A Summarized review of Hidden Agendas

[Muddy]

So yeah in summary deltas seek to protect and maintain their bubble from outside forces, while betas try to make the world their bubble.

[uncivilized]

I definitely don't have an Si HA if it actually operates the way as described in this thread. I don't ever really put things into categories such as "that is ugly" or "that is beautiful." Everything is a mix of those qualities, a snake is both beautiful and ugly, I analyze the parts, the essence of it. Someone might say a man or woman is ugly, and s/he might be in some ways, but I'll see the parts that aren't, maybe the way their hair is, or their facial structure, or the shape of their eyes. I seem to see things as an assemblage of parts, feel I'm good at teasing out such details, everything is a mix of the repulsive and attractive to me.

[Airman]

I definitely don't have an Si HA if it actually operates the way as described in this thread. I don't ever really put things into categories such as "that is ugly" or "that is beautiful." Everything is a mix of those qualities, a snake is both beautiful and ugly, I analyze the parts, the essence of it. Someone might say a man or woman is ugly, and s/he might be in some ways, but I'll see the parts that aren't, maybe the way their hair is, or their facial structure, or the shape of their eyes. I seem to see things as an assemblage of parts, feel I'm good at teasing out such details, everything is a mix of the repulsive and attractive to me.

Actually this is a Judging function of the psyche, though it is associated with Si, it must be also associated with Ti to produce this strong sort of categorization of things into 'ugly or beautiful', 'comfortable or uncomfortable' etc. As in for example ISTj which has the automatic categorization of things into labels and categories and understands them this way, or in ISTp where there is Ti as the strongest function (Demonstrative). These two types tend to be the most aesthetes because in ISTj the leading element is Ti = categorization and the strongest element is Si which is its Demonstrative function. In ISTp as I have described the opposite happens, producing a very similar effect regarding this. Also important to notice that Si as Hidden Agenda has to do with HEALTH and COMFORT first rather than beauty, though of course Si is the aesthetic element per se, so beauty cannot escape its influence. When I mention the Demonstrative as the strongest function of the psyche this may seem new but it is a fact, and it was not originally suggested by me, but by the friend who introduced me to Socionics, and he said that in a conversation some four years ago. So I give him any credit for enlightening people about Demonstrative being the strongest function of psyche.
@Myst : I will, I just have an exam in less than 6 hours so I've been busy studying Political Science for the past 48 hours and I think I might get some two to three hours of rest before the exam, or better said I should.

[Myst]

Actually this is a Judging function of the psyche, though it is associated with Si, it must be also associated with Ti to produce this strong sort of categorization of things into 'ugly or beautiful', 'comfortable or uncomfortable' etc. As in for example ISTj which has the automatic categorization of things into labels and categories and understands them this way, or in ISTp where there is Ti as the strongest function (Demonstrative). These two types tend to be the most aesthetes because in ISTj the leading element is Ti = categorization and the strongest element is Si which is its Demonstrative function. In ISTp as I have described the opposite happens, producing a very similar effect regarding this. Also important to notice that Si as Hidden Agenda has to do with HEALTH and COMFORT first rather than beauty, though of course Si is the aesthetic element per se, so beauty cannot escape its influence. When I mention the Demonstrative as the strongest function of the psyche this may seem new but it is a fact, and it was not originally suggested by me, but by the friend who introduced me to Socionics, and he said that in a conversation some four years ago. So I give him any credit for enlightening people about Demonstrative being the strongest function of psyche.

Uh, Ti is not just categorizing... there is a lot more to understanding than that. Demonstrative is a strong function but the strongest would be the Base still.

@Myst : I will, I just have an exam in less than 6 hours so I've been busy studying Political Science for the past 48 hours and I think I might get some two to three hours of rest before the exam, or better said I should.

OK cool thanks & good luck to that exam

[Airman]

Uh, Ti is not just categorizing... there is a lot more to understanding than that. Demonstrative is a strong function but the strongest would be the Base still.




OK cool thanks & good luck to that exam

I have to clarify that Demonstrative function is the strongest when it is being 'used' or accessed by someone. It is not THE MOST USED function or THE MOST PREFERRED function , this would be the Base. The Demonstrative is neverthelhess the strongest because, this is my hypothesis, one is not fully aware of HOW to use it moderately, and it is only used for periods of time, so it would amount that when one is using this function it is used in an often exaggerated manner (clear example to me Se demonstratives LSE, ESE), otherwise than in a more moderate manner as in Se base such as SLE, SEE. You can observe this for yourself and check if it is a fact or not. I am not telling absolute truths here. Just what my observation confirms. Thanks for the 'good luck on the exam', actually I was so lucky the Professor cancelled the exam and postponed it to next Friday morning, so I was better than lucky because I've got more time to review the entire thing.

[Myst]

I have to clarify that Demonstrative function is the strongest when it is being 'used' or accessed by someone. It is not THE MOST USED function or THE MOST PREFERRED function , this would be the Base. The Demonstrative is neverthelhess the strongest because, this is my hypothesis, one is not fully aware of HOW to use it moderately, and it is only used for periods of time, so it would amount that when one is using this function it is used in an often exaggerated manner (clear example to me Se demonstratives LSE, ESE), otherwise than in a more moderate manner as in Se base such as SLE, SEE. You can observe this for yourself and check if it is a fact or not. I am not telling absolute truths here. Just what my observation confirms. Thanks for the 'good luck on the exam', actually I was so lucky the Professor cancelled the exam and postponed it to next Friday morning, so I was better than lucky because I've got more time to review the entire thing.

Sure it depends on how you define "strong". I don't agree though about the reasoning here, my observations differ; but this is off topic here.

[Beautiful sky]

I just like to keep people I love healthy

[Socionics Is A Cult]

I have found in the past that reading PoLR descriptions can be highly illustrative of what may be going on when someone uses their HA. (Another way of looking at the HA being that behaviour that displays out of a fear or a dislike of manifestations of their PoLR function, or maybe merely a reflection of the order of their priorities.

