Model D

[seriousguy]

It depends... N.B. Model D uses Jungian descriptions of Se. It does not use Socionics "force". If you physically push someone then you are using Se-. If you order someone then it is Te+ or Te-.

Te+ or Te-? Because Te+ is unconscious for me in this model, so I won't be able to easily order whenever I want?

Emotional pressure would be Fe- or Fe+. It depends on the situation.

Give the examples. Would emotional pressure also requires other functions (such as Se-)?

It makes no sense if you find a conscious Se- and a conscious Ne+. How do distinguish between conscious and unconscious functions?

If I am able to "pass" some information or act on it whenever I want, then I consider it conscious. If I need something from someone, then I can order them (Te+ or Te-?), and I don't need to "think" about it or expecting it from someone. Does "not thinking about it, but doing it naturally" makes something unconscious (even when it is doing the job just fine)?

What conscious/unconscious theory are you referring to?

I am referring to Model A's mental/vital theory, but your theory doesn't seem to differ either, especially as you said mental functions are verbalized.

Those are very obvious aspects of aggression. All people are capable of reacting like that, so it is not an indication of a conscious Se-. A weak and conscious Se- (like ILI's) gets annoyed by people who are too close. There are constantly exaggerations about physical threats. An ILI could say: "all immigrants are thieves".

I also fear people getting physically close to me but I don't exaggerate about physical threats openly. Does that make my Se- unconscious? (because I am not "verbalizing" the information)

The fact that you notice these aspects of Se- (and Te, and Fe) does not mean that it is conscious. And a vital function also think about these things consciously (according to Vladimir Yermak). The question is how much attention you give to these aspects of Se-, and how much you talk about it.

But then wouldn't it be a matter of degree of consciousness/unconsciousness rather than calling one function entirely conscious/unconscious?

You are probably referring to Judging (mbti), i.e. Fe and/or Te. Again, SLEs (and thereby Se-) do not push people around. LSEs and LIEs do that. "Force" is just an indirect consequence of extroverted sensing. And I do not agree with all descriptions of F (Se).

No, I am referring to Socionics' understanding of Se. And, yes, I don't see much SLEs pushing people around, rather they give orders. (I always thought it was due to Se accepting, as Se producing push people directly) Indirect consequence? You mean Se is kind of verbalized through Fe/Te when someone orders others? (so in my case I am using Te/Fe and indirectly Se when I am ordering someone? Either way, I have offended LII with it... thought it was due to their Se PoLR)

IEI's Ni+ is mainly interested in seeing the consequences of some imaginary actions (i.e. scenario thinking). He or she uses Te- to decide the best or most accurate action.

In that manner, IEI would be perfectly capable of taking the best / most accurate action due to 4D Te-? But IEIs report taking the wrong routes / methods and just "go with the flow", like even when they can easily see the consequences of something, they have trouble deciding the most efficient way to reach there. How do you explain that? Is it due to their 2D Ti+ (or 1D Te+)?

It is off topic... it was just an example of the difference between 3D and 4D.

It appeared to me that you were referring to that theory to prove your point, so I asked how it applies in your theory / understanding of dimensionality.

It depends on how you look at it. Ni+ and Ni- are either separate functions or two versions of Ni. It really doesn't matter. However, you must realize that Ni+ is a consequence of Ni blocking with Te. That is a basic premise in Model D.

If I give an advice on the best possible option to take to achieve something or whether it is possible or not, would I be using Ni+ (as you said it is blocked with Te) or Ni-Te-? How to separately apply the dimensionality here without taking the nature of combined functions? So, for example, it doesn't make sense to call Te- 4D, but rather better to call Ni-Te- 4D (and make it explicitly clear that we are talking about this particular aspect of information).

What? In what way is IEI with Ni as a Leading function the same as IEI with Ni- and Ne+ as Leading functions?

-+ signs were added later as far as I know, and I don't know how these IEIs differ from each others. What exactly you are asking?

In what sense am I screwing the original defintions of conscious/unconscious, dimensionality...?

I get the sense from you that you are putting your personal understanding on conscious/unconscious, dimensionality, etc. rather than what is agreed by most socionists, but I could be wrong.

