ESTj Description by I/O

[wacey]

This is business logic, productivity, efficiency, systems of preparing work, getting as much done in a day as possible in the shortest amount of time, managing employees and teams all of which are assigned differing tasks and making sure products and resources are managed to maximize out put. Are you telling me LSE are some kind of cowboys at there? flying off the seat of their pants and just winging it? Preparation and planning for the future is absolutely within the realm of black logic. The logic of actions. the logic of what should be done and how best to do it.

Maybe SLI wouldnt care how other people are doing tasks, they will just do them the way they think is right themselves. LSE are a totally different story. Why else would they rub the Betas the wrong way if it was not for being pedantic about Te?

[Exodus]

Preparation and planning for the future is absolutely within the realm of black logic.

Before you said this was , now it's ?

The logic of actions. the logic of what should be done and how best to do it.

Sure, but the way you've characterized the manner in which LSEs express this value is not accurate.

Maybe SLI wouldnt care how other people are doing tasks, they will just do them the way they think is right themselves. LSE are a totally different story. Why else would they rub the Betas the wrong way if it was not for being pedantic about Te?

They would rub them the wrong way for not thinking about the future consequences or the deeper significance of what they are doing. They would also rub them the wrong way for not expressing their expectations clearly or adhering to firm principles, rather adopting an opportunistic attitude of deriving benefit in whatever way is available ( > ).

[wacey]

Before you said this was , now it's ?


Sure, but the way you've characterized the manner in which LSEs express this value is not accurate.


They would rub them the wrong way for not thinking about the future consequences or the deeper significance of what they are doing. They would also rub them the wrong way for not expressing their expectations clearly or adhering to firm principles, rather adopting an opportunistic attitude of deriving benefit in whatever way is available ( > ).

In my experience working closely with LSE in a mid sized company that my assessment is actually extremely accurate. Of course you don't have to believe me and thats fine.

They would rub them the wrong way by going for the actions of how to do something instead of the underlying process involved in order that others may find and discover their own ways of preforming an act Ti vs Te.. Ti will explain and maybe reexplain, but they will not expect that it should be done exclusively the way they might do it. LSE will have this expectation that things are done their way, period. And if you are doing it differently then there is definitely something wrong with you.

And to say LSE are not aware about future implications of their's and other's actions in the realm of Te is false. They want to do something right the first time, which leads to a extended preparation period. The devil is in the details when it comes to black logic. You must be thinking about SLIs or something here.

[consentingadult]

... getting as much done in a day as possible in the shortest amount of time...

This is not quite the case, if I understand you correctly. The efficiency of LSEs is about getting more done in the same amount of time (i.e. making the most of the time available). This as opposed to the efficiency-attitude of SLIs, which is about getting specific things (a preset amount) done in the shortest amount of time. To put it differently: LSEs want to make the most of a 9 to 5 workday, whereas SLIs strive to get the job done and go home early.

It is this difference in attitude that is an important reason why IEEs can endure SLIs much longer than LSEs. IEEs interacting with LSEs feel physically worn out after a while, and this is the reason why in activity relations between IEEs and LSEs the IEEs need a temporary break from the relationship every now and then. This is not entirely to blame on the LSEs: the recognition-seeking mobilizing-Te can-do-attitude of IEEs gives LSEs a false impression, the (refreshing) impression that the IEE is willing and capable of doing more. Meanwhile, the IEEs have an unconscious expectation that the LSEs will protect them from overexerting themselves, which is what an SLI would take care of in a relationship with an IEE. (I'm reminded of an LSE woman at work yesterday, who, each time she brings me my latte, offers to already put the sugar in it for me. Such obvious caretaking behavior is a sweet thing to see, in a sense more charming than the more subtle, covert caretaking behavior of SLIs).

Likewise, LSEs probably need a break from IEEs because of an overdose of Ne, which is encouraged by LSEs because of their recognition seeking mobilizing-Ne, giving the IEE the false impression the LSE wants more of it.

[wacey]

This is not quite the case, if I understand you correctly. The efficiency of LSEs is about getting more done in the same amount of time (i.e. making the most of the time available). This as opposed to the efficiency-attitude of SLIs, which is about getting specific things (a preset amount) done in the shortest amount of time. To put it differently: LSEs want to make the most of a 9 to 5 workday, whereas SLIs strive to get the job done and go home early.

It is this difference in attitude that is an important reason why IEEs can endure SLIs much longer than LSEs. IEEs interacting with LSEs feel physically worn out after a while, and this is the reason why in activity relations between IEEs and LSEs the IEEs need a temporary break from the relationship every now and then. This is not entirely to blame on the LSEs: the recognition-seeking mobilizing-Te can-do-attitude of IEEs gives LSEs a false impression, the (refreshing) impression that the IEE is willing and capable of doing more. Meanwhile, the IEEs have an unconscious expectation that the LSEs will protect them from overexerting themselves, which is what an SLI would take care of in a relationship with an IEE. (I'm reminded of an LSE woman at work yesterday, who, each time she brings me my latte, offers to already put the sugar in it for me. Such obvious caretaking behavior is a sweet thing to see, in a sense more charming than the more subtle, covert caretaking behavior of SLIs).

