SE

[Benny]

Joy, of all people, seems to like to tell me that I act Se - this is especially noticable on the #socionics chatroom. But also dotted in insidious remarks, put on this forum.

Of course, when people spout shit like that, I'd rather dismiss them, or deal with it in one go, rather than to deal with lots of small little tidbits of annoying things.

And thus I see Joy as an enemy - soemthing to be extinguished, and of no worthwhile purpose.

That, to me, isn't a logical decision - it's a rational decision. It aids me, to dismiss her.

But, honestly speaking, I've got no idea how much Se I have, or don't have -- it seems to be somewhat hidden from me.

When I use excessive force, I don't actually notice. If it's noted to me that I used excessive force, then I will stand behind the fact that I used a reasonable amount of force for the situation at hand -

Now, here's where it gets tricky. Sometimes my force jumps up when there is a lot of "noise" around me - when things irritate, or grind on me. And I want to get rid of them quickly, and efficiently.

But to me - it's not about power, it's about simplification. It's like reducing the scope of a problem, so that I can deal with what's in front of me minus the negative influences.

To this end, I have sometimes, in the past used physical forcee to erradicate undesirables from my sight.. and what I've found, is that they seem to come back. Which means I must once again erradicate them.

They then seem to decide that I'm bluffing, and so I push them a little, and they start getting disconcerted, so I push them a little more.

Now this pushing, I do, does have a purpose of raising intensity. But it's so that I can "see" them clearer. It's so that I can get a "feel" for them. It's because I'm *not* very good at registering willpower, force, etc .. and so I need it to raise, before I can understand where they're coming from.

In the same manner - in normal every day situations, I'm really not very aware about will - and how it's utilised. It's only at extremes, that I notice it. And at these extremes I tend to react quickly, and become more forceful. But doing so makes me hot, and dehydrated, so I have to drink a lot of water, and cool down.

And if I don't get these cool down periods, then I tend to just get rid of anything that'll heat me up too much, in case I overheat.

Now, if the usage of force relates to the desire to be "cool" so that I can feel comfortable, that means that it could just as well, be that I'm reacitng from a desire to feel clear, and not constricted, rather than to gain power -

But if gaining power, to me, is about reducing impedements, rather than having large quantities of power..

And if in "positions of power" I act like I can give the impression that I don't give a shit. And that it's this not giving a shit, that seems to make me look power-hungry, could that make me seem more Se'ish?

And thus, could this actually be a drive for Ni, and the accumulation of vision. And detraction of anything that'll get in the way of the vision.

As when people engage in power trips, gossip mongering etc, all that shit .. well it gets in the way of my vision.

If anyone could comment on if they see any usage of Se. And if so how much, and with what intended purpose could you please advise me. It's an area that I really don't have much feedback on, in real life.

[Benny]

An example of this in real life...

Is when I'm interacting with people, and the intensity rises, and they become unsure of themselves, I don't ask them if they're okay. I just assume that they'll kick back in when they've finished being ratty.

[XoX]

An example of this in real life...

Is when I'm interacting with people, and the intensity rises, and they become unsure of themselves, I don't ask them if they're okay. I just assume that they'll kick back in when they've finished being ratty.

To me you are pretty much the only ENTj here who sounds like my friend who I have used to think as an ENTj. I might be wrong but perhaps you could be made the new stick against which other people's ENTjness is measured. At least that would be a new kind of approach.

What you just described above is exactly how my ENTj friend behaves. This is the first time anyone have actually been able to explain the strange features in his interactions with other people.

If you are not ENTj then I would be interested to know what are you

[Benny]

An example of this in real life...

Is when I'm interacting with people, and the intensity rises, and they become unsure of themselves, I don't ask them if they're okay. I just assume that they'll kick back in when they've finished being ratty.

To me you are pretty much the only ENTj here who sounds like my friend who I have used to think as an ENTj. I might be wrong but perhaps you could be made the new stick against which other people's ENTjness is measured. At least that would be a new kind of approach.

Joy is trying to say that I don't even have Te as a front-running function. Of course what Joy says isn't necessarily valid.

But *something* is prominent in me, and people *do* seem to notice it.

What you just described above is exactly how my ENTj friend behaves. This is the first time anyone have actually been able to explain the strange features in his interactions with other people.

