I don't like comparing subtypes when base type is in question because subtype descriptions exist to add nuance to a base type and the descriptions are based on shades and relative differences from
within the type, thus there are other much more effective means that bear on the question directly without getting inadvertently tied up in a mess of presuppositions about what the words mean because they refer to an already established base type. if you take away that foundation and try to look at it from a free floating lens of determining type in general it distorts the meaning and purpose of the descriptions and leads to highly subjective and confusing results. the best way to determine base type is have a good understanding of the fundamentals of socionics and then use highly dispositive dichotomies such as merry v serious or a comparative look at the creative function. this of course requires an understanding of what merry v serious actually means and same with the what the creative function actually looks like. these are not things people can easily do for you, but here are four pages with the information that if you properly understand it, they contain what you need to determine SLE v LIE
quadra values
renin's description of creative functions
democratic v aristocratic
merry v serious
another thing I would point out is the types assess their success (self esteem in other words) in terms of their mobilizing function. thus Fe mobilizing looks to the positive emotional feedback they receive in order to determine value, whereas Se mobilizing looks at what actual effects they have on the environment as objects. Se wants to know they "can really do stuff" Fe mobilizing wants to know they "really are viewed as good". Se base is already confident they can "do stuff" it is not so much a source of self esteem because its in the zone of confidence, it is taken for granted. although there are small boosts here and there from positive feedback on the ego functions, its not in the zone of insecurity which is what they really aim for positive feedback on. Likewise LIE knows he "knows whats really going on" and doesnt want emotional feedback so much as to see his plans actually come to fruition whatever they may be--to validate his internal vision of things. no one can really shake his assessment of whats going on in a conceptual sense rather hes more concerned about it being "frustrated by stupidity or other obstacles" not that his base understanding is somehow off base, even the most negative feedback on this channel is looked as an opportunity to correct course, not a true self esteem hit
1d Fi in general is highly subjective and can look like almost anything, because it is derived only from experience and not informed by societal norms, isn't sophisticated enough to reliably and agilely respond to exceptions, and can't develop itself in time without some kind of experiential stimulus
the difference is LIE is highly sensitive to information about relations and tends to ignore emotions, except as a mostly procedural aspect of polite society, whereas SLE wants to see positive emotion and is willing to ignore or is otherwise confused by the real status of relationships in general
I feel like in a certain sense 1d and 4d functions are similar in that they are highly individuated, as a category. whereas the 2d functions are fairly rigid, but pleasant, and only fall short under unusual circumstances. 3d functions, especially the creative are united in the sense that they are used to solve problems thus they all tend to take on the shade of being used "offensively" creative Fi for example is using your relationship to things as a weapon to bring people to heel. Se Fi manifests as a confident display of opinions designed to influence others, but not via direct attention to the emotional expression and reaction for its own sake, but with care for the underlying relationships at work (4d Fe is a consequence of this approach, but as a byproduct, not as a goal unto itself). creative functions all have a manipulative quality to them that becomes easier to spot over time once you understand what the creative exists to do. thus you can see identical but opposing creative functions in action as both "tools of the same master's house".. they may disagree in the particulars but the way they go about it is structurally the same. like watching 2 SEEs argue or 2 LIIs
4d functions actually recede from 1st person view quite a bit because theyre the lens things are viewed from (as base, in other words I don't look at my glasses, I look
through them) or an unconscious byproduct of creative (as demonstrative). thus other people can see your demonstrative in action many times, but you will rarely identify with it. for example I don't think of myself as Ne at all. likewise I don't really sit down and say to myself "how am I going to Te this out", it just happens automatically. what I do consciously meditate on a lot is "whats the deal with x?" in terms of Ni (not every possibility but the "one" "real deal" with x), which itself a kind of composite of Te and Ne if you really think about it, but that is the definition of creative Ni
from an LIE--4d Te Ne. In fact it seems DarkAngelFireWolf69 is working on a new model that tries to capture this dynamic more explicitly... but I digress
I believe if you recognize this as a possibility, you're on the right track. thing is wanting to be an ENTj doesn't make it true, and even if being an ENTj improved a persons prospects at income generation, pretending to be one wouldn't accomplish that, it would only set you back inasmuch as you're attempting to be something you're not and detracting from your real strengths. On the other hand, type values and descriptions we identify with do come from a place wherein maybe we recognize our own internal ideal. they say the best way to learn something fast is from an identical who already has it figured out. LIE is more about the capacity to get shit done, the money is just validation of that. so the question becomes do you want to be rich just to be rich, or do you want to accomplish big things and be recognized for it? the latter is more LIE, money is just proof of concept and that which allows you to realize even bigger dreams. beyond a certain level money in of itself is not a huge deal. LIE is Si polr, meaning they're not really interested in pampering themselves (or others) or building a Si castle. thats more LSE. money provides opportunities for both Si and Ni creative. LSE is more about providing for others via Si creative, whereas Ni creative is more about enacting a vision of the world, a more global approach to problems. thus their attitude towards money is more or less concrete v abstract. LIE views money as abstract measure of power, LSE views it as tangible yet liquid fuel for ready transformation into other tangible modes of comfort and problem solving. in other words LIE would aim at funding research into a cure for cancer, LSE would aim at providing money for cancer treatment of a loved one (or donate to a charity aimed at a sympathetic group that does this, sick childrens medical costs etc) i.e.; caregiving v researchers.. globality v locality approach to money and solving problems
Difference between ENTj-Te Subtype and ESTp-Ti Subtype
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by KanRen
