Please don't reveal the true meaning of polr to me. My feeble mind will shatter with incomprehension!
Or maybe it will just be another dumb theory. <-- I didn't say that *whistles insouciantly*
Not sure what you mean by "base types." Introverts generally will prefer to conserve their energy (but least of all creative types).
As for energy conservation, all Ip types conserve it. Afaik ILI does it so they don't waste time on inefficient stuff.
is the PoLR the gateway into hell? every IE has its illustrious details ("god is in the details"), but the more you see the world through the intricacies of the PoLR, the more insane you become ("the devil is in the details"). it's like the key you can turn to invert your entire psyche and live as an inside-out person (in pain all the time). and around you people try to always make you be good at your PoLR - if they just make you use it more and more you will get better, they think. untrue. sadistic individuals delight in slowly turning you into a sputtering imbecile no longer in command of any of your faculties. it's mind control, just like the DS function.
i think this happened to me because my mom's Fe lead and my dad Te creative. imagine the ambivalence this created for me (i had to spend an unnatural amount of time with them both). so actually i'm just constantly torn between creative fct and PoLR. there is no end to the conflict.
oh, and once you see it, you can't unsee it.
Last edited by inumbra; 09-28-2016 at 04:13 PM.
~ I consider any IE in the ego and creative block to be base type because logistically they work in tandem. A Si ego is always going to have either Fe or Te producing creative function, as you know. A Te or Fe type might sometimes have Si producing. The ego or creative Si is quite apparent in both observationally and so I just call it Si base if that is the topic at hand.
~ Generally introverts may attempt to converse energy yet my point was Si types will do it the most. And SiTe the very most because of space efficiency Te creative. This is where the stereotypes of being "lazy" come from. Although they are not in actuality being lazy, their work efforts are spent as it where, spending the least amount of effort for a given task and if more is needed, then this energetic push will not be sustained for long. Further, hardcore "exercise" and explosive use of ones body for sport is rather replaced with leisure time, such as boating on a hot afternoon. This isnt something imagined up, btw. I have observed this of Si egos. If any fast paced sport is attempted, its often involves the use of a motor vehicle instead of raw physical energy.
~ I will say for a second time the walking over driving example is a general rule of thumb as opposed to a case by case definition. That you personally do not drive might simply be a product of your environment. Not driving in my part of the world would mean you could not "have a life" - hold a job, meet with friends, buy groceries. I grew up in the country so not driving meant you were basically a paraplegic. All sociotypes can drive of course, yet some may choose not to like you said of yourself because of ... Se based Fear I assume? Back to the main point, yes it is my belief conservation and expending effort is a key component to Si - with SiTe being the most efficient at it. That you choose not to drive sounds like it has more to do with your life circumstance (not owning a car, fear of driving) and less to do with what I am saying about conserving energy.
Although in your specific case even choosing not to drive is an attempt to save yourself, it would seem - I may be wrong, from the effort of learning a new skill. It takes effort to save up for a car or truck. It takes effort to read the manuals. It takes effort to learn how to drive. It takes effort to do something that causes your heart to race and your senses to ignite with adrenalin. It takes effort to cope with the stress of manuvering busy streets. It takes effort to learn the skills. It takes effort for road tests. It takes effort to fuel your vehicle. It takes effort to buy vehicle insurnace. All these things a sensing type could do of course, but you are an NT type so is not your lack of interest in driving related to expending effort to put up with the daily consequences of driving in order to get places? Do you think this is soley to do with polr-Se? Could other factors be at play?
~ Anyway I'm ralying against the storm here because it seems as though no one knows what I'm talking about or agrees so it seems really to be a mute point.
Last edited by wacey; 09-28-2016 at 04:40 PM.
btw: in socionics the first two functions are called the Ego, "Ego Si", "Ego Ni" etc. The first function is base/leading/lead/etc.
Sure, there can be other factors involved, having a social life (ethics+sensing) is also a part of it.~ I will say for a second time the walking over driving example is a general rule of thumb as opposed to a case by case definition. That you personally do not drive might simply be a product of your environment. Not driving in my part of the world would mean you could not "have a life" - hold a job, meet with friends, buy groceries. I grew up in the country so not driving meant you were basically a paraplegic.
Yes...and effort is also an Se theme.Although in your specific case even choosing not to drive is an attempt to save yourself, it would seem - I may be wrong, from the effort of learning a new skill. It takes effort to save up for a car or truck. It takes effort to read the manuals. It takes effort to learn how to drive. It takes effort to do something that causes your heart to race and your senses to ignite with adrenalin. It takes effort to cope with the stress of manuvering busy streets. It takes effort to learn the skills. It takes effort for road tests. It takes effort to fuel your vehicle. It takes effort to buy vehicle insurnace.
And I already know how to drive and have owned a vehicle, thanks.
implied said a long time ago, they ruin every vacation. ime, the EJ-IJ temperament style is far more on the go all the time than EP-IP which goes in spurts and in a far more flowy way. without EPs around, IPs can fall into inactivity. but EJs rarely help because it's like they are on speed all the time.
EJ vacation: fit in all the important things to see according to a schedule (no deviation!). or maybe that is more LSE. it's like there's a checklist you have to get through or something. it's best to start at 6 am so you can cram as much in as possible. also, travel guides. and only tourist sites (the ones that everyone goes to).
that said, time can be scheduled for "relaxing" but it's just like after you recover from having to run on hyper speed, then you are just bored.
eta: exaggerating less, it is more like EJ just does things in modes... like there's steady-keep-working-steadily mode; hyper speed mode; and idle "relaxation" mode (where for XSEs that seems to involve no mental energy or physical energy). each mode is stable/consistent. it's not only that sustained hyper speed mode is exhausting, but the whole pattern is so completely foreign and draining. the steady mode goes on too long and is too steady. the relaxation mode goes on too long and is like death by boredom.
i feel like this still fails to explain what i'm trying to describe.