Si:

 

EIIs are typically negligent of their surroundings and have difficulty keeping track of objects or constantly monitoring things and people around them.
They can be passive and self-absorbed, often preferring to wait for things to happen rather than make them happen. As such, they tend to have quite a number of lost opportunities. To a certain extent, EIIs can be oblivious to hints from someone who is romantically interested in them. Therefore, this gives the other party the wrong impression that they are not interested in them.
Outsiders often think the EII is oblivious to reality because they will often neglect basic needs. Although it is by no means necessary, this may also manifest itself as a general rejection or aversion to violence or force as a means or way of life.

 

The LII hates being ordered what to do, and chafes especially under orders that don't make sense to him. In such cases the LII is likely to criticize the authority — but if he does he is not subtle about it, and usually ends up being marked as a "rebel" and feeling even more frustrated than he did to begin with. An LII works best alone, so that he doesn't have to subordinate (to) others — or constantly negotiate his priorities, which strains his patience and diverts his time and attention away from reworking his understanding; if he is forced to waste time defending what he already knows, he gives up the freedom to deepen his understanding further. He does not tolerate pushiness combined with close-mindedness.
The LII does not like being simply told "get real" or "get off your duff", which he views as crude, intrusive, and insulting. He prefers to be left alone - or better, included in an atmosphere of open discussion that is receptive to his thoughts and thereby inspire him to develop them more.
If the LII has a problem that cannot be solved intellectually, but requires direct personal confrontation, he may resort to total avoidance rather than approaching the person directly, which he tends to think will produce only frustration and contempt. The LII thinks that, in an ideal world, everyone would just listen to reason instead of insisting on having their own way.

Fe:

 

SLEs have trouble evaluating the internal emotional state of others unless it is accompanied by a visible emotional expression. When unable to do so, they become uneasy. When an individual expresses negative emotions, SLEs feel that they are unable to offer the support needed; they get uncomfortable and confused, and as a result, will not respond appropriately to the situation or will react in a way which is unhelpful to the individual. SLEs themselves constantly seem emotionally guarded, and so very rarely will anyone actually have the chance to "comfort" the SLE in the everyday use of the word. The best way to do so is to let the emotion run its course.
SLEs often tread carefully when it comes to interpersonal relationships because they recognize their inherent weakness in this function. They feel the need to not only be respected, but also to be held dear by others, precisely because they feel inept when it comes to relationships. Often their behavior will have the opposite effect of what they were hoping for; if they are trying to protect someone, that someone may view their "protection" as pure jealousy, and thus will attempt to break away. The SLE will respond with further limitations in order to counter what they believe is irrational rebelliousness, perhaps causing a breakdown of said relationship. Despite this, SLEs can without extra effort manage to maintain a superficial - purely physical or formal - relationship. Their IEI duals, however, have an understanding of SLEs; they know how to react with in accordance with the SLE's mood, and thereby tactfully avoid incurring any misunderstanding.
To ease their doubts about their relationships with others, SLEs are sincere when it comes to establishing new bonds with others; they feel it is important to inform others of their true nature so that they will not be taken by surprise when the SLE acts in a certain way. Likewise, the SLE will often prefer to take the initiative in establishing new friendships and relationships. This is partly due to the fact that SLEs fear psychological distance; taking a more upfront and aggressive approach would allow him to more accurately observe those around him, while removing the possibility of one's gradual avoidance of the SLE.
SLEs are under the impression that they might gain respect or admiration from others, but can never be truly loved by anyone. Sometimes, SLEs can become paranoid about their relationships with others; they often mistrust declarations of affection, and so can appear insecure.

 

Unstable in maintaining psychological distance. May have trouble making clear attraction. Can hide their personal sentiments when pushed and avoids the public examination of their desires. ILE's tend to be unaware of how others view them relationship wise, unstable in levels of trust. View relationships skeptically unless legitimized. This can result in a mistrust of others and a general wariness regarding others' opinions of them, potentially causing irrational behaviors based on misconceptions in this area. They appreciate people who can reassure them of the status of a relationship.
Emotional responses to trauma will often manifest themselves several years later, triggered by things that seem to have little to do with the event responsible for the reaction e.g. abandonment issues surface after visiting a nursing home.
An ILE may view many accepted moral standards with scorn if they do not make logical sense to him and may be frustrated if convenient loopholes in a system are said to be 'out of bounds' morally. Indeed, the ILE may come to the conclusion that if he has not done anything legally wrong, then he could not possibly have done something morally wrong. Such thinking may bemuse more ethical types. In more extreme circumstances, the ILE will see morality as just another system to be taken apart and studied, shocking types who value moral traditions when he uses logic and his clever insight to dissolve moral imperatives. e.g. "You may view human sacrifice as something inherently wrong but that's just a result of your upbringing. If you were raised an Aztec you would have seen it as a remarkable thing, believing it to be responsible for keeping your crops watered and the sun moving across the sky."

Ni:

 

The ESI is highly skeptical about ideas and opportunities that may appear not to lead anywhere specifically, and seeks concrete assurance that actual material benefits will be achieved. The ESI prefers the kind of ideation that seems to lead somewhere (offer solutions) rather than the sort that is most likely to bring upheaval and unwanted changes. So they don't want to hear about all the possible problems in a situation, they'd rather hear only the very likely problems if there are any, and the benefits.
The ESI dislikes evaluations of people's potential to engage in activities or develop skills in which they haven't had experience yet; above all he is uncomfortable with such discussions by other people regarding himself. This makes the ESI concerned about the impression he makes on other people in those areas. He is inclined to be either over-skeptical of his own potential or going to the other extreme and overestimate his possibilities in specific areas on occasion.
ESIs are often amused by, and attracted to, demonstrations of the intense use of by others if at least tangentially connected to ideas that might have some practical use (); but they are repelled by it if used in such a way as to excessively contextualize ethics to the point of irrelevancy.

