Quote Originally Posted by lump View Post
What still seems out of place to me w EIE is the explicitness ie, "this is what I like/dislike in a person," "if you want to get along w me, you have to __," etc, ime beta nfs are so much more like... You either get it or you don't.... (I wonder what beta nfs would say about this). But if it's only one thing, I guess it's not worth sticking on and I don't really see much sign of Te other than being goal-oriented, but that's not strictly Te. And I think EJ temperament is right.



I don't think this is what Adam was going for with the "drop them like a hot potato" thing, but I don't take any issue with this. Cuivs relationship posts are pretty high drama, but I'm not sure how much at face value to take them and how much is poetic license (but that would point away from LIE too).



The qualities you listed are all good and I know they were just examples, but I feel like it's important to say Fi is really idiosyncratic w what resonates w them and what repels them. I just want to say that bcuz of the notion that fi is all empathy & light or something. An unhealthy fi type might resonate w bad qualities in someone. You're right about the dropping, though, at least w fi base, if you think you were "dropped like a hot potato" you weren't being held as close as you thought to begin with.
That may be. I'm not confident enough about it to say with certainty. It just seems like that is mixing MBTI, subjective feelings that motivate one to act in response to that feeling and socionics Fi which are subjective feelings, but are more restricted in that they are toward an ethical standard. ESI is referred to as the Guardian for a reason. They aren't the "do what feels good type", but "do what IS right to them. It appeals to what they believe is objective ethics.

But it is all overly vague to me really, so idk. There really seem to be inconsistencies in the theory.