I agree with the basic terminologies of Socionics. The problem is that 95% of all people on this forum (and other forums) uses, for example, valued/unvalued functions completely wrong. Then you can get insane typings like LSI for Christopher Langan, "the world's smartest man", or ESI for Christopher Hitchens. Btw, both are ILI.

But, it's more like they have a different understanding of valued/unvalued functions, so you are ought to explain your understanding, so they don't get confused by your model. You need to understand that these are separate language game (especially if people who are coming from MBTI / Socionics, they would get confused or get the wrong understanding, which means you won't achieve your purpose rather increase their misunderstanding. Got my point?). Do you have arguments for why Hitchens is ILI?

Strategizing involves some kind of decisions, right? ---> Te-! IEI is not particularly interested in chess. There is a reason for that.

But you said that Te- is 4D? Basically, they are not interested in chess (because Te- is unconscious), but if they play it, then they can naturally start using Te-? (and then they would be great at it due to the logical deduction nature of Te?) In the similar manner, every unconscious function can be "used" for good purpose, but they need to be "forced" from the outside? For example, in Model G, Se- is considered a strong function for an IEI (in terms of energy), but it needs to be supplied from the outside, this is why they can be very pushy when drive by strong emotions.

What do you mean? Te is also about making decisions (which is closely related to logical deductions).

Te- or Te+? Do you put the shared aspect of functions in both -+ signs, or you consider them entirely separate functions? If logical deductions belong to both Te- or Te+, then the difference between Te- and Te+ would be that the former is about taking the most efficient route (through logical deduction) and latter would be deducting the conclusion using the factual information / evidence? I can see IEIs lacking in both areas to be honest.

No, you are wrong. Te+ is about concrete and specific facts (Trivial Pursuit etc.). IEI's Te+ 1D PoLR.

Yes, IEIs are shitty when it comes to deciding the accurate fact from the bunch of factual information.

In what way is your understanding of dimensionality and conscious/unconscious different from mine?

Dimensionality is the same as Model A. What I don't understand how you associate 1D-4D with isolated functions when they can't be talked in isolation? Why not simply say IEI's NiFe is 4D, NiTe is 3D? To me it seems like you are putting symmetry where it doesn't exist or they don't matter anymore.

"IEI is a people person". That is only partly true. "ILI is like a robot" That is not true at all. ILI understands people better than SEI.

So, you are trying to defy the stereotypes that have arisen due to the blind faith in Model A (and other factors)?

Model A is a crude approximation. Model D is much more accurate.

Are you confident enough that Model D isn't crude approximation either and the dimensionality/conscious/unconscious would apply to every subtype? Dimensionality and conscious/unconscious can't be changed due to environmental factors? Did you base your model on hypothetical scenarios or you have actually observed people in real-life? For example, in order to validate it, I need to meet at least 10 people of all the types (with subtype variations).

[Petter]

Te+ or Te-? Because Te+ is unconscious for me in this model, so I won't be able to easily order whenever I want?

It depends on the situation. It could be Te+ or Te-. Orders about specific things is Te+ . IEI's Te+ is a weak mental function in Model D.

You can use the vital functions whenever you want as well. The problem is that you start thinking about Te- and 30 seconds (or perhaps a bit more) later you have automatically switched to Ti-, without you even noticing it.

Give the examples. Would emotional pressure also requires other functions (such as Se-)?

All cognitions (and thereby cognitive functions) interact with emotions, so Se- could indirectly be used to change the emotional state in someone. Fe is different though, since the function itself considers emotional responses.

If I am able to "pass" some information or act on it whenever I want, then I consider it conscious. If I need something from someone, then I can order them (Te+ or Te-?), and I don't need to "think" about it or expecting it from someone. Does "not thinking about it, but doing it naturally" makes something unconscious (even when it is doing the job just fine)?

I think both the mental and vital functions can be used unconsciously. The Leading function could be an exception.

My view on conscious and unconscious functions correponds with SSS's view. The vital functions are actually semi-conscious and we are able to use them consciously. But... see comment above.

I am referring to Model A's mental/vital theory, but your theory doesn't seem to differ either, especially as you said mental functions are verbalized.

Yes, Model D is the same as Model A in this respect.

