet so that it's less likely to blow up in my face later.

[Suz]

Well, the story goes that when an LSE gets flustered about some thing they can't deal with they seek out relationships to relate their problems to, not being able to judge the value of these relations, as in who they are talking to and what importance these people really have in the scope of having added value to their relationship experience.

Have you experienced an LSE who seeks out all kinds of people to pour out their thoughts about events that bother them?

Have you experienced a desperate LSE seek out all sorts of people to relate to in their neurosis?

Maybe...
I've found this to be the case with SLIs too, maybe even more so.

[Beautiful sky]

There's such thing as the neocortex and the paleocortex and I think sometimes I have a difficulty understand how LSE bypass their neocortex in the time of emotional hijacking. Behaviors are not subject to rationalization any longer when this happens. The neocortex, our modern brain is in the process of rational thought, while the paleo is part of instinctual response. What makes me wonder is how someone who is so intelligent in the form of being able to accumulate data, facts, etc and analyze them outside of their own personal interaction, is quite incapable of assuming the same role in regards to their own personal involvement with the very same process, the subject being turned into the object.

If the LSE observes a subject as an object, completely detached from themselves, like in a lab, they are quite capable of discerning the object's behavior, actions, analyze them, describe them and their qualities, but just as soon as the object is in contact with the LSE as a subject, what happens is a lot of what is rationality, which is thinking about why the other person does they things they do in relation to their own emotions and makeup seems to go out the door; intelligence of an LSE, I mean the capability to figuring out what others are doing and will do, is not a factor in this equation, when they become emotionally hijacked. What is emotional hijacking, very simply is that when anything in the slightest seems any sort of accusation of their character, their own person, and would in some way hit or indicate that the person is not accepted (whether these things are in objectively true or not, because sometimes real objectivity is missed) the person turned into nothing but a feeling subject and the responses are often too stress, inappropriately exaggerated, assumed to be an attack on the person's actions and character, even that whatever is said to them might seem in any way unrelated to the assumptions they conclude, the feeling response is often cold, distant, and assuming. Take for instance, you ask an LSE "why did you do that?" If in any way the LSE perceives that as some kind of attack on their actions as being wrong, the response is "don't blame me for your insecurities." The LSE is incapable of viewing something that's purely a question of "what happened" and instead allows their emotional brain to hijack them and respond inappropriately. The appropriate approach to such a situation is to 1. be calm, 2. restore some sense of security that the person is not being attacked, 3. express your concern and question in another way, 4. the feeling LSE may be really off the deep end and then what is most appropriate in this case is to just leave them alone.

[Beautiful sky]

I think LSE, particularly, make the poorest choices out of their personal selfishness with regards to handling personal relationships out of their own sense of comfort and safety; this is often due to their lack of concern for the emotional welfare of the people who they make choices against, for, whatever in favor of their own sense of comfort and rationality, destroying relationships, destroying the feelings of the other individual, despite having had a normal relationship before certain loss of comfort; their unwillingness to forgive or to see past events that would incite their memory, jolt them back to a time when they had feelings that were somewhat normal and had continuity is scarce and certainly lacking at times.

When THEY decide to make choices, they are often made without consideration of the opposite party's own personal sense of comfort, security and emotions; often making the LSE seem intent-full, hurtful, feelingless, and irresponsible. Because their common call is that "well, I make choices for me" which is pretty much saying that they don't care about how someone else takes or deals with the choices that come suddenly, unexpectedly and without appropriate amount of normal exchange and interaction.

It's like being thrown a giant cannon, right into your emotional life and now YOU have to decide how to deal with it;

I find that partnerships and relationships with other types are smoother, much more developing in terms of fluidity of movement in feelings; I feel like I'll know, can know, or can reasonably expect certain actions, and deal with them in appropriate smoothness of changing emotional states.

Truth be told, my dual cousin has NEVER done anything in terms of outright inappropriate emotional response, there have been little jerks, but she realize them quickly and calls herself on them to take actions to restore reciprocity of feelings to herself in relationship with others. It's a comfort in knowing that I've never been put in that situation with her. But certainly, I do not have a romantic relationship and thus far, what I've experienced with all TeSi, TeNi, types in relationship response to me has been very negative.

[Beautiful sky]

How do you guys think LSE handle relationships, personal, emotional, familial, etc.

[InvisibleJim]

It appears they motivate neurotic IEEs to keep talking about it on the internets.

[DirectorAbbie]

Do you only want the guys' input?

[Creepy-theticalanti]

How do you guys think LSE handle relationships, personal, emotional, familial, etc.

Objectively.

Gauging emotional reactions and distances is something valued by us, but we are naturally bad at it. If we act formally, objectively, and stay consistent in our actions, it's easier to measure how the other person reacts to make an accurate comparison between how they feel about us and how others feel/act towards us.

Work has a certain appeal. It's important to mention, since sometimes LSEs will push away even family for their work. We like work because in most cases it's fun for us, fulfilling our Te; and in other cases, in healthier LSEs, we do it ultimately to provide a better lifestyle to our families, be more in-control with our lives, and spend more time with them.

That being said, in family relations, if things become strained, LSE will resort back to work. We subconsciously expect others to maintain/develop relationships. Healthier, more developed LSEs can do this better ourselves, and continue to add value to the relationship.

