Why do I fall for every SEE guy I meet? What about them draws an LSI?
Why Do I Go for SEE as an LSI
Why do I fall for every SEE guy I meet? What about them draws an LSI?
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
They have causes.
"Inasmuch as it is nothing but pure communicability, every face, even the most noble and beautiful, is always suspended on the edge of an abyss"
They asked the fox, "Who's your witness?" The fox said, "My tail!"
Could you elaborate pleaseOriginally Posted by Delilah
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
IME SEE are very humanitarian driven once some degree of success have been achieved; protecting others and taking on certain humanitarian issues (or tackling them if professionally). They're quite gutsy too.
"Inasmuch as it is nothing but pure communicability, every face, even the most noble and beautiful, is always suspended on the edge of an abyss"
They asked the fox, "Who's your witness?" The fox said, "My tail!"
Hmmm. That doesn't sound like the men I'm talking about. Could I be thinking of ESE, IEE, or SLE?
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
In the case of typing uncertainty I'd just shelve what I mentioned about SEE being drawn to certain causes; it might make things unnecessarily more complicated based on what it is you have in mind.
As an aside, it is likely they could be ESE(?) though I don't know what characteristics they possess. Cheers.
"Inasmuch as it is nothing but pure communicability, every face, even the most noble and beautiful, is always suspended on the edge of an abyss"
They asked the fox, "Who's your witness?" The fox said, "My tail!"
They're the type to be the class clowns. Sometimes they have have a bad boy edge. But they are mostly like the comedians. Loud. Funny. Extroverted.
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
In Socionics terms, it's the Demonstrativeof SEEs. In particular, SEEs technically have the same kind of
In general, I see that the Demonstrative function of the Supervisee is rather appealing for the Supervisor (that's what primarily draws the Supervisor towards a Supervisee, besides matching Cognitive styles and non-type related factors like physical attraction). Personally, I am also into theof ESEs, haha, even though it is not reliable. Meaning, I don't feel like I can really "rely" on the
In the romantic sphere, the supervisor often finds the supervisee's use of his demonstrative function alluring, but will ultimately be unsatisfied with its sporadic nature.
SEE people are also in general popular, so they attrack lots of different types. Because they're usually fun, animated, people's person, seem to know how to connect with everyobody, good at dancing and use of their body, know how to dress and flaunt themselves etc. Traits that are elevated in society.
parents
early experiences
fixations?
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Ah, that makes sense. I need to learn more about demonstration functions.In Socionics terms, it's the Demonstrative
In general, I see that the Demonstrative function of the Supervisee is rather appealing for the Supervisor (that's what primarily draws the Supervisor towards a Supervisee, besides matching Cognitive styles and non-type related factors like physical attraction). Personally, I am also into the
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
What does fixations mean in socionics speak
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
Also makes sense!
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
Cuz we're hot as fuck.
Right, I find myself highly attracted to many LSIs as well.In Socionics terms, it's the Demonstrative
In general, I see that the Demonstrative function of the Supervisee is rather appealing for the Supervisor (that's what primarily draws the Supervisor towards a Supervisee, besides matching Cognitive styles and non-type related factors like physical attraction). Personally, I am also into the
Yeah demonstrative function is very attractive indeed for supervisor when there is a need for it. Bad thing is that it is ON/OFF.
I'm still very grateful for LSI who gave me pain medication. Same can be said about LSI dentist. Memorable moments.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
NO Private messages, please. Use Discord instead.
Because... flowers...
C'mon, @Pole. You know.
4D Fe.
I understand the 8 functions. I get duality and conflictor, other than that I'm lost.
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
SEEs have the potent 4D
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
Could be multiple possibilities here:
1. You've typed yourself falsely
2. You type them falsely
3. Their behavior is part of your Imago (ideally imagined partner, what you think is your dream-man)
4. Because of earlier relations with SEEs, the familiarity draws you in and vice versa; relations of habit.
5. You, as an agressor (ISTj) or for whatever other reason naturally like the power you feel over SEEs as their supervisor, as it's a one way street basically.