 

LSIs do not tolerate ambiguity, and so dislike abstract ideals that are not directly based on their experience. They almost invariably focus on the worst-case scenario whenever they are forced to be in an ambiguous situation. If the situation is in the future, they will expend much effort to be 100% prepared. They also tend to be very suspicious of others' intentions, being highly aware that every person is ultimately motivated by self-interest.
They set clearly achievable goals, which they often reach. Failure to meet these goals causes the LSI to express anger and lose control of his emotions in the form of a seemingly childish tantrum.
The LSI has a clearly defined set of rules that he must adhere to. Only through learning can the LSI change, and grow to understand how something could work differently than the way he imagines it in the moment.

Se:

 

The EIE is more likely to measure the comfortableness of conversation than other more physiological signs. Still, they are quite attuned to the the physical sensations others are experiencing and use the information to raise and lower the emotional conditions that those individuals are experiencing. In any case however, EIEs are prone to making errors in daily routine. This can include having little or no idea of where they put an object, allowing neglected responsibilities to pile up, or failing to remember important tasks given to them; excessive procrastination is common in EIEs. The EIE has little respect for people who seem to be too concerned with their health and comfort and who avoid straining themselves. The EIE feels that people who focus too much on caring for themselves will have no time to achieve anything worthwhile.
The EIE will feel empty and restless if he is in a situation where he is expected to just chill out and have a good time; he would feel that this undermines his devotion to realizing his abstract visions. He can only enjoy visceral contact with reality if it is accompanied by an active will to initiate such contact, to intentionally engage it. EIEs frequently reflect on experiences with others, both positive and negative, and are always bracing themselves for future problems (which mostly involve other people). This extensive planning of future engagements cause EIEs to often feel restless as they want to implement their goals quickly. In situations where they are forced to remain patient and idle, EIEs can dwell in their stress and neglect real problems.

 

LIEs have the view that aspects are of less importance than others for achieving their goals. They put a low priority on the physical, short-distance, here-and-now in relation to longer-distance and longer-term considerations. A typical manifestation is a lack of concern for small aesthetic details, since a greater focus is given on the opinion that, in the longer term, taking care of them is a never-ending exercise. This is also manifested in a relative lack of awareness of the immediate surroundings, as in noticing where objects may be if they don't have to deal with them particularly, and of their own physical sensations.
LIEs can accept that, for professional or social goals, they may have to take great care of aesthetic details in their immediate environment; but that will always be seen as a concession to others or to convention; they will never evaluate others in that regard and will tend to look down on those who are spontaneously very concerned about such matters.
This also leads to an inclination for postponing daily personal chores, which tend to accumulate and haunt the LIE later.

Ti:

 

IEIs have limited endurance in awareness concerning methods to achieve their purposes without wasting any energy or producing unwanted side effects. This creates a feeling of frustration and inadequacy. They do not value the importance of this area, and it can lead to painful consequences.
Taking care of intensely detailed work that is required to reach their goals, like managing finance or being pragmatic in business ventures, will exhaust their sense of concentration and they will find it frustrating as they continually encounter mistakes and things they had forgotten about or inadvertently ignored.
IEIs dislike having the details of the process--rote facts and statistics--thrown at them, giving more weight to an intuitive understanding of how the events within the process culminate inevitably in a certain result. They will distrust and dislike bossy people, and will avoid people who will assign them routine work like chores. They will even avoid their friends and family when they expect that they will be assigned such work, and do not enjoy fulfilling daily chores.
They dislike rote routine and do not give much attention to what others may view as the practical aspects of life. They may seem oblivious to objective reality, lost in their "dreams." This causes them to periodically lose track of their belongings, making them feel rather inadequate. IEIs will be overly stressed or even counter-productive in an atmosphere where speedy organization and efficiency are forced apon them.

 

SEIs can be skeptical of beliefs, arguments, and actions that are based on external sources of information or oppose the SEI's values system. Therefore, an SEI could come off as stubborn or rigidly set in their ways. They put more trust in the expertise of someone who seems to have hands-on experience, even if limited, than of someone who demonstrates having read many books on the same subject.
They can tend to tune out lengthy text-book explanations and information that requires especially concise explanations or language that they might have a relatively vague understanding or impression of. The reason for this is because the SEI always feels that "there is much more" to dry facts and statistics.
People who are bossy and critical are disliked by the SEI because SEIs usually believe in taking action only when it is prudent for them. They are also prone to avoiding people who demand perfection because that can lead to feelings of inadequacy for the job at hand.

Ne:

 

ESEs prefer to focus on immediate tasks, taking things as they come, rather than try to evaluate whether or not the task at hand will be very important in the longer run. A common consequence of this is an inclination to get stuck with last-minute tasks that keep the ESE distracted from later appointments or tasks, leading to being late for those.
They generally have a poor sense of how long things will take, and what the best amount of time to spend on things is. Therefore it is difficult for ESEs to stay on schedule without extensive (even total) pre-planning. ESEs very often have very precise agendas to plan their professional and personal lives, and yet be somewhat late when actually going about them.
ESEs are more confortable narrating events or stories, or making a point, on a sequential basis - "this happened, and then this, and then that" - since they are not confident that others will connect the dots as to how one event leads to the other, since the ESEs do not feel confident when doing that themselves.
They perceive time in an undifferentiated manner: the past, present, and future are all perceived as being in or near the present. When talking about the future (especially one's longer-term plans), ESEs treat it as if it were accessible today and often they are not aware of all the developments that must happen first, and how long those can take.