I also fear people getting physically close to me but I don't exaggerate about physical threats openly. Does that make my Se- unconscious? (because I am not "verbalizing" the information)

Yes, you are describing a weak and unconscious Se-. ILI openly complains about immigrants, criminals...

But then wouldn't it be a matter of degree of consciousness/unconsciousness rather than calling one function entirely conscious/unconscious?

Correct. I prefer mental/vital.

No, I am referring to Socionics' understanding of Se. And, yes, I don't see much SLEs pushing people around, rather they give orders.

Hmm? SLEs giving orders? My experience is different. I think they influence people either directly via physical dominance or indirectly via "salesman tactics".

(I always thought it was due to Se accepting, as Se producing push people directly) Indirect consequence? You mean Se is kind of verbalized through Fe/Te when someone orders others? (so in my case I am using Te/Fe and indirectly Se when I am ordering someone? Either way, I have offended LII with it... thought it was due to their Se PoLR)

My point is that there is no special "force" that SLE uses. SLE is mostly in the here and now, so he/she will be automatically be dominant. When IEI is in "NiFe land" the SLE has seized an opportunity in the real/physical world.

In that manner, IEI would be perfectly capable of taking the best / most accurate action due to 4D Te-? But IEIs report taking the wrong routes / methods and just "go with the flow", like even when they can easily see the consequences of something, they have trouble deciding the most efficient way to reach there. How do you explain that? Is it due to their 2D Ti+ (or 1D Te+)?

That's 1D Te+. Te- is about the best/most efficient way when you are strategizing/visualizing (Ni+) something.

It appeared to me that you were referring to that theory to prove your point, so I asked how it applies in your theory / understanding of dimensionality.

It could be useful for understanding subtypes in Model D. ILI-1,x could have level 8 Ni+, Ti-, Fe+ and Ne-... while ILI-10,x could have level 7 Ni+, Ti-, Fe+ and Ne-.

If I give an advice on the best possible option to take to achieve something or whether it is possible or not, would I be using Ni+ (as you said it is blocked with Te) or Ni-Te-?

This is too general. It could be other functions as well.

How to separately apply the dimensionality here without taking the nature of combined functions? So, for example, it doesn't make sense to call Te- 4D, but rather better to call Ni-Te- 4D (and make it explicitly clear that we are talking about this particular aspect of information).

Can you explain this part a bit further?

-+ signs were added later as far as I know, and I don't know how these IEIs differ from each others. What exactly you are asking?

You: "your model is nothing but an alternative perspective to Model A"

What do you mean by this?

I get the sense from you that you are putting your personal understanding on conscious/unconscious, dimensionality, etc. rather than what is agreed by most socionists, but I could be wrong.

How do you think my view differs from socionists' views.

But, it's more like they have a different understanding of valued/unvalued functions, so you are ought to explain your understanding, so they don't get confused by your model. You need to understand that these are separate language game (especially if people who are coming from MBTI / Socionics, they would get confused or get the wrong understanding, which means you won't achieve your purpose rather increase their misunderstanding. Got my point?). Do you have arguments for why Hitchens is ILI?

How do you describe a "valued" function?

Hitchens... well, he's an intellectual with strong opinions, but let's stay on topic.

But you said that Te- is 4D? Basically, they are not interested in chess (because Te- is unconscious), but if they play it, then they can naturally start using Te-? (and then they would be great at it due to the logical deduction nature of Te?) In the similar manner, every unconscious function can be "used" for good purpose, but they need to be "forced" from the outside? For example, in Model G, Se- is considered a strong function for an IEI (in terms of energy), but it needs to be supplied from the outside, this is why they can be very pushy when drive by strong emotions.

Id functions are private and they are used sporadically. IEI can play chess just as well as ILI can strategize about social relations. However, IEI's Ni+ is one of the Ignoring functions.

I am very skeptical of Model G. Gulenko needs to convince his fellow socionists first.

Te- or Te+? Do you put the shared aspect of functions in both -+ signs, or you consider them entirely separate functions?

Both. It doesn't matter... both. And it is actually the aspects rather than the functions that causes +/-.