Lastly, LSEs tend to keep a mental log of all experiences with a person, using Si. In general, the longer we know someone, or the more time we spend with them, the closer the relationship. Time is crucial to developing trust. Delta relationships, especially LSE-EII, tend to develop much more slowly than Beta relationships. Because of this, there is a weakness in LSEs to disregard family members who have been inconsistent in our lives and to reject them just like anybody else. This is actually the furthest from what the LSE desires, close relationships with family - but when push comes to shove, we are objective because that is most natural for us.

This is just my perspective. I'm sure I've projected some. Not all of this will apply to every LSE. Hope this adds value to the discussion.

I'll also add, I don't view any of this behavior as necessarily "neurotic", as implied by the thread subject title. It's natural and works.

[Beautiful sky]

How do you handle neurosis, maritsa?

OMG, what creates it in me is when too many things happen at the same time. The last case of neurosis was when I was visiting Michael and my sister txts me with news about her new premi baby, my dad ending up in the hospital, my mom worried about everyone; when too many events are created at the same time, when I sit there and imagine how everyone must be feeling, when I imagine what must be happening, when I think of the worst possible scenarios and how I might have to prepare to handle each one; I don't live in the moment, I can't focus on what's in front of me, I get so scattered with my thoughts and paralyzed with actions, I get excessively worried about other possible things that may or may not happen. Too many thoughts in regards to actions are created within my mind. At that moment, I need someone to sit next to me, hug me and say "this is what's happening now, you don't know the rest, you need to live in the moment, focus on getting this done, this is the most important action to take now, don't focus on his/her behavior/actions, do this."

[Beautiful sky]

Um, it's so strange and sad to hear people, especially some LSE, say that they would rather have a dog than a human being in their lives; I was so emotionally moved by this suggestion that I cried almost all day to my LSE friend and asked why I was so deeply impacted by such a saying and I just asked him to help me work through my flustered emotions about this topic, and you will also notice that this isn't the first time I've mentioned this, which only means that it's been very impactive on my. Well the discussion went:

LSE: "Do you want me to compare what it's like having a dog as a companion rather than a human being?"
Me: Yes, please.
LSE: "Well, you give emotional support to a dog but you can't get one from them, but with a human being you can get emotional support from them, which is what I need."
Me: So you do value relationship.
LSE: "I only said what I said to you the last time because I was frustrated and was dealing with a lot of small problems, that were insignificant, but I didn't mean it."
Me: You better not say something like that again.
LSE: "Why are you so tied up about it."
Me: It's wrong to not value relationships, human beings, not to appreciate people, even if you don't agree with minor things just because you're the type of person who is so emotional about what they say as it's in regards to you.
LSE: "I know. I didn't mean it." (laughs, hugs me)

[Kim]

I prefer being with dogs over people most of the time. Very few humans make me giggle at least 5 times a day every day.

[DirectorAbbie]

I certainly wouldn't rather have a dog than a human being. Do you realize how much training they would require just to understand how to "close the curtains?"

[InvisibleJim]

I certainly wouldn't rather have a dog than a human being. Do you realize how much training they would require just to understand how to "close the curtains?"

Is it more or equal to the amount of training required to get an EII to understand how to 'close the curtains'?

[Creepy-theticalanti]

I certainly wouldn't rather have a dog than a human being. Do you realize how much training they would require just to understand how to "close the curtains?"

It requires much training to teach certain individuals how to pick up after themselves. And sometimes they still don't get it. At least dogs respond to treats and positive reinforcement.

[Beautiful sky]

not ime.

yeah,

if I were to put the order of relations I will have to put my family in the top hierarchy, my 7 closest relations underneath and everyone else falls in the "I'm trying you out" zone, some of which I can hardly bring myself to calling a "friend"

[silke]

LSE Fi d.s. as described by someone typing as ESI:

"... Another thing I don't like about LSEs is that they do a lot, but they want to be praised for it. My EII grandmother is very good at giving out praises, adoring others, being adulating and rewarding by her words, telling someone that she appreciates what they have done. I will say "thank you", but I'm not going to spend half an hour complimenting their work. While the LSE is waiting for it and takes offense otherwise. I say: "Then don't do it. If it's not needed, why even do this? Don't exert yourself to do something just to be praised." This is their suggestive Fi seeking, this searching for a constant source of gratefulness, positive emotion and ethical appraisal of their actions. For ESIs this works differently: I give as much as I can give without any expectations of being praised."

[consentingadult]

LSE Fi d.s. as described by someone typing as ESI:

"... Another thing I don't like about LSEs is that they do a lot, but they want to be praised for it. My EII grandmother is very good at giving out praises, adoring others, being adulating and rewarding by her words, telling someone that she appreciates what they have done. I will say "thank you", but I'm not going to spend half an hour complimenting their work. While the LSE is waiting for it and takes offense otherwise. I say: "Then don't do it. If it's not needed, why even do this? Don't exert yourself to do something just to be praised." This is their suggestive Fi seeking, this searching for a constant source of gratefulness, positive emotion and ethical appraisal of their actions. For ESIs this works differently: I give as much as I can give without any expectations of being praised."

This is nonsense, LSEs don't fish for compliments when doing a lot of work. No types fishes for compliments on their base function. Such behavior would be mobilizing Te, which can in fact be observed in IEEs and SEEs. LSE's acceptance and recognition seeking behavior is through mobilizing Ne.