 

In order to be happy and productive, LSEs need a stable environment without sudden, unexpected changes. It takes them a while to get into a "groove" and find their rhythm, and any uncertainty about the future tends to fill them with a dread that makes it hard to be productive at all.
LSEs tend to express a simplistic vision of the future where their hard work pays off in the long run, or where everything in society goes hopelessly awry. They are not easily able to incorporate many different forecasts into their view of the future, relying instead on the trend of visible changes around them.
LSEs generally avoid talking about things that might or might not happen that don't depend on them, though they may think about these things to themselves. Discussions about what might or might not happen that are not based on provable facts distress them. Speculation not steeped in reality is a waste of time.
LSEs They prefer to believe that change depends on our actions and choices rather than on external events over which we have no control.
LSEs tend to have an unchanging habit of either being chronically late or chronically early. They rarely know or think about how long things will take, and their estimates are often way off. They are often surprised by the amount of time that has passed between events, and wonder where the time has gone. LSEs tend to want everything done as well as possible and to the highest possible quality, often failing to consider the amount of time necessary to do the job in such a way.
When making plans for the future, LSEs typically do not leave room for unforeseen obstacles. These obstacles frustrate the LSE because they destroy the established rhythm of operations and require switching gears. In talking about their goals for the future, LSEs often leave out intermediate steps, leading others to consider them naive. In LSEs' opinion, the important thing is to express a clear goal; the step-by-step process of getting there is less important.
LSEs get irritated by people who take forever to do things, or who slow down the overall pace of work for no good reason. If someone appears to be doing nothing, the LSE will assume that nothing beneficial is taking place.

Fi:

 

SLIs feel insecure and tense in situations with loud emotional displays — whether positive or negative — as well as in any situations expecting vocal displays of feelings and passions. Therefore, SLIs try to ignore anything relating to their vulnerable function. However, it becomes most prominent when they cannot properly organise the sensations, actions, and movements of their physical world. When this happens, they will feel hopelessness and extreme loss.
SLIs prefer to have lots of time to get to know people so that they can let out their hidden passions in a safe and friendly environment where no one will judge them. These passions are tender and must be treated with respect. If they are told they are not passionate enough or are too passionate, they will take offence and hide their emotions from that person in the future. They find it offensive when people assume things about their emotional state based on their expressions, because they find such inferences are too often wrong. Instead of explaining to the person how they are actually feeling, they will get annoyed and push the person away. If an SLI feels comfortable with a person, he can go on and on about his feelings, explaining them in-depth - not anything related to his present state but instead opinions about people he knows and, more often than not, what he finds irritating about them (which is perhaps related to ).
SLIs see no reason to get worked up about things. They tend to condemn people who do not control their emotional displays and "fly off the handle." They believe that people should think first about the effect their words and emotions will have on other people rather than just spilling out negative or potentially hurtful feelings as they feel like it. If someone has chewed them out in an emotional way just once, they tend to hold this incident against the person for years. To them such behavior is unnecessarily demeaning and malicious.
SLIs extremely dislike socialising (particularly amongst large groups) because they are incapable of creating and sustaining a wide range of emotions for people. They are also quite unable to deal with the painful and complicated job of organising the unpredictable emotions that they can receive from so many people at any one given time. Consequently, SLIs are often reclusive and socially unengaged despite being rather comfortable around a few people they have learned and when having one-on-one conversations on subjects in which they are knowledgeable.

 

ILIs analyze situations and make decisions in a very logical and scientific manner. Their reliance on objectivity and accumulation of factual knowledge leaves very little room for decisions based on emotional considerations. ILIs deeply dislike being asked or coerced to express their emotions. They are most comfortable expressing negative sentiments which indicate their disdain for required emotional participation, such as wry, sardonic pessimism. Some ILIs have very poor control over their emotions, and may lash out angrily if provoked.
When discussing important matters, ILIs often betray a harsh, critical perspective on viewpoints and ideas that they find particularly stupid or insensible. ILIs do not attach emotions to factual information, and so do not consider such criticism to be offensive. If confronted with somebody whose intelligence, persona, or ideas they do not respect, they may react in a hostile fashion, which can be perceived as arrogant or insensitive; not all ILIs, obviously, will react this way.
ILIs' reactions to the sphere of emotions can vary greatly, but they are particularly apparent in the sphere of social relations. ILIs are typically not social creatures. Some do not understand the importance of social connections and choose to ignore the area of emotional involvement with others altogether, instead delving into virtual reality, mystical introspection, or private study. Others trudge through the social landscape without truly understanding the art of socialization, ignoring politeness and not caring about offending others. ILIs may view people who constantly try to make others happy as foolishly involving themselves in a completely pointless exercise.
ILIs tend to be nervous about interacting with other people due to lack of confidence in their social abilities, and often feel that they are not socially respected. They find it difficult to gauge a person's mood without an obvious expression or gesture. Only with a small number of people whom the ILI trusts deeply does the ILI let down his emotional guard. To these people, the ILI can be surprisingly sincere and kind. Nonetheless, the ILI will be little more than an acquaintance to the mass of people that the ILI does not completely trust.

Te:

 

The SEE hates when other people infer or remind him that he's not doing what he "should be doing." This is in complete opposite to his preference of following his whims and doing what he wants when he wants it, with as little structure as possible.
They have trouble focusing on systematic decision making, sometimes leading to occasional large mistakes (e.g. an unnecessary, expensive purchase) that was not thought through. Such mistakes lead to shame, guilt, and disappointment within the SEE, although he does not broadcast these sentiments to many. SEE doesn't like having to weight out pros and cons or make the "right" or "proper" decision.
In regards to unsubstantiated, theoretical knowledge, the SEE can either accept the unproven parts in good faith, or he'll completely reject it as foolish, unnecessary, and unimportant.
The SEE can be afraid to make discussion about fields heavy in systematic knowledge, doubting his ability to convey such thoughts in a clear, composed, and valued manner.