Well, my interaction with others is described generally as "Sometimes I interact really intenesly with people" and other times I "Don't say much".

Although I find if I don't say anything then people *do* seem to notice that.

Also I can kind of home in on people, and be a little intrusive. I don't always know when I should "ease up" in social interactions more. Especially if no-one reminds me.

I can also be quite unreactive, at times. And quite reactive at other times.

If you are not ENTj then I would be interested to know what are you

Well, nothing else is in the running at the moment. But I'm open for input.

[XoX]

To this end, I have sometimes, in the past used physical forcee to erradicate undesirables from my sight.. and what I've found, is that they seem to come back. Which means I must once again erradicate them.

They then seem to decide that I'm bluffing, and so I push them a little, and they start getting disconcerted, so I push them a little more.

Now this pushing, I do, does have a purpose of raising intensity. But it's so that I can "see" them clearer. It's so that I can get a "feel" for them. It's because I'm *not* very good at registering willpower, force, etc .. and so I need it to raise, before I can understand where they're coming from.

Wow. I have seen this happening. The intensity goes HIGH but in the end nothing happens. The ENTj was just somehow measuring the other person. It looked like a big fight is coming but in the end nothing came. It is actually quite funny. It also often looks worse than it really is. Some people find it hard to understand though. It seems like the ENTj wants to smash your skull but the climax never comes. People don't understand this behavior well. I'm not sure if even I get it 100% right but anyways

[Kim]

There is Se for you:

Of course, when people spout shit like that, I'd rather dismiss them, or deal with it in one go, rather than to deal with lots of small little tidbits of annoying things.

And thus I see Joy as an enemy - soemthing to be extinguished, and of no worthwhile purpose.

Now, here's where it gets tricky. Sometimes my force jumps up when there is a lot of "noise" around me - when things irritate, or grind on me. And I want to get rid of them quickly, and efficiently.

To this end, I have sometimes, in the past used physical forcee to erradicate undesirables from my sight.. and what I've found, is that they seem to come back. Which means I must once again erradicate them.

They then seem to decide that I'm bluffing, and so I push them a little, and they start getting disconcerted, so I push them a little more.

And at these extremes I tend to react quickly, and become more forceful. But doing so makes me hot, and dehydrated, so I have to drink a lot of water, and cool down.

Alll this is Se, which you are trying to rationalize as follows:

And thus, could this actually be a drive for Ni, and the accumulation of vision. And detraction of anything that'll get in the way of the vision.

As when people engage in power trips, gossip mongering etc, all that shit .. well it gets in the way of my vision.

That might be the trigger, but all those examples are still . I have never seen you use Te (as an ENTj would). It is always Se or Ni.

[XoX]

So is the claim that he is ESTp then? Or just an ENTj who uses Se? I just know he sounds a lot like my friend.

[Kim]

To me you are pretty much the only ENTj here who sounds like my friend who I have used to think as an ENTj. I might be wrong but perhaps you could be made the new stick against which other people's ENTjness is measured. At least that would be a new kind of approach.

Let's not. Benny does not strike me as ENTj and besides, it is one of the more misleading approaches. I, personally, am sick of hearing "s/he is so much like Kim, s/he must be ENFp!" It has gotten to the point where ENFps are described as reactive around here. Kim is reactive, but ENFps are not.

So to conclude, I don't think measuring type against one member is a good idea. :wink:

[Benny]

To this end, I have sometimes, in the past used physical forcee to erradicate undesirables from my sight.. and what I've found, is that they seem to come back. Which means I must once again erradicate them.

They then seem to decide that I'm bluffing, and so I push them a little, and they start getting disconcerted, so I push them a little more.

Now this pushing, I do, does have a purpose of raising intensity. But it's so that I can "see" them clearer. It's so that I can get a "feel" for them. It's because I'm *not* very good at registering willpower, force, etc .. and so I need it to raise, before I can understand where they're coming from.

Wow. I have seen this happening. The intensity goes HIGH but in the end nothing happens. The ENTj was just somehow measuring the other person. It looked like a big fight is coming but in the end nothing came. It is actually quite funny. It also often looks worse than it really is. Some people find it hard to understand though. It seems like the ENTj wants to smash your skull but the climax never comes. People don't understand this behavior well. I'm not sure if even I get it 100% right but anyways

If it helps at all, if someone asks me if I want to smash their skull I ask them why I'd want to smash their skull. And if there's any reason that I should do such ...