If this is true, you should try to (obviously) find you dual instead (maybe they are and you just type them as SEE every time) or just try to exercise more healthy relations with people in general (any relation but the ones in which you are the benefactor or supervisor), where it's a two-way street. Yes you run more risk of getting hurt in some way mentally (because the other is actually in a normal position towards you in the relationship) but exercising different relations may make you more confident engaging in relations other than the ones in which you are the supervisor.
Practice makes perfect.
You bring up really good points. *questions everything in life*
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
What makes you think they are Se lead specifically?
Btw I can be ok with SEEs myself but if they try to manipulate too much with their personal attitudes, well, I don't particularly care about that tbh. I don't react truly negatively to it, it's just boring and a slight turn-off. There can be lots of power struggles too. That can be fun to a degree tho' lol.
But on the whole, I don't find them very interesting, I get bored with their stuff relatively fast. That's my experience so far anyway.
That's an interesting topic but I don't think it's as simple as falling hard for any Fe dom even if you probably were intentionally exaggerating it a bit lol. The ego Logic still acts as a filter to check things with it first. So it's not like LxI can't resist any kind of Fe ever. But yeah, if that filter agrees, then there can be a lot more openness to Fe, over time.Okay a couple things. Firstly LSI are SUCKERS for Fe.I can only speak about the LSI men I know but they will date other types and be the aggressor in those relations but if they meet an EIE or ESE they will fall for them hard. They cannot resist Fe. Also many thinking types don't trust their "feelings" but with an Fe dom they will believe it is the real deal. LSI especially likes a challenge and see Fe doms are challenging and interesting. EIE and ESE will bring out the Fe in the LSI and they trust them more easily than other types.
I probably mistyped then. Fe is like crack for me, tbh.Okay a few things:
1) LSI are suckers for Fe.
Since the LSI has weak Ne, they don't always see the negative potential in people while still being skeptical. They tend to be quite trusting of ESE and EIE, but not trusting other types as much.
2) ESE looks a lot like a SEE. In fact many people who are very good at MBTI considering me an ESFP. I even test as ESFp but I am not.
My theory- they are ESEs or EIEs.
3) SEEs are just awesome. They tend to be attractive, fit, confident and kind. But my LSI IRL has trouble with SEEs and gets upset with them very easily.
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
Lol I guessed soI was being dramatic (pardon the Fe). I edited my post a bit. I guess what I mean is that the LSI will dampen down their romantic feelings in general. They don't trust them or see the point. From what I have seen they will engage in a lot of casual dating but is skeptical of most non-Fe types as won't see them as a long-term partner.
When they meet an "attractive" EIE or ESE, who is compatible in terms of Ni goals, enneagram, and intelligence they will be much more attracted.
What are they seeing that I'm not seeing? LOL I don't get it
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
It's up to you to answer that, what precisely do you see in them that creates this magnetism, and is it a quality you lack or not? Ikr some members did a super good job already but if we know that it could be easier to use intertype relationships.
SEEs tend to be somewhat hedonistic and experiential; many LSI like experimentation and to be in control so couple this with healthy libidos - et voila. But what happens when the experiment is over?
a.k.a. I/O
When I see Fe I see manipulation. I am very distrustful of people, and rather have them be blunt and honest with me than acting all sweet and caring while secretely having a different agenda. This is why I value the Se/Fi combo in SEEs so much, because with them, what you see is what you're gonna get, no desillusion.
I also see Fe as patronizing, I am perfectly capable of handling my own shit without you looking out for me, thank you very much. I don't need your ungrounded sympathy, it makes me feel like I apparently come accross as helpless, because apparently you found me to be looking helpless enough to be ''sweet'' or ''caring'' to me. Like I'm some maternal object you could patronize. Fuck off.
I want you to be honest and direct with me, not caring.
I'm an adult, not a baby, so treat me like one.
When someone is being honest and direct with me (Se), I respect them, and am grateful that they took the time and effort to be honest with me. Because honesty is a virtue, and serves the purpose of self-improvement.
Being sympathetic (Fe) serves no purpose but to ingratiate yourself with others so that you've got leverage to make them do things for you. I'd rather be independent than have some Fe lead playing me.
This is why my ESE mother gets on my nerves a lot. Often she just does things for me she doesn't even have to do for me, like cooking. Later, when we've got a disagreement, she blackmails me by saying: You don't even know how to cook. No, because you always do it, so why would I have to learn?