 

IEEs tend to have a difficult time describing a concept or system in a manner in which the essential facts are all that is needed to understand or describe it. The IEE's focus in describing a concept or system is in how they themselves came to understand and see what they are describing. If an IEE is asked to describe or explain something, their natural tendency is to describe the pieces of the concept, system or idea that are related to the subject as a foundation before explaining the actual concept itself. The IEE will often describe details or aspects of a system that are unnecessary to the understanding of the system's properties, but the IEE views these details as essential functions of a sequential system (as opposed to describing the concept or system and only the concept or system as an independent entity). In other words, even if a detail is deemed outside of the IEE as extraneous, the IEE that is describing it will see it as a vital and significant part of a chain in order to paint the full, "proper" picture of the system the IEE wants to describe. An IEE will tend to start off explanations with a tremendous amount of detail, energy and patience and will move towards a more general explanation as they tire out (if they tire out). If something in the IEE's chain is broken or questioned, the description (in the IEE's mind) halts or falls apart.
When an IEE understands a logical concept or system, they are much better at describing anecdotal experiences with the concept or system that help to illustrate the concept or system. They would prefer to do this rather than describing the concept or system as described in the previous paragraph -- describe the essential facts of a concept or system.
IEEs will demonstrate inconsistent behavioral patterns to the objective, outside world. But to the IEE, these behavioral patterns are as a result of a relativist view of how they make their decisions. For example, an IEE might be steadfastly against going to a particular branch of a bank to deposit a check that is easily accessible and only 2 miles away, but is perfectly content going to a different branch of the same bank that is 25 miles away and requires a roundabout route to get there. To the outside world this would not make sense; why not just go to the branch that is easier to access that can handle the same function? But to the IEE, this does not matter. Something at the closer branch bothers the IEE enough to justify going to the further one. Maybe a particular person works there that the IEE wants to avoid, maybe one time the IEE did something embarrassing while at the closer branch and they are embarrassed to show their face again. Regardless of the reason, the IEE will justify circumstances to dictate the decisions they make in their behavioral patterns.
The IEE is keenly aware of societal structures and affiliations that they belong to. These structures can be small entities such as "family" and large entities such as "political affiliation". As such, an IEE will naturally speculate about how these societal structures they belong to would interact if they mingled (+). With a propensity to be involved in a diverse number of interests, IEEs find themselves in a position where they would deem that members of certain societal structures would clash if they met. This will, at times, cause IEEs to hide their affiliations to parties that they feel might cause scrutiny or criticism of their affiliations. They would rather not be judged by others based on their affiliations. Also, if an IEE is cast into an "incorrect" category, this can cause deep wounds in the IEE especially if the IEE believes that the person doing the casting will not change their position about the IEE's affiliation, and as a result of that, believes it to be a negatively connoted statement of their own character.

[poops magoops]

I have found in the past that reading PoLR descriptions can be highly illustrative of what may be going on when someone uses their HA. (Another way of looking at the HA being that behaviour that displays out of a fear or a dislike of manifestations of their PoLR function, or maybe merely a reflection of the order of their priorities.

Si:

 

EIIs are typically negligent of their surroundings and have difficulty keeping track of objects or constantly monitoring things and people around them.
They can be passive and self-absorbed, often preferring to wait for things to happen rather than make them happen. As such, they tend to have quite a number of lost opportunities. To a certain extent, EIIs can be oblivious to hints from someone who is romantically interested in them. Therefore, this gives the other party the wrong impression that they are not interested in them.
Outsiders often think the EII is oblivious to reality because they will often neglect basic needs. Although it is by no means necessary, this may also manifest itself as a general rejection or aversion to violence or force as a means or way of life.

 

The LII often applies in an academic field such as mathematics, one which allows for abstract speculation to be realized in concrete conclusions. The LII does not much care for implementation or hands-on work, requiring some degree of independence from material demands in order to develop his own ideas. If the LII feels made to do a task he perceives as boring, he will try to find an original way to do it, if simply for the sake of developing an interesting idea. The LII can think on his feet, and is able to consider multiple viewpoints, although if he feels that he has fully analyzed an idea in the past, he may dismiss it out of hand with .
The LII is always in tune with the "big picture", looking at things from the most general perspective possible. Given this frame of reference, he sees many ways ordinary life could be changed to meet his vision of how things should be. Thus the LII is often seen by other more practically-minded types as naively idealistic.
The LII does not come up with ideas simply for their own sake, but tries to relate everything back to "the main point". He quickly becomes impatient or disinterested with discussion that is simply meant to generate ideas, instead of realizing them.

Fe:

 

SLEs have trouble evaluating the internal emotional state of others unless it is accompanied by a visible emotional expression. When unable to do so, they become uneasy. When an individual expresses negative emotions, SLEs feel that they are unable to offer the support needed; they get uncomfortable and confused, and as a result, will not respond appropriately to the situation or will react in a way which is unhelpful to the individual. SLEs themselves constantly seem emotionally guarded, and so very rarely will anyone actually have the chance to "comfort" the SLE in the everyday use of the word. The best way to do so is to let the emotion run its course.
SLEs often tread carefully when it comes to interpersonal relationships because they recognize their inherent weakness in this function. They feel the need to not only be respected, but also to be held dear by others, precisely because they feel inept when it comes to relationships. Often their behavior will have the opposite effect of what they were hoping for; if they are trying to protect someone, that someone may view their "protection" as pure jealousy, and thus will attempt to break away. The SLE will respond with further limitations in order to counter what they believe is irrational rebelliousness, perhaps causing a breakdown of said relationship. Despite this, SLEs can without extra effort manage to maintain a superficial - purely physical or formal - relationship. Their IEI duals, however, have an understanding of SLEs; they know how to react with in accordance with the SLE's mood, and thereby tactfully avoid incurring any misunderstanding.
To ease their doubts about their relationships with others, SLEs are sincere when it comes to establishing new bonds with others; they feel it is important to inform others of their true nature so that they will not be taken by surprise when the SLE acts in a certain way. Likewise, the SLE will often prefer to take the initiative in establishing new friendships and relationships. This is partly due to the fact that SLEs fear psychological distance; taking a more upfront and aggressive approach would allow him to more accurately observe those around him, while removing the possibility of one's gradual avoidance of the SLE.
SLEs are under the impression that they might gain respect or admiration from others, but can never be truly loved by anyone. Sometimes, SLEs can become paranoid about their relationships with others; they often mistrust declarations of affection, and so can appear insecure.