If logical deductions belong to both Te- or Te+, then the difference between Te- and Te+ would be that the former is about taking the most efficient route (through logical deduction) and latter would be deducting the conclusion using the factual information / evidence? I can see IEIs lacking in both areas to be honest.

Both are about logical deduction. Te- makes decisions about prior Ni+ thoughts. Come up with a scenario at work/in school where you try to "outsmart" your colleagues. Those decisions will be sophisticated (3D/4D).

Dimensionality is the same as Model A. What I don't understand how you associate 1D-4D with isolated functions when they can't be talked in isolation? Why not simply say IEI's NiFe is 4D, NiTe is 3D? To me it seems like you are putting symmetry where it doesn't exist or they don't matter anymore.

Okay, now I see what you mean. I should not have used "in isolation". I just meant that you cannot discuss Ni+ without recognizing that Te causes '+'. Hence, saying that IEI's Ni in Model A has both '+' and '-' is incorrect.

So, you are trying to defy the stereotypes that have arisen due to the blind faith in Model A (and other factors)?

Yes... but I just want an accurate model.

Are you confident enough that Model D isn't crude approximation either and the dimensionality/conscious/unconscious would apply to every subtype? Dimensionality and conscious/unconscious can't be changed due to environmental factors? Did you base your model on hypothetical scenarios or you have actually observed people in real-life? For example, in order to validate it, I need to meet at least 10 people of all the types (with subtype variations).

I am convinced that Model D is accurate, but it takes time to validate a new model. First things first, people should begin to estimate the strength/sophistication of NiFe vs. NiTe, SiTe vs. SiFe etc.

[seriousguy]

It depends on the situation. It could be Te+ or Te-. Orders about specific things is Te+ . IEI's Te+ is a weak mental function in Model D.

Specific things? If I tell someone to give me the glass of water, it will be Te+ and if I explain the steps then it will be Ti+? What about Te- then? Which kinds of orders require Te-? General orders? Give me examples.

You can use the vital functions whenever you want as well. The problem is that you start thinking about Te- and 30 seconds (or perhaps a bit more) later you have automatically switched to Ti-, without you even noticing it.

I see what you mean, and I can relate to the forgetting about Te- after few seconds or minutes. Maybe one can use the vital function if forced from the outside? (in an example of chess, because in this case one MUST use Ni+Te- considering that these two functions are required for strategizing and taking the best action)

I think both the mental and vital functions can be used unconsciously. The Leading function could be an exception.

Using mental functions unconsciously? How?

Yes, you are describing a weak and unconscious Se-. ILI openly complains about immigrants, criminals...

What about ILI's 1D Se+? How it differs from IEI's 2D Se+? Give me examples. Also, in your Model D, an LII would have 4D Se+, but 1D Se-? They would know which person can benefit them, but they have zero skills when it comes to pushing people, right?

Hmm? SLEs giving orders? My experience is different. I think they influence people either directly via physical dominance or indirectly via "salesman tactics".
My point is that there is no special "force" that SLE uses. SLE is mostly in the here and now, so he/she will be automatically be dominant. When IEI is in "NiFe land" the SLE has seized an opportunity in the real/physical world.

Yes, I meant they naturally use the aggressive tactics to get what they want, and live in here and now.

That's 1D Te+. Te- is about the best/most efficient way when you are strategizing/visualizing (Ni+) something.

So... you are saying IEIs are capable to strategize or know about the best/most efficient methods, but unable to follow through?

This is too general. It could be other functions as well.

Let's say I am advising my colleagues that they should study from xyz books in the given time as that will help them "outsmart" other colleagues. What functions would I be using?

Can you explain this part a bit further?

How are you calling Te- a 4D function for an IEI when the dimensionality is supposed to be applied to an isolated function?

You: "your model is nothing but an alternative perspective to Model A"

What do you mean by this?

