So can anyone provide an explanation, considering that the supervisee should be feeling "pain".
Also, in a conflicting relationship, how does pain occur, for example between INTj and ESFp?
Why does this pain not occur between INTj and ESTp?
Examples of and reactions to PoLR "Hits"
So can anyone provide an explanation, considering that the supervisee should be feeling "pain".
Also, in a conflicting relationship, how does pain occur, for example between INTj and ESFp?
Why does this pain not occur between INTj and ESTp?
Originally Posted by Hugo
About the INTj-ESTp, for example, ESTps have Ti, so they will however provide logical motivations for theiractions. This will upset less the INTj. On the contrary, ESFp are the most likely to take
(no offence meant here).
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I think it goes like this.
In a an INTj-ESFp conflicting relationship, the ESFp will notice the INTj's weak
The INTj will listen to the ESFp's interpretation of an event, and then go on to dismantle the ESFp's "logic". "What you just said makes no sense whatsoever, it actually went like this" etc hitting the ESFp's.
Between ESTp and INTj is more one-sided, since the ESTp will still say the same things as the ESFp, above, but he won't be sensitive to attacks on his logic since it's also strong.
Between ISTps and ENTjs, I think I have an explanation -- the ISTp probably does notice the ENTj's weakand that makes the ISTp have a low opinion of the ENTj's abilities. However, the ISTps are perhaps less inclined to actually say something because of their
PoLR, which makes them insecure as to how people will react to criticisms.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
how about for isfp and entj
Of course I can only give the ENTj's point of view. But I think it's straightforward.
We hit the ISFp's
In theory, ISFps would hit my
So, in practice, what happens between me and most ISFps is not a mutual PoLR smacking, but rather, I hit their
I've never really understood the entj polr, and still don't.
Ok, I'll try to describe it from others' point of view --
Most obviously, it is a sort of insensitivity to aesthetics. For instance, I will wear the same clothes on two different social occasions, but I don't expect people to notice it, or to care, because I don't notice that on other people, unless I made a conscious effort to pay attention to that (which I usually don't). But then someone will ask me, "why are you always wearing the same clothes, everybody noticed it and found it odd".
Likewise, it doesn't disturb me in the least whether my car, or my desk, is untidy, as long as I can find my way in the untidiness. And I don't care, nor do I even notice, if others' desks or cars are untidy. But some people do notice it, and do care.
Louise gave a good example in this thread, http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...r=asc&start=15 , about a former ENTj boss:
That is the ENTj's problem regarding their PoLR. Her boss probably did not care about her own clothes enough to pick others for the party, and since she probably seldom notices what others are wearing, she assumed that nobody would notice - or care - what she was wearing, either.Well - once she wore the same clothes that she wears to work, out to this guy's birthday party...people thought that was a little strange.
That may be extended to most aspects of sensorial perception.
The CEO of my agency is an entj and she decorates all the locations beautifully.
She's a snappy dresser, too.
Entp
ILE
I dont understand the emphasis of aesthetics with Si/Ni. What happened to the emphasis with time and space?
So if that doesn't seem to fit your CEO, what can I say, except to take the easy way out and suggest she's not ENTj, or that, being made aware of that weakness, especially as a woman, she goes out of her way, consciously, to compensate for it.
Or how else would you describe the ENTj's PoLR?
The problem with socionics is the problem with everything that becomes popular, people start to deviate too far from where we started off. I've started to realize that people make a lot of crap up that seems to do little with Jung's original funcitons.
Introverted Sensation has to do with the subjestive sensation of objects, and personal space. That's it. It has to do with taking a litte bit from an outside object, then closing yourself off from that object. Introverted Sensing says to itself, "What's the point? Why do I need these 'objects' anymore? I can already feel them without them being there. I can sense it whenever I want."
Introverted Sensing needs some sort of "sensation" that they can be able to pull as many different feelings and meanings out of, otherwise they get bored with it. We need to experience one thing in a hundred ways.
Having a weak Si means that you don't relate to what I just said, lol.
Yeah, that is a pretty good way of saying what Si is to other people who relate to Si, but if I did not understand beforehand that Si is faithfulness to the quality of a known experience, I would not have a clue what this means.The problem with socionics is the problem with everything that becomes popular, people start to deviate too far from where we started off. I've started to realize that people make a lot of crap up that seems to do little with Jung's original funcitons.
Introverted Sensation has to do with the subjestive sensation of objects, and personal space. That's it. It has to do with taking a litte bit from an outside object, then closing yourself off from that object. Introverted Sensing says to itself, "What's the point? Why do I need these 'objects' anymore? I can already feel them without them being there. I can sense it whenever I want."
Introverted Sensing needs some sort of "sensation" that they can be able to pull as many different feelings and meanings out of, otherwise they get bored with it. We need to experience one thing in a hundred ways.
Having a weak Si means that you don't relate to what I just said, lol.
Thanks for answering!
I had a weird thought today. I remembered meeting someone at the Oregon Coast Aquarium 2 summer's ago. I thought it was funny that she was the first person I ever knew that liked to actually touch and memorize the textures of objects. I do it all the time which is why I noticed. I memorize the imprint which helps me later remember it. This is especially helpful with plants and their numerous genera, species, subspecies and cultivars. She tested as an MBTI INFP btw. Not that it means anything. Do you think there is any correlation? Im betting in a PEP survey that we'd both test highest for visual (because it builds up for unseen layers behind and within the instantly visual layers) but what about in type? And why her? I still remember my aunt always scolding me for wanting to touch everything lol.
Si is not faithful to the quality of a known experience. One of the problems occurs when an Si type becomes TOO detached from the object. It's bases itself off some sort of outside object initially, but, as I said, closes itself off from that object, which means we become unfaithful to it over time.