Fe manipulates you by patronizing you into becoming helpless (like a child), by doing stuff for you that really isn't needed, or showing sympathy that's unneeded. Then they get mad when you don't reciprocate. I never said I would, so stop doing stuff for me. I don't ask for sympathy.
That's why I hate Fe.
ESE and EIE are not even the same, though. Not all Fe is equal.
ESEs primarily use +Fe, EIEs (and SEEs) primarily use -Fe.
SEEs can be manipulative AF too.
This is you being Type 6. "Acting all sweet and caring while secretly having a different agenda" is typically +Fe with Si ego, so basically ESE. Not EIE. Can also be Type 2.
That's Fe with a Caretaker attitude, aka Alpha SF. Beta NFs are not like that, generally.I also see Fe as patronizing, I am perfectly capable of handling my own shit without you looking out for me, thank you very much. I don't need your ungrounded sympathy, it makes me feel like I apparently come accross as helpless, because apparently you found me to be looking helpless enough to be ''sweet'' or ''caring'' to me. Like I'm some maternal object you could patronize. Fuck off.
I want you to be honest and direct with me, not caring.
I'm an adult, not a baby, so treat me like one.
All in all, what you "hate" is patronizing Alpha SF (mothers). You assume that all Fe ego types will be like an Alpha SF. Probably because most Fe ego types are in fact Alpha SF.
But assuming that all the behaviour above is Fe-specific is inaccurate. It's a mix of Fe with Si (and being a mom).
P.S: My parents have that patronizing attitude, too. They are ESE and LSE, both Si subtype. Driving me nuts. Not all Si Ego types will be like that, but it is a common problem.
Interesting because I don't really see SEEs that way. SLEs sure, but SEE is still an Ethical type so they are going to do emotional manipulation.That is, they do go beyond what you see directly.
Heh for sure you are no LII then. All the stuff you are talking about is alpha Si. Medusa explained it very well already though.I also see Fe as patronizing, I am perfectly capable of handling my own shit without you looking out for me, thank you very much. I don't need your ungrounded sympathy, it makes me feel like I apparently come accross as helpless, because apparently you found me to be looking helpless enough to be ''sweet'' or ''caring'' to me. Like I'm some maternal object you could patronize. Fuck off.
I think this is probably your perspective (Si superego? idk, I've seen other beta NF say this), I don't find them patronizing, doesn't drive me nuts, I mostly just ignore it/deflect it politely when someone tries to do that much Si caretaking stuff.
Hmm, maybe. At least they're not patronizing.
Meh, anyone can have a secret hidden agenda while trying to manipulate someone. Not just ESEs.
It's just that Fe leads do it in an annoying and patronizing way, which I can also almost always see through. It irritates me.
Agreed. But the Fe part is still about sympathy, which I still find to be patronizing.
Still not LSI
No, I was just describing my ESE mother as an example. I know EIEs are a bit different, but they still are Fe based, which I don't like. As I said, I like directness and honesty (Se). Not sympathy (Fe). The Si doing stuff for me is even more annoying, but doesn't take out the fact that it's because of Fe reasons.
My dad's an LSE also, lol join the club.
Also I am sadly not knowledgeable enough in enneagram to respond to your assumptions on that matter.
The same for the Fe- and Fe+ stuff. I assume you mean SEEs also have strong Fe that they undervalue, but nevertheless sometimes use?
Yes, SEEs use their Fe often enough. Their Fe is as strong as the Fe of Fe leads. All ExFx types have the strongest Fe.
True, this highlights an important aspect. Sensing relations in Gamma and Beta don't start off with physical hesitations, something that's different when LSI gets themselves an intuitive partner who will not only make it more of a prolonged but bonding challenge but also enriches the dyad with other perspectives which make everything more interesting. The spark comes in doses, so to say, while the SEE delivers it instantly. Which is of course the gratification that strongSEEs tend to be somewhat hedonistic and experiential; many LSI like experimentation and to be in control so couple this with healthy libidos - et voila. But what happens when the experiment is over?
a.k.a. I/Oin the LSI want, rightfully, but the SEE partner does not truly need these for compensation.