Model A doesn't have -+ signs, but dimensionality and consciousness/unconsciousness, if you map functions to Model A's position / blocks, you would get (for an IEI):

4D: Ni- (ego), Fi+ (id)
3D: Fe+ (ego) Ne- (id)
2D: Si- (super-ego) Ti+ (super-id)
1D: Te+ (super-ego) Se- (super-id)

So, basically you further distributed the 1D-4D dimensionality to -+ signs, making it two Model As. Btw, are you sure that Ne+ is 4D and conscious, and Ne- is 3D and unconscious for an IEI? Can you give me real-life examples? In Model A, for example, it is assumed that Ignoring function is used along with Demonstrative, so Ne- belongs to super-id. Conscious here would mean able to use it constantly (and not for just a moment or "30 seconds" as you put it earlier). Ne+Ti- belongs to ego block, right? (this is why IEI can look very much like an LII or ILE)

By "an alternative perspective", I mean that your Model doesn't necessarily contradicts Model A (similarly how Model G doesn't contradict it and seems to explain functions in a different manner... internalities, externatilies, etc.,) or am I wrong?

How do you think my view differs from socionists' views.

Because it seems to me that dimensionality was supposed to apply on isolated functions not the -+ signs formed through combination of functions, so here applying the dimensionality to -+ signs would only lead to confusion, for example, you haven't explained yet how Te- is 4D for an IEI... in comparison to which type? You said strategizing requires taking decisions, thus Te- would be used, but how that's the sign of 4D? How to quantify it? For example, I can see how Fe is 4D for an SEE and 1D for an ILI who are unable to make facial expressions in a normative way. How +Fe is 4D for an ILI? If it's just a matter of strategizing about social issues, then it doesn't make sense to call Fe+ 4D at all, just say that Ni- (or Ni+) is 4D. It just seems to me you arbitrary applied this dimensionality to functions in order to either create the symmetry or just to match the standard.

How do you describe a "valued" function?

A "valued" function would be the one we can use with psychological comfort and has positive effects on our psyche, so the weak valued functions, even if they are hard to use on our own (unless we put so much efforts), if supplied from the outside, we feel good about it.

Id functions are private and they are used sporadically. IEI can play chess just as well as ILI can strategize about social relations. However, IEI's Ni+ is one of the Ignoring functions.

Ni+ is ignoring because it's unconscious (or subconscious)? Did Ni+ get the + sign because it is formed by the combination of NiTe?

Both are about logical deduction. Te- makes decisions about prior Ni+ thoughts. Come up with a scenario at work/in school where you try to "outsmart" your colleagues. Those decisions will be sophisticated (3D/4D).

"Scenario" seems to be coming from Ni+. Also, Te- is used with Ni+, right? So, when an IEI is playing the chess, he is basically relying on the vital functions?

[Petter]

Specific things? If I tell someone to give me the glass of water, it will be Te+ and if I explain the steps then it will be Ti+? What about Te- then? Which kinds of orders require Te-? General orders? Give me examples.

Weighing/speculating pros and cons when you are going to buy a product. "Do I a really need it? Will it be useful? What's the quality of the product..."

A programmer gives instructions

Thinking about a scenario at work, and then deciding what aspects are favorable

I see what you mean, and I can relate to the forgetting about Te- after few seconds or minutes. Maybe one can use the vital function if forced from the outside? (in an example of chess, because in this case one MUST use Ni+Te- considering that these two functions are required for strategizing and taking the best action)

What do you mean by "force from the outside"?

Using mental functions unconsciously? How?

I am not sure... this is speculation... but i think IEI uses some aspects of Fe+ unconsciously while being focused on Ni-.

What about ILI's 1D Se+? How it differs from IEI's 2D Se+? Give me examples.

... and IEI's Se+ is conscious, which is also an important factor. SeFi is about actually meeting and interacting with people. There is no doubt that IEI is more socially active than ILI. A 1D function oversimplifies... it is black and white, so ILI either pays no attention at all to his girlfriend/friend or he is very intense/thoughtful. IEI is not extreme in this way when it comes to relationships.

Also, in your Model D, an LII would have 4D Se+, but 1D Se-?

No, LII has 1D Se+ and 4D Se-.

They would know which person can benefit them, but they have zero skills when it comes to pushing people, right?

I don't think Se- is about pushing people. A type with 3D/4D Se- uses appropriate defensive methods in the physical world. LII's Se- looks like LSE's Se-.

Yes, I meant they naturally use the aggressive tactics to get what they want, and live in here and now.

ok

So... you are saying IEIs are capable to strategize or know about the best/most efficient methods, but unable to follow through?

yes... in most cases.