I'm pretty calm/logical as intensity rises..

*BUT* if people lose control, that can lead me to attack.

As long as people don't lose control, and don't try to make cutting remarks then I'm comfortable.

[Benny]

To me you are pretty much the only ENTj here who sounds like my friend who I have used to think as an ENTj. I might be wrong but perhaps you could be made the new stick against which other people's ENTjness is measured. At least that would be a new kind of approach.

Let's not. Benny does not strike me as ENTj and besides, it is one of the more misleading approaches. I, personally, am sick of hearing "s/he is so much like Kim, s/he must be ENFp!" It has gotten to the point where ENFps are described as reactive around here. Kim is reactive, but ENFps are not.

So to conclude, I don't think measuring type against one member is a good idea. :wink:

For some reason all ENFp's seem the same to me. To the point that I can't tell which one said something.

[XoX]

To me you are pretty much the only ENTj here who sounds like my friend who I have used to think as an ENTj. I might be wrong but perhaps you could be made the new stick against which other people's ENTjness is measured. At least that would be a new kind of approach.

Let's not. Benny does not strike me as ENTj and besides, it is one of the more misleading approaches. I, personally, am sick of hearing "s/he is so much like Kim, s/he must be ENFp!" It has gotten to the point where ENFps are described as reactive around here. Kim is reactive, but ENFps are not.

So to conclude, I don't think measuring type against one member is a good idea. :wink:

Well he is still a lot like my friend who I thought is ENTj So this interests me anyways. I am pretty confused nowadays of who are ENTps, who are ESTps and who are ENTjs.

[Kim]

So is the claim that he is ESTp then? Or just an ENTj who uses Se? I just know he sounds a lot like my friend.

I would say ESTp, but who knows. I just don't see anywhere. Even Ashton who uses lots of also uses a lot of and is clearly dominant. I tend to think Benny is >

[Kim]

Well he is still a lot like my friend who I thought is ENTj So this interests me anyways. I am pretty confused nowadays of who are ENTps, who are ESTps and who are ENTjs.

I nothing else, ENTjs love their Te. :wink:

[XoX]

So is the claim that he is ESTp then? Or just an ENTj who uses Se? I just know he sounds a lot like my friend.

I would say ESTp, but who knows. I just don't see anywhere. Even Ashton who uses lots of also uses a lot of and is clearly dominant. I tend to think Benny is >

Then again how much similarities he shares with Herzy? I don't see ESTps to be such all powerful crushing force Benny portraits himself to be. They are more likely to mislead their "victim" and strike their weak spot when they least expect it or something. Not raise intensity like that. But I don't know. We would need some more ENTjs and ESTps to discuss. I'm kinda on thin ice here. I still see Benny as ENTj until something new comes up. I'm not ready to retype my friends yet

[XoX]

Well he is still a lot like my friend who I thought is ENTj So this interests me anyways. I am pretty confused nowadays of who are ENTps, who are ESTps and who are ENTjs.

I nothing else, ENTjs love their Te. :wink:

I don't even know what is Te and Ti anymore Which one do I show more?
I would think Te but many people who I have asked to rank my functions say Ti > Te so I'm kind of confused about that.

[Benny]

So is the claim that he is ESTp then? Or just an ENTj who uses Se? I just know he sounds a lot like my friend.

I would say ESTp, but who knows. I just don't see anywhere. Even Ashton who uses lots of also uses a lot of and is clearly dominant. I tend to think Benny is >

Then again how much similarities he shares with Herzy? I don't see ESTps to be such all powerful crushing force Benny portraits himself to be. They are more likely to mislead their "victim" and strike their weak spot when they least expect it or something. Not raise intensity like that. But I don't know. We would need some more ENTjs and ESTps to discuss. I'm kinda on thin ice here. I still see Benny as ENTj until something new comes up. I'm not ready to retype my friends yet

ESTp females I've known have been very .. tense ... But they've always been kind of playful...

Whereas I'm not always like that.

I think I find it easier to be serious than ESTp's.

[FDG]

I'm more on the playful side than on the intensity-raising one; unless the environment is a debate-like one.

[Benny]

I'm more on the playful side than on the intensity-raising one; unless the environment is a debate-like one.

Actually, when I'm not working much I tend to be more playful. And when I'm working a lot I tend to be more intensity-raising.