I thinkPoLR comes into play as well when you look at this scenario. "This could potentially really become something" does not occur, and weak
's one track to the future further diffuses the encounter.
Well they are generally attractive people.
The following is from this page: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Victor-DarkAngelFireWolf69
Causal-Determinist Cognition
Let us now examine the first cognitive form: It is analytic, positive, and deductive. We will call this style Causal-Determinist. Its carriers are Sociotypes ILE, LSI, SEE, EII (ENTp, ISTj, ESFp, INFj, respectively)
- As Statics, their cognitive activity is stable and clear.
- As Evolutionary types, they think procedurally without overlooking parts and intermediate details.
- As Positivists, they aim towards singularly valid solutions.
Intellectual Sphere
Causal-Determinist cognition is known under synonymous names as formal logic or deterministic thinking, both of which emphasize its rigid nature. Speech in this cognitive style takes shape with aid of the connectives "because", "therefore", "consequently" (causal conjunctions). The mental process consists in constructing chains of cause and effect, reducing explanations to deterministic mechanisms. Using the example of Aristotle, who first pointed out four ways to explain phenomena, the reason for the existence of a sculpture is the sculptor who fashioned it directly.
In the scientific sphere so thinks ILE, in the managerial-administrative sphere is methodical LSI, in the social sphere SEE calculates chains of material interests, in the humanitarian sphere subject to the same categorical imperative is EII.
Social Sphere
Aristotle is considered the discoverer of this approach. The basic laws of formal thinking are outlined in his theory of syllogism. However, the first to consistently put them into practice was Euclid, founder of geometry. More recently, its principles grounded rationalist Rene Descartes in his 1637 treatise "Discourse on the Method". Then it finally took shape in mathematical logic. The Causal-Determinist paradigm reached its apogee in Logical Positivism, then increasingly began to decline in value towards the end of the 20th century. However, as the common stereotype of proof, it still dominates to this day.
I will touch its advantages. First, it is perceived by society as the most authoritative, most convincing, and singularly correct. In mathematics, it is formalized as the deductive-axiomatic method. Use of it requires great intellectual stamina. Second, attributes of greater clarity and concentration are inherent to this style. The type most characterized by singular concentration is LSI. However, the irrational SEE argues quite soundly, deriving one consequence from another, implying focus on the chain of events. If even one link fails for any reason, then Determinists lose their sense of rationale and find it difficult to act because they see no reason to.
At the same time, Causal-Determinism has its drawbacks. It is primarily the most artificial and removed from the laws of functioning life. Its efficacy extends to the 'logical' formulation of already existing results, the construction of operating mechanisms, but not fundamentally new discoveries. The first dead end which formalization risks is scholasticism, i.e. pointless albeit logically impeccable reasoning. The second intellectual dead end faced by sequential Determinists is the trap of reductionism, which they fall into on account of fragmenting wholes into their component parts. This deficiency was noted even by the ancient skeptics, as well as in modern times by Hume, who doubted that any event could be dictated by strict reason.
Indeed, in building a long chain of cause and effect, it is difficult to avoid the danger of circularity, the risk of falling into circulus vitiosus—a vicious circle in the proof. Kurt Gödel's theorem on the incompleteness of formal systems, asserts that any sufficiently complex system of rules is either inconsistent, or contains conclusions that can be neither proven nor refuted by the rules of that system. This established limits in the applicability of formal logic. Using the deductive-axiomatic method, the medieval Scholastics in particular, attempted to rigorously prove the existence of God. Resulting from closure of causes in terms of effects, they circularly arrived at a definition of God as the thought which thinks of itself.
Psychological Sphere
Causal-Determinist cognition forges a mentality poorly protected from indoctrination, or in extreme cases, even brainwashing. By skillfully combining memorable words and actions, it is possible to gain control over the behavior of specific individuals. Intelligent Determinists in particular, are characterized by a strong dependence on the events of childhood, which Sigmund Freud discovered in his time, though poorly understood in full. Habits in pronounced Determinists are comparable in their rigidity to conditioned reflexes.