Let's say I am advising my colleagues that they should study from xyz books in the given time as that will help them "outsmart" other colleagues. What functions would I be using?

You are constantly using many different functions, so it is not always that easy to discern a particular function. But you giving them some books and saying "read this", that would be Te+.

How are you calling Te- a 4D function for an IEI when the dimensionality is supposed to be applied to an isolated function?

Because Te- IS an isolated function. I didn't mean it like that. See my previous comment regarding this.

Model A doesn't have -+ signs,
"your model is nothing but an alternative perspective to Model A"

This is contradictory.

but dimensionality and consciousness/unconsciousness, if you map functions to Model A's position / blocks, you would get (for an IEI):
So, basically you further distributed the 1D-4D dimensionality to -+ signs, making it two Model As.
4D: Ni- (ego), Fi+ (id)
3D: Fe+ (ego) Ne- (id)
2D: Si- (super-ego) Ti+ (super-id)
1D: Te+ (super-ego) Se- (super-id)

No, because IEI´s Ne+ is more obvious than Ne-. +/- doesn't work in Model A.

Btw, are you sure that Ne+ is 4D and conscious, and Ne- is 3D and unconscious for an IEI? Can you give me real-life examples?

You must also distinguish between main functions and secondary functions. You are a very introverted subtype, right?

Ne is about humor. IEI and ILE get along very well for a reason. They share the same sense of humor. You usually don't see "ENFp-ness" in the IEI. For example, Craig Ferguson's humor probably doesn't attract you.

In Model A, for example, it is assumed that Ignoring function is used along with Demonstrative, so Ne- belongs to super-id.

No, see comment above about +/-.

Conscious here would mean able to use it constantly (and not for just a moment or "30 seconds" as you put it earlier). Ne+Ti- belongs to ego block, right? (this is why IEI can look very much like an LII or ILE)

Yes.

By "an alternative perspective", I mean that your Model doesn't necessarily contradicts Model A (similarly how Model G doesn't contradict it and seems to explain functions in a different manner... internalities, externatilies, etc.,) or am I wrong?

It doesn't contradict the basic structure of Model A. However, Model D contradicts some aspects of Model A. IEI's Fi is not always 4D, and it is not always Id etc.

Because it seems to me that dimensionality was supposed to apply on isolated functions not the -+ signs formed through combination of functions, so here applying the dimensionality to -+ signs would only lead to confusion, for example, you haven't explained yet how Te- is 4D for an IEI... in comparison to which type? You said strategizing requires taking decisions, thus Te- would be used, but how that's the sign of 4D? How to quantify it? For example, I can see how Fe is 4D for an SEE and 1D for an ILI who are unable to make facial expressions in a normative way. How +Fe is 4D for an ILI? If it's just a matter of strategizing about social issues, then it doesn't make sense to call Fe+ 4D at all, just say that Ni- (or Ni+) is 4D. It just seems to me you arbitrary applied this dimensionality to functions in order to either create the symmetry or just to match the standard.

Facial expressions is related to Fe-.

No, because strategy is not solely about Ni. Any strategy involves decisions. You cannot just visualize a scenario/problem (Ni). If the strategy is about subjects/people then it is NiFe or FeNi.

A "valued" function would be the one we can use with psychological comfort and has positive effects on our psyche, so the weak valued functions, even if they are hard to use on our own (unless we put so much efforts), if supplied from the outside, we feel good about it.

I disagree strongly with this. It is simply not true that IEI's OWN usage of Fi (in Model A) or Fi+ (in Model D) causes negative effects on our psyche. It is other people's excessive usage (from your point of view) that causes irritation. Especially when aspects of (your) Super-Ego functions are expressed verbally.

Ni+ is ignoring because it's unconscious (or subconscious)?

It is called Ignoring because IEI tends to igore it. (Some subtypes of) IEI uses Ne+ a lot, so Ni+ must be ignored. They "disturb" each other. And consequently Ni+ is pushed into unconsciousness.

Did Ni+ get the + sign because it is formed by the combination of NiTe?

Yes. The information aspects.