 

Unstable in maintaining psychological distance. May have trouble making clear attraction. Can hide their personal sentiments when pushed and avoids the public examination of their desires. ILE's tend to be unaware of how others view them relationship wise, unstable in levels of trust. View relationships skeptically unless legitimized. This can result in a mistrust of others and a general wariness regarding others' opinions of them, potentially causing irrational behaviors based on misconceptions in this area. They appreciate people who can reassure them of the status of a relationship.
Emotional responses to trauma will often manifest themselves several years later, triggered by things that seem to have little to do with the event responsible for the reaction e.g. abandonment issues surface after visiting a nursing home.
An ILE may view many accepted moral standards with scorn if they do not make logical sense to him and may be frustrated if convenient loopholes in a system are said to be 'out of bounds' morally. Indeed, the ILE may come to the conclusion that if he has not done anything legally wrong, then he could not possibly have done something morally wrong. Such thinking may bemuse more ethical types. In more extreme circumstances, the ILE will see morality as just another system to be taken apart and studied, shocking types who value moral traditions when he uses logic and his clever insight to dissolve moral imperatives. e.g. "You may view human sacrifice as something inherently wrong but that's just a result of your upbringing. If you were raised an Aztec you would have seen it as a remarkable thing, believing it to be responsible for keeping your crops watered and the sun moving across the sky."

Ni:

 

The ESI is highly skeptical about ideas and opportunities that may appear not to lead anywhere specifically, and seeks concrete assurance that actual material benefits will be achieved. The ESI prefers the kind of ideation that seems to lead somewhere (offer solutions) rather than the sort that is most likely to bring upheaval and unwanted changes. So they don't want to hear about all the possible problems in a situation, they'd rather hear only the very likely problems if there are any, and the benefits.
The ESI dislikes evaluations of people's potential to engage in activities or develop skills in which they haven't had experience yet; above all he is uncomfortable with such discussions by other people regarding himself. This makes the ESI concerned about the impression he makes on other people in those areas. He is inclined to be either over-skeptical of his own potential or going to the other extreme and overestimate his possibilities in specific areas on occasion.
ESIs are often amused by, and attracted to, demonstrations of the intense use of by others if at least tangentially connected to ideas that might have some practical use (); but they are repelled by it if used in such a way as to excessively contextualize ethics to the point of irrelevancy.

 

LSIs do not tolerate ambiguity, and so dislike abstract ideals that are not directly based on their experience. They almost invariably focus on the worst-case scenario whenever they are forced to be in an ambiguous situation. If the situation is in the future, they will expend much effort to be 100% prepared. They also tend to be very suspicious of others' intentions, being highly aware that every person is ultimately motivated by self-interest.
They set clearly achievable goals, which they often reach. Failure to meet these goals causes the LSI to express anger and lose control of his emotions in the form of a seemingly childish tantrum.
The LSI has a clearly defined set of rules that he must adhere to. Only through learning can the LSI change, and grow to understand how something could work differently than the way he imagines it in the moment.

Se:

 

The EIE is more likely to measure the comfortableness of conversation than other more physiological signs. Still, they are quite attuned to the the physical sensations others are experiencing and use the information to raise and lower the emotional conditions that those individuals are experiencing. In any case however, EIEs are prone to making errors in daily routine. This can include having little or no idea of where they put an object, allowing neglected responsibilities to pile up, or failing to remember important tasks given to them; excessive procrastination is common in EIEs. The EIE has little respect for people who seem to be too concerned with their health and comfort and who avoid straining themselves. The EIE feels that people who focus too much on caring for themselves will have no time to achieve anything worthwhile.
The EIE will feel empty and restless if he is in a situation where he is expected to just chill out and have a good time; he would feel that this undermines his devotion to realizing his abstract visions. He can only enjoy visceral contact with reality if it is accompanied by an active will to initiate such contact, to intentionally engage it. EIEs frequently reflect on experiences with others, both positive and negative, and are always bracing themselves for future problems (which mostly involve other people). This extensive planning of future engagements cause EIEs to often feel restless as they want to implement their goals quickly. In situations where they are forced to remain patient and idle, EIEs can dwell in their stress and neglect real problems.

 

LIEs have the view that aspects are of less importance than others for achieving their goals. They put a low priority on the physical, short-distance, here-and-now in relation to longer-distance and longer-term considerations. A typical manifestation is a lack of concern for small aesthetic details, since a greater focus is given on the opinion that, in the longer term, taking care of them is a never-ending exercise. This is also manifested in a relative lack of awareness of the immediate surroundings, as in noticing where objects may be if they don't have to deal with them particularly, and of their own physical sensations.
LIEs can accept that, for professional or social goals, they may have to take great care of aesthetic details in their immediate environment; but that will always be seen as a concession to others or to convention; they will never evaluate others in that regard and will tend to look down on those who are spontaneously very concerned about such matters.
This also leads to an inclination for postponing daily personal chores, which tend to accumulate and haunt the LIE later.

Ti:

 

IEIs have limited endurance in awareness concerning methods to achieve their purposes without wasting any energy or producing unwanted side effects. This creates a feeling of frustration and inadequacy. They do not value the importance of this area, and it can lead to painful consequences.
Taking care of intensely detailed work that is required to reach their goals, like managing finance or being pragmatic in business ventures, will exhaust their sense of concentration and they will find it frustrating as they continually encounter mistakes and things they had forgotten about or inadvertently ignored.
IEIs dislike having the details of the process--rote facts and statistics--thrown at them, giving more weight to an intuitive understanding of how the events within the process culminate inevitably in a certain result. They will distrust and dislike bossy people, and will avoid people who will assign them routine work like chores. They will even avoid their friends and family when they expect that they will be assigned such work, and do not enjoy fulfilling daily chores.
They dislike rote routine and do not give much attention to what others may view as the practical aspects of life. They may seem oblivious to objective reality, lost in their "dreams." This causes them to periodically lose track of their belongings, making them feel rather inadequate. IEIs will be overly stressed or even counter-productive in an atmosphere where speedy organization and efficiency are forced apon them.