When I'm being more playful I have to "let go" a lot. It's something I have to remind myself of. Otherwise I'm too forced, and rough.

[Benny]

I also make sudden abrupt movements...

Which may correlate with Se?

Like if I decide to do something I tend to start running; move quickly, long strides, jumping etc.

But when I don't have much to do I tend to walk slower.

So my level of business can be guaged by how fast I move.

Although, when asked to do minor things when busy, I'm often happy to help. But if I'm moving slowly, or don't talk much then it's pretty hard to interact with me.

[FDG]

No, I move abruply as well.

Abrupt movements = rational functions.

[aestrivex]

come on, people. we're typing somebody a certain way because he makes "abrupt movements?"

[FDG]

Your lack of won't help you to notice that nonetheless.

[aestrivex]

that's absolutely true. but that's not my point.

the presence of abrupt movements is not a particularly good indicator of type. there is a point when measurable psychology stops and individual idiosyncracies predominate.

[FDG]

that's absolutely true. but that's not my point.

the presence of abrupt movements is not a particularly good indicator of type. there is a point when measurable psychology stops and individual idiosyncracies predominate.

Uh, anyone said "ALL ENTJS HAVE ABRUPT MOVEMENTS"?

We just said "Me too", stop.

[aestrivex]

Abrupt movements = rational functions.

[FDG]

Yeah, that's true. So what? that just means "j", not a whole typing.

[aestrivex]

whether it means j or a whole typing is rather irrelevant. abrupt movements, as you have just agreed with your penultimate post, is not sufficiently widespread or significant to have any sort of effect on type.

ok, no that's not technically what you said; that's my opinion. but if you believe that everybody who demonstrates abrupt movements is a j, then your previous question would be rendered true:

Uh, anyone said "ALL ENTJS HAVE ABRUPT MOVEMENTS"?

if all js have abrupt movements, then yes.

[FDG]

Geez, it's not like I was stating an absolute truth.

[Benny]

niffweed .. if someone says that girls have breasts, would you try and track down a girl that didn't have breasts?

[aestrivex]

what does that have to do with my comment? the situations are not even comparable.

[Benny]

what does that have to do with my comment? the situations are not even comparable.

Yeah, they are. If something is by default right. But doesn't describe the intrinsic makeup of something, then it's a bit iffy to rely on it - but it's good enough to take a reasonable stab in the dark.

It's like automatic mail sorting in the postal system. It doesn't have to be 100% right, to be useful. If it screws up sometimes, then the system is improved.

Sure some people might bitch if a letter gets delivered to the wrong address. But people need a little bit of excitement, or they'll go brain-dead.

[Expat]

To me you are pretty much the only ENTj here who sounds like my friend who I have used to think as an ENTj. I might be wrong but perhaps you could be made the new stick against which other people's ENTjness is measured. At least that would be a new kind of approach.

It would not be a wise approach. You are taking too much for granted. First, your impression that Benny and your friend are of the same type might be correct - although even that is not certain - but that is no evidence that they are ENTjs.

Secondly, as has already been pointed out, it's not a good idea to use any single person as a "stick" to measure other people's type. Not only there are differences in subtypes, but there are also individual traits, which are not type related.

It happens too often here already, with people saying "I can't be of the same type as person A, I don't share attributes x, y, z". Which are often not clearly, or at all, type related.

[Benny]

To me you are pretty much the only ENTj here who sounds like my friend who I have used to think as an ENTj. I might be wrong but perhaps you could be made the new stick against which other people's ENTjness is measured. At least that would be a new kind of approach.

It would not be a wise approach. You are taking too much for granted. First, your impression that Benny and your friend are of the same type might be correct - although even that is not certain - but that is no evidence that they are ENTjs.

Secondly, as has already been pointed out, it's not a good idea to use any single person as a "stick" to measure other people's type. Not only there are differences in subtypes, but there are also individual traits, which are not type related.

It happens too often here already, with people saying "I can't be of the same type as person A, I don't share attributes x, y, z". Which are often not clearly, or at all, type related.

I agree that it's not a wise idea. Although, just to make things complicated..

If we bulid up a representation of all the "X is like Y" "Y is like Z", and thus "X must be like Z" and then go and do the whole thing backwards then we go to:

Z would ideally be like X, if X~=Y~=Z.