"Scenario" seems to be coming from Ni+. Also, Te- is used with Ni+, right? So, when an IEI is playing the chess, he is basically relying on the vital functions?

Yes.

What about duality? SLE ego block would be Se- Ti+, second ego would be Si+ Fe-, right? So, they would give 3D Ti+ (practical "how tos", rules) to an IEI and get 3D Ti- in return? (because their Ti-... abstract models... would be 2D) SLE do not have their Ti- models as sophisticated as an IEI?

That's accurate.

Also, tell me which functions are accepting/producing according to you, is Ne+ producing for an IEI?

No. Ne+, Se+, Si+ and Ni+ are accepting functions for an IEI.

[seriousguy]

Weighing/speculating pros and cons when you are going to buy a product. "Do I a really need it? Will it be useful? What's the quality of the product..."

A programmer gives instructions

Thinking about a scenario at work, and then deciding what aspects are favorable

But, I think most agree that IEIs lack the decisiveness in such matters, for example, they may spend too much money on something useless on the fly.

What do you mean by "force from the outside"?

We both agree that we can use vital function consciously for a moment, what I meant is that we can't use it for a long time unless there is an absolute reason for it, kind of requiring the external stimulus (i.e., certain activities require one to use certain functions). In the case of Ni+Te- example, I don't think such aspects would be enjoyable for an IEI unless they MUST do these things, then they may be able to restrain for a longer time without resorting to the approach of Ni-, Ti- or other mental functions.

I am not sure... this is speculation... but i think IEI uses some aspects of Fe+ unconsciously while being focused on Ni-.

Yes, for example, if they focus too much on Ni-, then they may start losing the sense of emotional atmosphere and Fe+ goes into subconscious.

No, LII has 1D Se+ and 4D Se-.
I don't think Se- is about pushing people. A type with 3D/4D Se- uses appropriate defensive methods in the physical world. LII's Se- looks like LSE's Se-.

You are contradicting yourself, you said earlier that Se- is used in pushing people. How 4D Se- looks in LII?

yes... in most cases.

In most cases? Are there exceptions?

You are constantly using many different functions, so it is not always that easy to discern a particular function. But you giving them some books and saying "read this", that would be Te+.

No, if I actually sense naturally that reading certain books will help them achieve something (perhaps those books have helped me in the past), and I tell them categorically, then I think that would be Ni+Te- (and the categories would be created through either Ti- or Ti+).

This is contradictory.

How? You added signs to your Model, but still using a Model A as the basis.

You must also distinguish between main functions and secondary functions. You are a very introverted subtype, right?

Not really, but not fully ambiverted either. I think my weak functions are stronger, particularly Ti- (fair understanding on how concrete objects work, able to isolate the parts from something and fix it), Fe- (negative emotions, vulgar vocabulary, swearing...), Te+ (able to order, work and manipulate objects somewhat), Se- (able to understand who can benefit me or what people want from me) and Se+ (a bit pushy, understanding of certain aggressive tactics). Ni- and Fi+ is in the background (not verbalized) most of the time. Ne+ is verbalized a lot though (especially in close distance when I am feeling comfortable). Ti+ is good enough, Fe+ is not good (though tell me which function is used in the "acting"? I think I am good at acting or playing a role for a while, but not empathizing with people, feeling the emotions of other people and understanding social navigation). I would be something like IEI-8,5. Do you find any correlation between your subtype system to DCNH? (and Big Five traits, for example, I am incredibly neurotic and feel that I use weak functions all the time)

Ne is about humor. IEI and ILE get along very well for a reason. They share the same sense of humor. You usually don't see "ENFp-ness" in the IEI. For example, Craig Ferguson's humor probably doesn't attract you.

I do love Ne humor, but I don't understand the distinction between ENTp's humor and ENFp's humor. For example, I really love Bill Maher's humor (see this video). Is he ENTp or ENFp?

Facial expressions is related to Fe-.

For this reason, LII's and LII's Fe- would be 2D? (because they seem to have better facial expressions)

I disagree strongly with this. It is simply not true that IEI's OWN usage of Fi (in Model A) or Fi+ (in Model D) causes negative effects on our psyche. It is other people's excessive usage (from your point of view) that causes irritation. Especially when aspects of (your) Super-Ego functions are expressed verbally.