Standard military interrogation procedures are designed to ensure guaranteed cause-effect impacts upon the psyche. It includes measures of exposure such as sleep deprivation, changes in room temperature and/or humidity, denial of food subsequently followed by its delivery as a reward, etc. Isolation of the detainee and the gradual imposition of regulations, bears fruit sooner or later. In time, the vulnerability of psychological destabilization is manufactured into dependence upon the interrogator.
It is noteworthy that extreme critical situations, trigger a 'slow-motion film' state of mind in Determinists. Thinking becomes particularly clear, but stretched out over time, such that seconds can subjectively feel like minutes. Along these same lines, due to an abrupt shakeup of their psyche, the stress of surprise severely impedes their cerebral activity until they can recover in deep sleep.
The psychological school of Behaviorism represents this model of the psyche. Its supporters believe that behavioral learning is achieved through reinforcement—rewarding adherence to rules and punishing their violation. B. F. Skinner formulated the principle of operant conditioning, according to which the behavior of living organisms is completely determined by the cause-effect of this conditioning. He proposed the method of 'successive approximations', in which students receive positive reinforcement in instances where their behavior conforms to that desired.
Behaviorists developed the concept of conditioned learning and established a rigid procedural method of action towards the goal as the basis for its operation.
Scientific Sphere
Formal logical thinking in its time gave birth to the deterministic cause-effect worldview. This is the worldview of classical physics whose cornerstone is Newtonian Mechanics, and was the dominant paradigm until the early 20th century. Rigid systems operate according to these rules—organisms and mechanisms. When faced with multi-factor processes (such as psychology or society), however, reductionism loses its explanatory power to portray complex phenomena in terms of their basic components. Additionally, this classic paradigm has been too influenced by the ideal of 'progress', in spite of numerous historical examples of regressive tendencies, setbacks, repetitions, etc.
A real-life model of Causal-Determinist cognition is given by information represented in the form of a chart or realistic illustration made using a direct perspective. In this technique, objects are depicted larger or smaller in proportion to their distance from the observer. By drawing in this way, following strict instructions, any object can be easily depicted.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
Thank you to everyone for the feedback. Could it be that I'm ILI and SEE is my dual?
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
Could be, but i think its more likely that youre simply typing them wrongly. Maybe you could be looking at esfjs or enfjs. These types can be pretty over the top aswel, its just that the stereotype is that overly emotional and impulsive behavior = See, but thats really not always the case. We should remember that theyre still base se and fi creative, whereas fe might be the thing youre actually spotting in these people
Definitely dont rule out the possibility of you being ili though
When I look up the descriptions of SEE, SLE, EIE, and ESE, they are very distinct from one another, how can they be confused?Could be, but i think its more likely that youre simply typing them wrongly. Maybe you could be looking at esfjs or enfjs. These types can be pretty over the top aswel, its just that the stereotype is that overly emotional and impulsive behavior = See, but thats really not always the case. We should remember that theyre still base se and fi creative, whereas fe might be the thing youre actually spotting in these people
Definitely dont rule out the possibility of you being ili though
LSI-Se 836 Sp/Sx
Because the same behaviour can be explained through every cognitive function.
E.g. a man kicks a ball
Ti: he tries to kick the ball 10 times to see if it follows the same trajectory every time.
Se: hes practising so he can outmatch his peers in a game of football
Te: he tries to kick a different ball every time to see which one is most effective at scoring a goal
Si: he kicks the ball because he likes playing football
Fi: he kicks the ball because his son wants to learn how to play football
Fe: he kicks the ball to impress his girlfriend
Ne: he tries to find a new way to kick the ball in the goal
Ni: the guy kicks the ball a certain way to see if it follows as predicted.
At the end of the day all you see is a guy who kicked a ball. Your interpretation isnt the only one. Therefore im saying you should be more open, because your expectations cloud reality. Any behaviour can be explained through any cognitive ability. The truth is you dont really know peoples motives unless they honestly tell you, thats why you shouldnt judge a book by its cover and try to get to know those 'SEEs' before you lable them.
I had the same thing with a colleague lately whom i thought was see at first, but now im starting to believe she might be enfj instead, because of all the damn drama and -fe.
Last edited by Number 9 large; 08-04-2017 at 03:13 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