So...

With a lot of them built up ...

You can then go, and take a subset of them. And start judging the authors based on their trustworthyness to give valid representations and then "see if it fits"

And although this will never be a deterministic solution. It's the long way to go about things -

Now,

When we identify, and see people, we notice certain things about them. And so when we see people using traits that someone else uses, it makes sense to start linking them together.

I do this for instance, with manipulative people. They all seem to link together for me - I notice it when I first start interacting with them. The connection is strong, but the bottom is weak - they can easily drop out -

And then I watch them .. I see how they drop out, what they do, and I try and track with what intent they're doing it. That way I can stay ahead of them with an awareness of intent. And foresee what may happen.

And that means I can "in my mind" deny any counterability to them, because I'm "styaing alert".

Although, if I'm feeling over-taxed, I could just stare at them until they get pissed off. Assuming that they'll then go and cry or something and I can get on with whatever I'm doing. (although it feels a lot "nicer" in my head than when I write it down)

[Joy]

I wouldn't rule out any of the Se types at this point. ISTj seems as likely as ESTp. He certainly does seem much more tense than any ESTp I've ever met.

[Joy]

niffweed

http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...=107603#107603

[aestrivex]

Yeah, they are. If something is by default right. But doesn't describe the intrinsic makeup of something, then it's a bit iffy to rely on it - but it's good enough to take a reasonable stab in the dark.

It's like automatic mail sorting in the postal system. It doesn't have to be 100% right, to be useful. If it screws up sometimes, then the system is improved.

Sure some people might bitch if a letter gets delivered to the wrong address. But people need a little bit of excitement, or they'll go brain-dead.

listen, my whole point is just that the whole thing of abrupt movements is not really a valuable indicator of type. when you are looking for the difference between a man and a woman and are unable to immediately differentiate the two, looking for a pair of breasts can be an effective strategy. this is because women generally have large breasts and men do not.

however, who is to say that any other type doesn't also make abrupt movements? i just think the whole thing is dubious. and i'm tired of this discussion.

[aestrivex]

niffweed

http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...=107603#107603

there are several ideas about Te/Ti in this thread, none of which are very well presented and several of which are contradictory. i don't know what you intended me to take from it.

[Joy]

[Benny]

Yeah, they are. If something is by default right. But doesn't describe the intrinsic makeup of something, then it's a bit iffy to rely on it - but it's good enough to take a reasonable stab in the dark.

It's like automatic mail sorting in the postal system. It doesn't have to be 100% right, to be useful. If it screws up sometimes, then the system is improved.

Sure some people might bitch if a letter gets delivered to the wrong address. But people need a little bit of excitement, or they'll go brain-dead.

listen, my whole point is just that the whole thing of abrupt movements is not really a valuable indicator of type. when you are looking for the difference between a man and a woman and are unable to immediately differentiate the two, looking for a pair of breasts can be an effective strategy. this is because women generally have large breasts and men do not.

however, who is to say that any other type doesn't also make abrupt movements? i just think the whole thing is dubious. and i'm tired of this discussion.

What I'm saying is that it can be useful, and may not always be right, but can cut lead towards the solution.

Normally when you look at someone, it's pretty obvious if someone's male or female, but if someone asks you how to distinguish then it's suddenly a lot more complicated -

When you try and attack everything with validity, then suddenly nothing's valid. And you may as well fail before you start.

It's better to screw up, and learn from your mistakes. Then to avoid making the mistakes in the first place.

And even if fuzzy-logic is being used as long as it's towards valuable ends, then maximum value can be harvested.

And to that same end, if a girl has small breasts, you can say that they're not really very woman-like. They're just a little girl.

Sometimes it takes years to arrive at what is destined to be, and earlier solutions, are replaced with more advanced solutions.

But as soon as you start attacking any earlier solutions, then you can't really get to any advanced solutions.

If you want to contradict the abrupt movements thing, then feel free to. Just give me something that actually contradicts it, rather than "It could be contradicted".

[Benny]

niffweed

http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...=107603#107603

there are several ideas about Te/Ti in this thread, none of which are very well presented and several of which are contradictory. i don't know what you intended me to take from it.

Your overwhelming degree of cynicalism, without anything worthwhile to offer seems to encourage me to not take you seriously.

Could you please try to reword what you say in the future, so as that it'll come across better.