I see what you mean here (will come back later on it).

[Petter]

But, I think most agree that IEIs lack the decisiveness in such matters, for example, they may spend too much money on something useless on the fly.

Lacking decisiveness corresponds to a strong Te-. ILI weighs pros and cons forever :-) Both negative and positive aspects of a product. Spending too much money corresponds to a weak Te+.

We both agree that we can use vital function consciously for a moment, what I meant is that we can't use it for a long time unless there is an absolute reason for it, kind of requiring the external stimulus (i.e., certain activities require one to use certain functions). In the case of Ni+Te- example, I don't think such aspects would be enjoyable for an IEI unless they MUST do these things, then they may be able to restrain for a longer time without resorting to the approach of Ni-, Ti- or other mental functions.

I think it is the other way around; the fact that IEI must do these things makes it not enjoyable. Id functions are private and sporadic. But there are, for example, lots of ILI mathematicians (TiNe), so let's not exaggerate the unusefulness of the Id functions.

You are contradicting yourself, you said earlier that Se- is used in pushing people. How 4D Se- looks in LII?

Well, it depends on what we mean by "pushing people". It can refer to many different kinds of behavior. SLEs don't give orders as you suggested. But they do influence people with "salesman tactics" and physical dominance.

Se- is definitely 4D in LII. They do not act "hysterically" when faced with physical threats. And just like SLI and LSE, they avoid these kinds of situations. A 4D Id function has (usually) nothing to prove for itself.

No, if I actually sense naturally that reading certain books will help them achieve something (perhaps those books have helped me in the past), and I tell them categorically, then I think that would be Ni+Te- (and the categories would be created through either Ti- or Ti+).

It could be Te- as well. It depends on what exactly you are referring to.

How? You added signs to your Model, but still using a Model A as the basis.

You: "Model A doesn't have -+ signs" "your model is nothing but an alternative perspective to Model A"

I: "The basic structure of Model A ... applies to Model D"

I don't claim that Model D is an alternative Model A. +/- is impossible with eight functions (if defined as in Model D and Model B).

Not really, but not fully ambiverted either. I think my weak functions are stronger, particularly Ti- (fair understanding on how concrete objects work, able to isolate the parts from something and fix it), Fe- (negative emotions, vulgar vocabulary, swearing...), Te+ (able to order, work and manipulate objects somewhat), Se- (able to understand who can benefit me or what people want from me) and Se+ (a bit pushy, understanding of certain aggressive tactics). Ni- and Fi+ is in the background (not verbalized) most of the time. Ne+ is verbalized a lot though (especially in close distance when I am feeling comfortable). Ti+ is good enough, Fe+ is not good (though tell me which function is used in the "acting"? I think I am good at acting or playing a role for a while, but not empathizing with people, feeling the emotions of other people and understanding social navigation). I would be something like IEI-8,5. Do you find any correlation between your subtype system to DCNH? (and Big Five traits, for example, I am incredibly neurotic and feel that I use weak functions all the time)

You: "I would be something like IEI-2,3."

Both ILE and IEI seem to have vulgar vocabulary. And IEE and ILI don't. This is probably related to a verbal ("valued") and weak Se- in ILE and IEI. I think this is a way of projecting toughness.

I don't agree with your interpretation of Se- and Se+. Fe- is not about negative emotions. It's about both positive and negative aspects of ETHICS of emotions.

Fe+ is about acting, i.e. playing with emotions, or speculating about relationships etc. EIE's and IEI's Fe+ is definitely strong. Hence, your Ti+ is weak. SLE is your dual!

I do love Ne humor, but I don't understand the distinction between ENTp's humor and ENFp's humor. For example, I really love Bill Maher's humor (see this video). Is he ENTp or ENFp?

He is most likely ENTp / ILE. He is absolutely not IEE.

Ne- humor is black and bizarre.

Ne+ humor is provocative. Russel Brand is a good example.

For this reason, LII's and LII's Fe- would be 2D? (because they seem to have better facial expressions)

No, I meant that LIIs are usually not good at facial expressions. LII's Fe- is 1D, vital... i.e. the Suggestive function.