Likewise, LSEs probably need a break from IEEs because of an overdose of Ne, which is encouraged by LSEs because of their recognition seeking mobilizing-Ne, giving the IEE the false impression the LSE wants more of it.

You kind of ran with what I was saying and elaborated on it. I pretty much agree with everything you just said here, you fleshed it out nicely.

And see its funny because for myself, the very "help-full" and well meaning small acts by an LSE in my work place, although kind in that Te sort of way, can be irritating and cause me to avoid them. I find myself internally rolling my eyes when I hear "one more little tip". I would assume this falls into their, as you put it "recognition seeking mobilizing Ne"? Voicing the facts of the external world Te in order to supply Ne with information which it in turn can use later on?

Because gammas are not nearly as paternalistic in their administration of Te. The phrase "don't ask, don't tell" comes to mind when describing gamma Te and funny enough SLI. If you don't ask them, then usually they won't tell you. With LSE unsolicited advice, even actual physical help, is the normal.

Your post also is helping me confirm that delta is not the quadra for me.

[consentingadult]

You kind of ran with what I was saying and elaborated on it. I pretty much agree with everything you just said here, you fleshed it out nicely.

And see its funny because for myself, the very "help-full" and well meaning small acts by an LSE in my work place, although kind in that Te sort of way, can be irritating and cause me to avoid them. I find myself internally rolling my eyes when I hear "one more little tip". I would assume this falls into their, as you put it "recognition seeking mobilizing Ne"? Voicing the facts of the external world Te in order to supply Ne with information which it in turn can use later on?

Because gammas are not nearly as paternalistic in their administration of Te. The phrase "don't ask, don't tell" comes to mind when describing gamma Te and funny enough SLI. If you don't ask them, then usually they won't tell you. With LSE unsolicited advice, even actual physical help, is the normal.

Your post also is helping me confirm that delta is not the quadra for me.

Mobilizing-Ne is made up of different things, and your item certainly can be one of them, but how Mobilizing Ne manifests itself also depends on the type of the person interacted with. When interacting with an EII or an IEE, Mobilizing-Ne means the LSE jumping on the Delta NF bandwagon so to speak. In other cases it might be the LSE elaborating their 'grand narrative' on some subject, and typically violating some Ni-aspects of reality:

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...-and-polr.html

[applejacks]

This is not quite the case, if I understand you correctly. The efficiency of LSEs is about getting more done in the same amount of time (i.e. making the most of the time available). This as opposed to the efficiency-attitude of SLIs, which is about getting specific things (a preset amount) done in the shortest amount of time. To put it differently: LSEs want to make the most of a 9 to 5 workday, whereas SLIs strive to get the job done and go home early.

It is this difference in attitude that is an important reason why IEEs can endure SLIs much longer than LSEs. IEEs interacting with LSEs feel physically worn out after a while, and this is the reason why in activity relations between IEEs and LSEs the IEEs need a temporary break from the relationship every now and then. This is not entirely to blame on the LSEs: the recognition-seeking mobilizing-Te can-do-attitude of IEEs gives LSEs a false impression, the (refreshing) impression that the IEE is willing and capable of doing more. Meanwhile, the IEEs have an unconscious expectation that the LSEs will protect them from overexerting themselves, which is what an SLI would take care of in a relationship with an IEE. (I'm reminded of an LSE woman at work yesterday, who, each time she brings me my latte, offers to already put the sugar in it for me. Such obvious caretaking behavior is a sweet thing to see, in a sense more charming than the more subtle, covert caretaking behavior of SLIs).

Likewise, LSEs probably need a break from IEEs because of an overdose of Ne, which is encouraged by LSEs because of their recognition seeking mobilizing-Ne, giving the IEE the false impression the LSE wants more of it.

Awesome post and insight. This perfectly sums up the relationship between me (IEE) and my Mother in Law (LSE). She will never offer me something without also making it for me herself- be it a meal, a drink. She does this for everyone, and tragically it goes under appreciated, which leads to built up anger. Somehow I can see and understand that, so I'm more inclined to give grace and appreciation to appease any rage.

My SLI husband will kiss my forehead or politely offer to help me as a form of caretaking. It's not as insisted as charming LSE is, but it is still there, if not gentle and overt.

In rather simplistic terms, I used to say my Mother in Law was the extroverted version of my husband. Both have anger. Both can be kind and caring caretakers, but they are made manifest very differently.