 

SEIs can be skeptical of beliefs, arguments, and actions that are based on external sources of information or oppose the SEI's values system. Therefore, an SEI could come off as stubborn or rigidly set in their ways. They put more trust in the expertise of someone who seems to have hands-on experience, even if limited, than of someone who demonstrates having read many books on the same subject.
They can tend to tune out lengthy text-book explanations and information that requires especially concise explanations or language that they might have a relatively vague understanding or impression of. The reason for this is because the SEI always feels that "there is much more" to dry facts and statistics.
People who are bossy and critical are disliked by the SEI because SEIs usually believe in taking action only when it is prudent for them. They are also prone to avoiding people who demand perfection because that can lead to feelings of inadequacy for the job at hand.

Ne:

 

ESEs prefer to focus on immediate tasks, taking things as they come, rather than try to evaluate whether or not the task at hand will be very important in the longer run. A common consequence of this is an inclination to get stuck with last-minute tasks that keep the ESE distracted from later appointments or tasks, leading to being late for those.
They generally have a poor sense of how long things will take, and what the best amount of time to spend on things is. Therefore it is difficult for ESEs to stay on schedule without extensive (even total) pre-planning. ESEs very often have very precise agendas to plan their professional and personal lives, and yet be somewhat late when actually going about them.
ESEs are more confortable narrating events or stories, or making a point, on a sequential basis - "this happened, and then this, and then that" - since they are not confident that others will connect the dots as to how one event leads to the other, since the ESEs do not feel confident when doing that themselves.
They perceive time in an undifferentiated manner: the past, present, and future are all perceived as being in or near the present. When talking about the future (especially one's longer-term plans), ESEs treat it as if it were accessible today and often they are not aware of all the developments that must happen first, and how long those can take.

 

In order to be happy and productive, LSEs need a stable environment without sudden, unexpected changes. It takes them a while to get into a "groove" and find their rhythm, and any uncertainty about the future tends to fill them with a dread that makes it hard to be productive at all.
LSEs tend to express a simplistic vision of the future where their hard work pays off in the long run, or where everything in society goes hopelessly awry. They are not easily able to incorporate many different forecasts into their view of the future, relying instead on the trend of visible changes around them.
LSEs generally avoid talking about things that might or might not happen that don't depend on them, though they may think about these things to themselves. Discussions about what might or might not happen that are not based on provable facts distress them. Speculation not steeped in reality is a waste of time.
LSEs They prefer to believe that change depends on our actions and choices rather than on external events over which we have no control.
LSEs tend to have an unchanging habit of either being chronically late or chronically early. They rarely know or think about how long things will take, and their estimates are often way off. They are often surprised by the amount of time that has passed between events, and wonder where the time has gone. LSEs tend to want everything done as well as possible and to the highest possible quality, often failing to consider the amount of time necessary to do the job in such a way.
When making plans for the future, LSEs typically do not leave room for unforeseen obstacles. These obstacles frustrate the LSE because they destroy the established rhythm of operations and require switching gears. In talking about their goals for the future, LSEs often leave out intermediate steps, leading others to consider them naive. In LSEs' opinion, the important thing is to express a clear goal; the step-by-step process of getting there is less important.
LSEs get irritated by people who take forever to do things, or who slow down the overall pace of work for no good reason. If someone appears to be doing nothing, the LSE will assume that nothing beneficial is taking place.

Fi:

 

SLIs feel insecure and tense in situations with loud emotional displays — whether positive or negative — as well as in any situations expecting vocal displays of feelings and passions. Therefore, SLIs try to ignore anything relating to their vulnerable function. However, it becomes most prominent when they cannot properly organise the sensations, actions, and movements of their physical world. When this happens, they will feel hopelessness and extreme loss.
SLIs prefer to have lots of time to get to know people so that they can let out their hidden passions in a safe and friendly environment where no one will judge them. These passions are tender and must be treated with respect. If they are told they are not passionate enough or are too passionate, they will take offence and hide their emotions from that person in the future. They find it offensive when people assume things about their emotional state based on their expressions, because they find such inferences are too often wrong. Instead of explaining to the person how they are actually feeling, they will get annoyed and push the person away. If an SLI feels comfortable with a person, he can go on and on about his feelings, explaining them in-depth - not anything related to his present state but instead opinions about people he knows and, more often than not, what he finds irritating about them (which is perhaps related to ).
SLIs see no reason to get worked up about things. They tend to condemn people who do not control their emotional displays and "fly off the handle." They believe that people should think first about the effect their words and emotions will have on other people rather than just spilling out negative or potentially hurtful feelings as they feel like it. If someone has chewed them out in an emotional way just once, they tend to hold this incident against the person for years. To them such behavior is unnecessarily demeaning and malicious.
SLIs extremely dislike socialising (particularly amongst large groups) because they are incapable of creating and sustaining a wide range of emotions for people. They are also quite unable to deal with the painful and complicated job of organising the unpredictable emotions that they can receive from so many people at any one given time. Consequently, SLIs are often reclusive and socially unengaged despite being rather comfortable around a few people they have learned and when having one-on-one conversations on subjects in which they are knowledgeable.

 

ILIs analyze situations and make decisions in a very logical and scientific manner. Their reliance on objectivity and accumulation of factual knowledge leaves very little room for decisions based on emotional considerations. ILIs deeply dislike being asked or coerced to express their emotions. They are most comfortable expressing negative sentiments which indicate their disdain for required emotional participation, such as wry, sardonic pessimism. Some ILIs have very poor control over their emotions, and may lash out angrily if provoked.
When discussing important matters, ILIs often betray a harsh, critical perspective on viewpoints and ideas that they find particularly stupid or insensible. ILIs do not attach emotions to factual information, and so do not consider such criticism to be offensive. If confronted with somebody whose intelligence, persona, or ideas they do not respect, they may react in a hostile fashion, which can be perceived as arrogant or insensitive; not all ILIs, obviously, will react this way.
ILIs' reactions to the sphere of emotions can vary greatly, but they are particularly apparent in the sphere of social relations. ILIs are typically not social creatures. Some do not understand the importance of social connections and choose to ignore the area of emotional involvement with others altogether, instead delving into virtual reality, mystical introspection, or private study. Others trudge through the social landscape without truly understanding the art of socialization, ignoring politeness and not caring about offending others. ILIs may view people who constantly try to make others happy as foolishly involving themselves in a completely pointless exercise.
ILIs tend to be nervous about interacting with other people due to lack of confidence in their social abilities, and often feel that they are not socially respected. They find it difficult to gauge a person's mood without an obvious expression or gesture. Only with a small number of people whom the ILI trusts deeply does the ILI let down his emotional guard. To these people, the ILI can be surprisingly sincere and kind. Nonetheless, the ILI will be little more than an acquaintance to the mass of people that the ILI does not completely trust.

Te:

 

The SEE hates when other people infer or remind him that he's not doing what he "should be doing." This is in complete opposite to his preference of following his whims and doing what he wants when he wants it, with as little structure as possible.
They have trouble focusing on systematic decision making, sometimes leading to occasional large mistakes (e.g. an unnecessary, expensive purchase) that was not thought through. Such mistakes lead to shame, guilt, and disappointment within the SEE, although he does not broadcast these sentiments to many. SEE doesn't like having to weight out pros and cons or make the "right" or "proper" decision.
In regards to unsubstantiated, theoretical knowledge, the SEE can either accept the unproven parts in good faith, or he'll completely reject it as foolish, unnecessary, and unimportant.
The SEE can be afraid to make discussion about fields heavy in systematic knowledge, doubting his ability to convey such thoughts in a clear, composed, and valued manner.

 

IEEs tend to have a difficult time describing a concept or system in a manner in which the essential facts are all that is needed to understand or describe it. The IEE's focus in describing a concept or system is in how they themselves came to understand and see what they are describing. If an IEE is asked to describe or explain something, their natural tendency is to describe the pieces of the concept, system or idea that are related to the subject as a foundation before explaining the actual concept itself. The IEE will often describe details or aspects of a system that are unnecessary to the understanding of the system's properties, but the IEE views these details as essential functions of a sequential system (as opposed to describing the concept or system and only the concept or system as an independent entity). In other words, even if a detail is deemed outside of the IEE as extraneous, the IEE that is describing it will see it as a vital and significant part of a chain in order to paint the full, "proper" picture of the system the IEE wants to describe. An IEE will tend to start off explanations with a tremendous amount of detail, energy and patience and will move towards a more general explanation as they tire out (if they tire out). If something in the IEE's chain is broken or questioned, the description (in the IEE's mind) halts or falls apart.
When an IEE understands a logical concept or system, they are much better at describing anecdotal experiences with the concept or system that help to illustrate the concept or system. They would prefer to do this rather than describing the concept or system as described in the previous paragraph -- describe the essential facts of a concept or system.
IEEs will demonstrate inconsistent behavioral patterns to the objective, outside world. But to the IEE, these behavioral patterns are as a result of a relativist view of how they make their decisions. For example, an IEE might be steadfastly against going to a particular branch of a bank to deposit a check that is easily accessible and only 2 miles away, but is perfectly content going to a different branch of the same bank that is 25 miles away and requires a roundabout route to get there. To the outside world this would not make sense; why not just go to the branch that is easier to access that can handle the same function? But to the IEE, this does not matter. Something at the closer branch bothers the IEE enough to justify going to the further one. Maybe a particular person works there that the IEE wants to avoid, maybe one time the IEE did something embarrassing while at the closer branch and they are embarrassed to show their face again. Regardless of the reason, the IEE will justify circumstances to dictate the decisions they make in their behavioral patterns.
The IEE is keenly aware of societal structures and affiliations that they belong to. These structures can be small entities such as "family" and large entities such as "political affiliation". As such, an IEE will naturally speculate about how these societal structures they belong to would interact if they mingled (+). With a propensity to be involved in a diverse number of interests, IEEs find themselves in a position where they would deem that members of certain societal structures would clash if they met. This will, at times, cause IEEs to hide their affiliations to parties that they feel might cause scrutiny or criticism of their affiliations. They would rather not be judged by others based on their affiliations. Also, if an IEE is cast into an "incorrect" category, this can cause deep wounds in the IEE especially if the IEE believes that the person doing the casting will not change their position about the IEE's affiliation, and as a result of that, believes it to be a negatively connoted statement of their own character.

Did you write these? It is really spot on.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Did you write these? It is really spot on.

ah no, I didn't. There're from the main type profiles on wikisocion.org

[Myst]

I have found in the past that reading PoLR descriptions can be highly illustrative of what may be going on when someone uses their HA. (Another way of looking at the HA being that behaviour that displays out of a fear or a dislike of manifestations of their PoLR function, or maybe merely a reflection of the order of their priorities.

The LII one is the wrong one (Ne creative description is quoted instead of Se PoLR)

I see these descriptions as mostly just showing a real bad use of the IE in question and/or an overlay of the creative function on top of that.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

The LII one is the wrong one (Ne creative description is quoted instead of Se PoLR)

Thanks.

I see these descriptions as mostly just showing a real bad use of the IE in question and/or an overlay of the creative function on top of that.

It's not perfect (and in some cases, they don't really work) because they weren't written with my usage in mind, but I think they touch on a "photographic negative"-type description for the HA...a second part, a flip-side. I found it interesting for taking an oblique look, perhaps looking more on passive usage/manifestations of the HA.

[Myst]

It's not perfect (and in some cases, they don't really work) because they weren't written with my usage in mind, but I think they touch on a "photographic negative"-type description for the HA...a second part, a flip-side. I found it interesting for taking an oblique look, perhaps looking more on passive usage/manifestations of the HA.

Yeah, I get the idea. I do in general view the opposite attitude (of introversion or extraversion) as quite relevant when interpreting what it means to focus on a specific IE.