Last edited by inumbra; 09-28-2016 at 11:34 PM.
If this was a vocab lesson, then yes I would have failed that question and I had done so consciously. Still, my point remains: base and creative work in tandem in real life forming the entire ego block which is holistic. If you want to get sticky on terminology then by all means.
btw: in socionics the first two functions are called the Ego, "Ego Si", "Ego Ni" etc. The first function is base/leading/lead/etc.
Ok makes sense.Sure, there can be other factors involved, having a social life (ethics+sensing) is also a part of it.
Sure, different sides of the same coin. My entire point from thread 1 was to say that Si will conserve whereas Se will expend even if reserves are low.Yes...and effort is also an Se theme.
It was an illustrative example no need to take it personally.And I already know how to drive and have owned a vehicle, thanks.
Last edited by wacey; 09-29-2016 at 07:58 PM.
Si is not a lazy function. It's an efficient function due to being introverted, but Sx functions in general tend to spur people into action more, along with Fx functions. I consider ESFj (Fe lead + Si creative) the most industrious type by far. The types who I would consider really lazy are the xNTp types, since intuition is focused on abstract things and thinking is focused on just passive looking at how things are rather than what one should do. xNTj tends to be pretty conscientious due to being a rational type, but you won't find workaholics amongst them from my experience.
Also, inumbra, yes, a lot of Si stereotypes are utter BS, but you don't come across as an Si lead to me at all. I don't think Si leads are likely to pop up on a forum like this at all, really.
I think a good rule of thumb is that if you need to eschew what most of the sources say an IE involves as "stereotype," you're building your own system. That isn't a bad thing! I do it all the time. But, it's good to acknowledge when you're doing it. That way, you can start listing arguments and counterarguments for which is better (in case they share a good majority of goals, or otherwise just don't compare apples/oranges).
I admit I am sometimes loose about it, because I feel I'm essentially being true to socionics' basic definitions and think the sources are just building on the fundamental definitions in a ridiculous way...but I acknowledge I ultimately just kind of have my own interpretation, even if it draws a lot of inspiration from ze socion.
Comments on Jung's introverted sensation: I'd say this is one of the most controversial portraits personally (possibly Jung may even agree were he alive), even though it conveys the idea still. Jung thought of himself at the time of writing Psychological Types as a T>S>N type. He later changed this designation to N>S very clearly. As the orthodox Jungian way seemed much more in tune with the idea that the attitudes of the top two functions of consciousness coincide than are opposite (note: Jung did not distinguish among things like valued vs strong, so all this really meant was he thought there's 1 attitude of consciousness/its opposite colors the unconscious, rather than generally slicing up the attitudes function by function), it's plausible he thought of the introverted sensation portrait as somewhat applicable to himself....which is significant in assessing just how well it distinguishes sensation from intuition, given he seemed to change diagnosis
ESEs are definitely industrious but keep in mind that they are also in Se Demonstrative mode much of the time.I consider ESFj (Fe lead + Si creative) the most industrious type by far.
If you want to understand Si more, most visual artists have Si in the ego block, and writers like Charles Dickens, Franz Kafka, and Heinrich von Kleist have an Si-heavy writing style.
Part of what you're describing is basically accurate but it seems like you are also using Jungian or MBTI definitions. And, again, it helps if you don't personify the elements.
"Either of them can make people get off their rear ends and do things."
This is not compatible with the socionic view of introversion and extroversion. Initiative and action - these are alien concepts to introverted elements.
And yeah this stuff was too strongly tasting like MBTI...
Jung's Si definition was not this, btw.
@Schildmaid - "ordinary things" are just Sensing. Se will want money and a nice house, clothes etc. too, even more than Si as Se is expansive. Also I suggest you let go of MBTI and its simplistic and inconsistent function model.
Also, I've actually read Kafka and not just (usually horrible) translations, as well as biographical information, so I can confidently say he's . It's people here who have MBTI-like stereotypes about , not me...
Do you disagree with this characterization? All of these elements are related to in socionics. He's basically an early version of Lynch - juxtaposing (or really, caricaturing and making fun of) daily mundane things with horrific and absurd things.His work, which fuses elements of realism and the fantastic, typically features isolated protagonists faced by bizarre or surrealistic predicaments and incomprehensible social-bureaucratic powers, and has been interpreted as exploring themes of alienation, existential anxiety, guilt, and absurdity.
Cool that wasn't clear to me that you weren't equating them with behaviours. Btw they are called information elements, not functions. That language is again MBTI.They're much closer to socionics definitions than MBTI or Jung, and I'm just largely thinking in terms of what causes the behaviors attributed to functions rather than just seeing the functions themselves as behaviors. Models like this tend to have a strong degree of emergentism anyways (and if you use Reinin dichotomies, etc. it's more or less proven) and I'm just making room for that by defining the functions in the most abstract terms possible that yield the empirically observed results.
I don't use Reinin.
As for the last part -- cool, but a lot of other conditions will need to be specified too to get to the observed results.
It would be cool if you substantiated this random claim.It's people here who have MBTI-like stereotypes about , not me...