Jadae: Are you saying that having a weak Introverted Sensing is like needing to touch everything? I think I might agree...
Just as a function in itself, I would agree with what you said above ... but placing the function inside of the socionic model where it will be interacting with other functions will make it behave the way I implied.
I dont know what Im saying. Im curious/wondering. I cant really even answer your statement without knowing for sure her true type and my own.
Thanks Jadae, I can actually see what you are saying.
I can see the same thing in my ENFj Mom. Ever since I was young, I could sense that she was just "different". I always felt like she didn't know when to restrain herself or not have to touch something. Interestingly, my INTp Dad, I can see, has a similar problem, if somewhat differnt. He likes to touch people (like me) when it's clear we are sensitve to touch and want to be left alone. I remembered Cone saying that he actually does this to people as well, so I took a mental note of it, becaue it reminded me of my Dad. It makes perfect sense it is a poor Si which makes these types need somesort of Se. I guess these are the types of things that I sort of noticed before, but it's interesting to bring them to conciousness with words (which is often hard for perceivers...).
This is the kind of talk I said I'd like to have more of.
Needing to touch is a strong Se.
thing.
CoolAs long as no one gets on my case for being "too serious," it's fine with me.
I'm hoping the INFp and INFj's can comment on this aspect. It would help a lot. Actually, even INTp and INTj as well.
Supervisor relations are hard for me to deal with. The biggest issue I think is that ENFjs are constantly trying to reassure me, help me and complement me which are all things that irk me. But at the same time I understand that they are being nice and that they are not trying to be condescending, so I avoid confrontation. I don’t think these relationships are as healthy as they appear on the surface.
My ENFj friend was a bit too controlling at times, plus our interests just seemed to progressively differ as we aged. Other than that, he was the only true nonconformist I've ever known.
For me, arguing with Jadae is like fighting a bear. It seems like I always miss what he has viewed in perfect clarity. No matter what you do, you are going to get mauled.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
If you have a function in your Super-Ego block, then you have either an inferior or superiority complex about it and are either making it look bigger than it really is or protecting it from notice because you are touchy about it.
I wonder if my brother might be an INTj. I bet I can get him to take a test.
So if he is, would he be my supervisor or would I be his? It feels like I would be his supervisor, but he's younger than I am so it's hard to tell.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Forcing someone with an Se PoLR to be more considerate about new experiences or to force to consider alot of facts, figures, statistics is a way to piss him or her off.
That sounds like ENFp or INFp ...
Exactly Diane!
Side note: How many have read Jung's books? Ive always wondered what he was on. I also love the cultural bias of the time lol.
Another side note: I asked my best friend what he thought of me being intro or extro. His answer, after deciphering his crappy writing in email, was the summary of, "Youre extroverted around me and those we know but not others." That wasnt very helpful lol. He also stated that I was too serious bah lol. One of the funny things I find is that the desciptions for half the functions in INFj and ENFj sound extremely similar in the sense that both are reserved in new suroundings and people and expressive in comfortable settings. So confusing sometimes...
I was raised by an internet den of INTJ's
God, you must be the most dangerous threat to the Gammas.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
I can't relate to that at all.
For me, the
avoiding surrounding details or noticing too much detail and obsessing about it, suspicion or defensiveness about personal appearance, distant physical look in eyes and appearing to others as though unaware, walking or looking past people, objects, and things as though they were not there, static taste and inflexible habits, unsure of aesthetic understanding, or an obsession with cleanliness.
The INTj is the ENFp's supervisor.
This is the kind of thing I'd love to explore. I cannot deduce it to anything social, cultural, from my past, etc. And why her, too? I still remember her vividly as she traced the face of the large-scale bat model there just like I would (and did).I can't relate to that at all.
For me, the
avoiding surrounding details or noticing too much detail and obsessing about it, suspicion or defensiveness about personal appearance, distant physical look in eyes and appearing to others as though unaware, walking or looking past people, objects, and things as though they were not there, static taste and inflexible habits, unsure of aesthetic understanding, or an obsession with cleanliness.
Maybe it was a luck-of-the-draw developmental kind of thing, like one day you just thought, "I think I'll feel things today."
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
I'm not sure whether to ask someone else whether you are extroverted or introverted in the common meaning of those terms is very helpful. I am getting the impression that too many people are too quick to rule out some possible typings because "no way I'm an extrovert" etc.
Besides what rmcnew said, I think that INFjs's PoLR is most sensitive regarding aggressive behavior from others - the sort of "we'll do this because that's what I want, and that is that. No further discussion" kind of behavior.
I agree as well. I tend to be very touchy although I am slightly paranoid about personal space so I tend to leave the touching (and accidental breaking) to inanimate objects.
In human biology I loved playing with the hominid skulls. I don't think I can relate to objects unless I deliberately engage them in that way.
I agree.I can't relate to that at all.
For me, the
avoiding surrounding details or noticing too much detail and obsessing about it, suspicion or defensiveness about personal appearance, distant physical look in eyes and appearing to others as though unaware, walking or looking past people, objects, and things as though they were not there, static taste and inflexible habits, unsure of aesthetic understanding, or an obsession with cleanliness.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
.
@Diana: fair enough, but what if that had not been an option - if you somehow had to work with someone like that?
An aspect of the
Expat wrote:
This is true for me too. A lot of it has to do with feeling that such behaviour is very aggressive (and aggressive = dangerous in my mind) and as such intimidating. The other side of that is also true - I have huge issues trying to push/enforce my will on people. Part of it is that I really don't know how, part of it is that I feel almost evil doing it. But maybe that's just me and completely unrelated to type.An aspect of the
Possibly ethical-intuitive introvert.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote