Neither Ni nor Se nor any other elements have much of anything to do with goals.Originally Posted by NorthernRose
But, the Reinin Tactical/Strategic does focus on that. Strategic Result types would be by those measures the most goal-focused (LII, SLE, LIE and SLI.) Tactical process types the most present action-focused (LSI, ILE, LSE, ILI.) I wouldn't type via this however, it's just something interesting to consider imo.
Okay, let me try again.
"Goal" was not the point of this. The goal is what happens in the future, as an abstract projection happening in the present. The more concret part of making the present match the "future projection" is to come back to the present and do stuff.
It's about Ni getting stuck in the future, and Se bringing it back to the present more than anything.
I linked it with "goal" as I read above :from @Avebury... Perhaps I should have quoted before... meh, too late....reading the description ofseeking I get the impression they like others to set goals for them, which I couldn't accept!
I also couldn't accept someone setting goals for me...
There was a lot of stuff happening far up in my head, and very little came through in a concret form to be understood, which killed what I was trying to say. I just realize how fucking far I was from what I tried to express... it's a problem. -w-b
This is where I got the idea ILIs want others to set goals for them:
I always understood that ILI relies on SEE to invent goals while SEE relies on ILI to invent methods to acheive those goals...ILI - INTp (Ni,Te) Honoré de Balzac - the French writer.
1."Imagination directs me". He possesses a powerful, intellectual imagination. A representative of this type, Honoré de Balzac, in his series of novels, The Human Comedy "painted" the portraits of more than 2000 people who appear hyper real: "he is comparable perhaps only to the city controller's office" —wrote of him Andre Maurois. Similarly, the phantasmagoric world of Gabriel García Marquez is impressively precise in every detail. Due to this quality The Critic can forecast the future quite well. From empirical observations of how a man acts at various times he creates something like a functional model in his mind. In general, he tends to know everything in advance. If he did not have to warn other people about possible dangers (opportunities interest him less), he most possibly would feel himself redundant.
2."A priest's calmness and restraint". He almost never expresses emotions and protects from them his family and friends. He sincerely believes that passions, too strong, will lead one to his doom. Honoré de Balzac has constantly demonstrated throughout his literary works how passion spreads like a devastating cancer that eats away the souls of men until it finally suppresses all else. This holds totally true in the case of his dual (Caesar, The Politician), a hyperactive person that easily gets carried away.
3.A profound analyst. He is convinced that living is impossible if one disregards the natural laws that regulate the world. One who ignores reality is heading for disaster. The Criticist believes that it is better to be somewhat too cynical then be a hypocrite. Hearing of a situation, he very soon thoroughly understands it and begins to tell to the bewildered interlocutor the details and aspects that the latter had overlooked. His analysis is devoid of any self-encouragement. "You shouldn't have a different attitude towards life than you have for the kitchen—the same amount of stinking odor; if you want to cook a dish, you'll have to get your hands dirty, just make sure you'll be able to wash the dirt off once you are done; that's the entire moral of our day and age."—So speaks Vautrin, a hero of Balzac's books. Such misanthropy can kill the anybody's spirits, except his dual (The Politician)!
4."First and foremost, he is kind". In spite of all his "negativism", he is really a very kindly person in nature. The above phrase about Honoré de Balzac belongs to George Sand who knew him very well. He likes strong people who know their way in life, who demand concessions: such people release him from the necessity to invent goals, while using methods invented by him (he is a master of inventing methods.) He is capable of pouring a bucket of cold water out on the head of an enthusiast. But on the other hand, he is likewise capable of easing one's despair, when they are unlucky, when things go the wrong way, when destiny seems to be hostile.
5.Unapproachable and thus desired. A girl-student by the name of Laima (The Politician) gave a good description of this type when she tried to describe the hero of her dreams: "He must be handsome and smart, with big and sad eyes, not talkative. He does not tell compliments, and by that he creates an impression of his inapproachability. He is taunted by myriads of problems, which, in my opinion are nothing to be bothered with. I am attracted by his sadness, seriousness, so I try to amuse him, to raise his spirits, to make him happy. If such a boy is present at a party, I wouldn't be bored." This is a vivid description of this personality type, who is constant in his feelings, does not like adventures, and desires total dependence of his demanding partner.
http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...I_.28Balzac.29
@Avebury
Something bothers me greatly about this... what is it though?
That's pretty much how it happens, however, it is not as simple as Se refocusing that goal into concrete actions. Every Se and Si lead type is also "strategic" by Reinin so they have big goals to achieve of their own to the point of ignoring the goals of their Ni/Ne lead duals if those don't complement their own. This is flipped for rationals where it is the Ni-creative/demonstrative types who are the strategists of their dyad, and it creates some interesting distinctions in how these two different versions of Ni and Se interact.
You tell me!
But maybe you don't like the idea of submitting to someone? That is something I can understand.
@silke sort of said it... it's like what I want may not matter... and I'm sick of passing last... or not having a turn at all.
It's also intrusive, limitating, and telling me how to best "live" my life with this dual thing that sounds like a hate fest to me.
And silke being Ni lead understood what I meant, when other types seem to have missed my point... this is disturbing... I mean I knew it, perceptions, valued functions, yada blah, but it's disturbing nontheless... it's what I've been fighting with my whole life... there is no escape.
Oh shit, existential dread ongoing...
Well, tactical process types are focused on current actions, the process, and methods or system to enact. And ILI as tactical, process and also Te creative, quite easily could be a master of methods. They're not so much looking at distant goals, so having someone around with "big ideas" can be a relief for them, while they focus on how to make those ideas a reality (or squash them if they're completely unrealistic.)
The way that some people are associating Ni with goals is incorrect imo because if you look at those that are most goal-focused you have both SLE and SLI, and the only Ni type is the Ni-creative LIE. Ni is a direction, a leading pattern, a projection forward of current trends, a vision, not an endpoint, so to make it about goals is to misunderstand its nature. IMO Especially when you consider which types do indeed keep an endpoint in mind.
yeah to set a goal is to make some form of judgement. ni is perception, it might inform a goal but it can never set one in of itself. Ni might explode a goal by pointing out some contradiction within it that makes it impossible or otherwise not worth it, but it leaves that to the other person. actually it can point out with its own criterion why the perception leads to a rational result, doing all the work for the other person, but the other person is always free to disagree. what makes Ni more pernicious is how it slips past their rational line of defenses. its the essence of "making the other person think they thought of what you wanted to convince them of" i.e.: thinking it was their own idea, because they did the rational work, over what was really an unconscious perception.. IEIs are actually the masters of this as far as I can tell, because they're not rational types and don't subordinate this urge to anything. when self directed the ni ego can posit for itself goals it knows to be contradictory, mainly because it understands things as non linear. there's really nothing that pins Ni down in such a simple way because it perceives contradictions or smooths them out via time which is orthogonal to how most people usually think. in other words, it lives "within" the contradiction, doesn't treat it as a problem in the same way most people do. this is especially true of ni base. for the ethically oriented intuitive, i.e.: EIE it does treat it as a "problem" to be solved, but it is still somewhere between, in contrast to how people usually diverge strongly to one side, for example, LSE. gulenko defines EIE as the type to "find" the problem, convergence to the limit, etc EIE is literally defined as the point of tension between opposites where the contradiction is centered. it focuses on it, sharpens it, LSE for example makes it their mission to resolve them rationally which involves a kind of pilling over them rather than digging them up. you can see this is in how LSE formulates issues, which always posit certain rational imperatives in the first place in order to limit the emergence of problems, which in turn can be solved by an application of pre-existing maxims. LSE is all about creating the all encompassing flow chart one can reference and in so doing solve every problem. if something can't be solved by the flow chart, it isn't considered to exist. it takes "there are no problems without solutions" quite literally
Last edited by Bertrand; 08-10-2018 at 01:28 AM.
I think your goals will matter to an
What you want does matter though, at least not less than someone else...
I honestly doubt this, Ave.I think your goals will matter to an
What you want does matter though, at least not less than someone else...
My life experience ifls proof that people don't give a flying fuck of what I want.
Maybe if I had a larger sort of goal, but it's narrow and including anyone would just ruin what I want. It's not a 2 persons thing.
I guess Anaïs Nin (IEI) had it right to never marry Henry Miller (SLE), so she could maintain her writing and not merely sustain his... even though she worked and believed very hard in what he did, she stayed away enough to protect the relationship they had. I think she was sometimes ressentful of him, but I'm not sure.
I guess I don't want a dual... or I could just change type... who cares really?
A bunch of peeps would happily see me as ESI, LII, or whatever, so why not...
Thanks for the reply, no worries. Influencing people is Fe, not Te, yeah. I'm getting a Ni lead vibe from all this philosophising here, but I'm not sure.
I dunno about that, ILI-Te friend sets her own goals just fine. She's actually decent at finding concrete steps too, she's more like she feels she lacks willpower to consistently do things and wants someone to kick her in the ass lol (she said so).
This is how I interpreted it originally too. How else would it be interpreted anyway...
I'm not Ni lead
Idk if you want me to ask about this but I'd say I think if you voice what you want audibly enough they would hear you. Ofc some people will ignore even that, but not all people are like that.
Can you say more on these distinctions please? I'd be really interested.
@crAck, I’m normally pretty secure in unfamiliar territory, but when I‘m not feeling secure, I definitely use Fe warmth to disarm people who could be possible threats. I do this until I can make a better assessment of their potentials and intentions. Then I revert to normal mode, whatever that is. Being a self-interested pushy jerk, maybe, who might care deeply about you but isn’t going to show it.
Role Fe is used with all new people as you wish to make better impression on them. While you allow youself to show "brick" (by your words) to them, and even feel nothing bad in this.
In my understanding to supress strongly emotionality is also kind of insulting, as you express to people like they are noone to you, do not respect them.
When I do selfy photos I try to express good emotions on them, to make more pleasant and good impression. You seems don't.
I reduce emotions among closer people - as they will not be hurted by this, I trust they'll accept me in such form as our connections are stable and wide. Also when feel tired or in bad mood.
You differ from me in this. Among T types base Te are the least possible to have your approach. What you say about yourself is closer to P-T types. Also base Ti types having role Fi have lesser expressive role emotionality and being introverts lesser care about other ones - they may look closer to "brick" more often.
Lol Sol typing Adam as Ti base and himself as Te base
All that while Adam is way better at Fe
You'd have more success holding back a glacier than you would have convincing Sol to reconsider his type. That's a taboo.
“I want the following word: splendor, splendor is fruit in all its succulence, fruit without sadness. I want vast distances. My savage intuition of myself.”
― Clarice Lispector
Why try to convince him of anything? He knows his type, and does indeed have a better basic understanding than many people here, particularly those trying to retype him. He may be stubborn and closeminded to other ideas, but that doesn't mean his typing is wrong.
Well, considering he goes around this forum berating others about their type, I don't see why someone couldn't question his. I don't see why you have more of a problem with people reconsidering Sol's type than anyone else reconsidering others's types, which is what this thread is filled with.
We should all consider we could be wrong in our self-typing, every now and then, even if you end up ultimately rejecting the conclusions . This is normal and healthy.
I don't know why but whenever Sol is criticized for whatever reason, people act like he is some kind of saint with some other-wordly wisdom that makes him more apt at typing or something. So Feathers is right: it is taboo to question anything Sol says. I personally find this disturbing, also disturbing how he holds himself above others as infalliable and always right.
I would imagine LSEs often end up as corporate managers, the only way to escape to start your own business and hire them.
Well Sol would like it to be a taboo, but it's not an actual taboo
I don't. I don't think trying to convince anyone has much of a point, and tends to do more harm than good, but I have no problem with questioning and suggestions.
Obviously. And actually, Sol has been quite a bit more accepting of other people's suggestions than a lot of people. I've never seen him get upset by anyone suggesting something different for him. The closemindedness I was referring to is in re. to his rejection of any ideas that expand on the basic socionic theory. He won't even look at Gulenko, Reinin, or various other authors and ideas suggested.We should all consider we could be wrong in our self-typing, every now and then, even if you end up ultimately rejecting the conclusions . This is normal and healthy.
Lol. You're quite misreading that then. I don't find him a saint, nor do I think he's a fantastic typer with some kind of extraordinary wisdom and skill. He's often wrong imo about other people. Quite stubbornly wrong lol. But, I do think he's typed himself correctly and does have more basic knowledge of socionics than people give him credit for.I don't know why but whenever Sol is criticized for whatever reason, people act like he is some kind of saint with some other-wordly wisdom that makes him more apt at typing or something. So Feathers is right: it is taboo to question anything Sol says. I personally find this disturbing, also disturbing how he holds himself above others as infalliable and always right.
I have known Shay for over 33 years and lived with her for thirty of those. I have thought for a long time she is INTP and the description above does absolutely match my experiences with her.
She has a great ability to determine consequences of potential actions and also a vivid imagination. This is something I am hopeless at. Many times it is better to let her determine the how (or method) to achieve something and then for myself to go off and execute according to the how. Part of this is Shay reminding me to let things naturally occur as it can be damaging to try and go against this and force an unnatural outcome which as an SE I am sometimes tempted to do.
She can instantly dampen my over enthusiasm by reminding me I am getting way ahead of the situation, as well as captivate me with her imagination in what could be possible.
Most of all she can pour cold water on me and make me feel terrible (she laughed when she read this bit of my draft reply) and a minute later say something to me when things have not turned out at as I wanted and immediately give me hope again. I have never met someone else that can do this to me! Our kids have also commented on witnessing the impact described above that she has on me.
Lastly she has can hold onto a few key goals for many years. One particular goal I am hoping we can achieve very soon
That sounds decent.
Yeah you did, and no idea... sometimes I say things and people understand something I don't even understand... xDThis is how I interpreted it originally too. How else would it be interpreted anyway...
I'm not Ni lead
"Have you thought of seeking professional help?"Idk if you want me to ask about this but I'd say I think if you voice what you want audibly enough they would hear you. Ofc some people will ignore even that, but not all people are like that.
The other point is that, I can write fine but talk...
I take longer than most people I know to start a sentence, I take longer pauses, I stutter, sometimes I need a moment to collect my thoughts, I find questions bothersome as they cut my train of thought and now I have to include the question, all the "feeling" stuff distresses me, for say when people worry about me, it's like I have to deal with this and I can't now, so I prefer to bail off.
They usually grab into my silences to go back to a more interesting subject, themselves. Sometimes, I try to step up, and be heard, usually not much effective.
I have a voice that gets lost in the background also.
I know I'm partly guilty with the feeling stuff, it's so uncomfortable, I don't know what to do with it. What am I supposed to get from it? Now they have a "worry" which I consider a problem to be fixed ASAP.
I hate being given feelings I don't have, or asked how I feel about stuff...
As I said somewhere, I likely have a lot of Fe around me.
I often think I haven't found people with whom I feel on a similar page... I might be the problem here. -w-b
Well, sometimes quoting what someone says is more of a springboard to discuss other ideas than a direct response to them. And that was the case here where I quoted you. I was thinking about Reinin traits and goal-setting and how that could work in various types. Avebury's quoted ILI description is a perfect representation of what I was thinking, and I wanted to focus on how that was something separate from anything related to Ni, and your post was the material I used to do so. I do that to other people too because I'm more looking at the ideas and putting them together than the people saying them.
As much as I've said that people should listen and pay attention and etc to what other people are saying, well. . .often the advice we give is the advice we probably should be following lol. I'm sorry about using your post to just talk about my own thoughts there.
Last edited by squark; 08-11-2018 at 02:08 PM.
It's alright.
I didn't know people could do stuff like that... I'm used to "everything's personal" kind of thing. Hm.
it's doubtful LIE perceive so badly LSE
> Your only recourse is to never let an LSE be your boss.
his recourse is to be more reasonable
starting with the understanding of own correct type
being touchy to propaganda like F or I types may be. muddy thinking like never base Te are
I don't perceive LSE's badly, nor do I think most LIE's do. I happen to have had a controlling LSE mother, and most of my personal feelings about LSE's involve some kind of associations with her, but I try very hard to suppress that. On a one-to-one basis, I really like LSE's way of thinking, for the most part. They are one of the few types which think very clearly (Lol. IMO.)
My problem with LSE's is that when they insist on telling me to do things their way, a white explosion goes off in my head and I get irrationally defensive. I basically go nuclear inside, but by god, I try to suppress that, since it's an ancient reaction to my mother and now only interferes with a rational exploration of all options. Me being the LSE's boss allows me the freedom to respond flexibly, but when they were my boss, I didn't have that freedom.
I have had successful relations with LSE bosses when I was a low level employee. Their Caregiver approach is very reassuring to completely new and uncertain employees. I find that their lack of vision is frustrating at higher levels of an organization, because foreseeing the future of an organization is what LIE's do, and having the freedom to make that future a reality is where most LIE's thrive. My LSE bosses completely ignored the future in favor of the nuts and bolts of RIGHT NOW. In fact, most of the time, they would squash the initiatives I suggested, which were intended to make the company profitable in the long run, in favor of getting today's work done today. Even when that work was non-productive busy-work. They meant well, but had a very different focus than I did.
I actually started my first company because I invented a patentable process that revolutionized the industry we were in. I showed it to my LSE boss and he ignored it. I asked him if I could claim ownership of the process and he said, "Sure. We have plenty of work filling present orders." His company is now out of business and mine is growing pretty fast.
I know that LSE's can be very, very successful owners of businesses which don't require much innovation, like construction or rental properties, but they struggle to be at the forefront of R&D.
I work with an LSE-Te and an LIE-Ni, and they get along pretty well in the sense that they rely on each other, but both of them are mid-thirties and aren't really thinking beyond their immediate projects at this point.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 08-13-2018 at 04:01 PM.
I'd be interested in hearing some examples/anecdotes about this.
@Myst, three quick examples (aside from the patentable process I mentioned above, which was huge):
1. My LII sister is married to an LSE. He wanted to have these tall cedar-like bushes along one side of his driveway, so he ordered a bunch of them, got his personal excavator tractor out and spent a week planting them. When he was done, he decided they were on the wrong side of the driveway. He then spent another week moving them. Couldn't he foresee how they would look?
2. I was working with an LSE boss on building (actually machining the parts for) a satellite that he had designed. He was a brilliant designer, incidentally. It had to be extremely clean, since it was designed to process Germanium wafers in space. Machining stainless steel requires cutting fluid which had to be laboriously cleaned from each part as we assembled it. The work was going way over schedule. I told him we needed to just machine everything and assemble it dirty, and then when everything was working, disassemble it, clean everything, and then reassemble it in a clean room. That worked and we met the deadline (barely). He didn't seem to be able to see the entire process and the future time trades involved in different actions.
3. I designed a process for assembling and aligning the optics in a complex laser weapon. It involves many steps and the alignment of each stage affects the later stages, but each stage has an error budget which must be met to get the thing to work when all the parts are assembled. Later stages have the capacity to correct errors of a certain magnitude in previous stages, but they have limits. I assigned an LSE to aligning two intermediate stages and walked him through the process. He said "This is hard."
Of course it's hard. That's why we are doing it. But it is entirely doable. He focused on just the task in front of him and didn't understand how it affected the outcome until everything came together. I'm not sure if he sees the entire picture to this day.
Yeah I saw that but I was interested in more examples, thanks for them
OMG lol, my sister's husband (he is possibly LSE but I don't have enough info on him to be sure yet) does that sort of thing all the time... make a decision then change it like that. Big decisions, actually. Bigger than this planting of bushes in the garden. Messing up everything in the process... with a lot of waste of time and money too. My ESI mom and I continue being shocked at his lack of foresight1. My LII sister is married to an LSE. He wanted to have these tall cedar-like bushes along one side of his driveway, so he ordered a bunch of them, got his personal excavator tractor out and spent a week planting them. When he was done, he decided they were on the wrong side of the driveway. He then spent another week moving them. Couldn't he foresee how they would look?(Idk if that's Ni HA being particularly shocked at PoLR Ni)
Hm I think when it comes to making decisions and possibly changing them, I'm very restrictive actually... In a nutshell, if I feel that the outcome needs to be seen well before making and committing to a decision, bc I sense that there are certain important factors here and there that will affect it strongly, I'll stop cautiously and clarify the factors and their effects to myself. And then when the decision has been made and is being executed or completed execution of it already, I'd rather not find new ideas/options that'd make me change my decisions, let alone if it involves much waste of time/money/resources/upheaval overall. Maybe a good illustration of Ni HA+Ne PoLR vs Ne HA+Ni PoLR beyond general Ni vs Ne valuing.
Interesting examples, I have a hard time imagining the last one concretely enough without much info tho I kind of can, but the first one makes sense. Lol as I know myself, I'd get impatient pretty soon with the process and cut out asap what's not needed. You quickly seeing the best option for the overall solution reminds me of the Ne demonstrative of LIEs as I've experienced it before when working together, and I find that Ne demo really cool. With the last example, I think I wouldn't want to start until I had an okay overview of how things affect the outcome. It actually sounds like an interesting task in terms of working that out. (But otherwise I ofc know nothing about the optics of laser weapons lol)2. I was working with an LSE boss on building (actually machining the parts for) a satellite that he had designed. He was a brilliant designer, incidentally. It had to be extremely clean, since it was designed to process Germanium wafers in space. Machining stainless steel requires cutting fluid which had to be laboriously cleaned from each part as we assembled it. The work was going way over schedule. I told him we needed to just machine everything and assemble it dirty, and then when everything was working, disassemble it, clean everything, and then reassemble it in a clean room. That worked and we met the deadline (barely). He didn't seem to be able to see the entire process and the future time trades involved in different actions.
3. I designed a process for assembling and aligning the optics in a complex laser weapon. It involves many steps and the alignment of each stage affects the later stages, but each stage has an error budget which must be met to get the thing to work when all the parts are assembled. Later stages have the capacity to correct errors of a certain magnitude in previous stages, but they have limits. I assigned an LSE to aligning two intermediate stages and walked him through the process. He said "This is hard."
Of course it's hard. That's why we are doing it. But it is entirely doable. He focused on just the task in front of him and didn't understand how it affected the outcome until everything came together. I'm not sure if he sees the entire picture to this day.
@Myst, thank you so much for that information. It really goes a long way toward explaining why the ESI's I've been dating have been taking their time in scheduling the next date. To me, it's just the next date, let's have it and see how it goes. To them, it might be the direction for the rest of their lives.Yeah I saw that but I was interested in more examples, thanks for them
OMG lol, my sister's husband (he is possibly LSE but I don't have enough info on him to be sure yet) does that sort of thing all the time... make a decision then change it like that. Big decisions, actually. Bigger than this planting of bushes in the garden. Messing up everything in the process... with a lot of waste of time and money too. My ESI mom and I continue being shocked at his lack of foresight
Hm I think when it comes to making decisions and possibly changing them, I'm very restrictive actually... In a nutshell, if I feel that the outcome needs to be seen well before making and committing to a decision, bc I sense that there are certain important factors here and there that will affect it strongly, I'll stop cautiously and clarify the factors and their effects to myself. And then when the decision has been made and is being executed or completed execution of it already, I'd rather not find new ideas/options that'd make me change my decisions, let alone if it involves much waste of time/money/resources/upheaval overall. Maybe a good illustration of Ni HA+Ne PoLR vs Ne HA+Ni PoLR beyond general Ni vs Ne valuing.
I was actually thinking of asking some of the ESI's here why the ones I know seem so deliberate, but since you have the same force and time sense as ESI's, I'll take your answer for theirs.
Of course, they might just not be that into me, but assuming they are.....
Thanks. For what it's worth, I find your intellect to be really cool, too. Combined with your Se, it's hot, actually.
Yeah, while I can't tell you how ESIs work in dating, I noted how ESIs are very cautious in some things even more than what I described, but along a similar line of thinking, yes.@Myst, thank you so much for that information. It really goes a long way toward explaining why the ESI's I've been dating have been taking their time in scheduling the next date. To me, it's just the next date, let's have it and see how it goes. To them, it might be the direction for the rest of their lives.
I was actually thinking of asking some of the ESI's here why the ones I know seem so deliberate, but since you have the same force and time sense as ESI's, I'll take your answer for theirs.
Of course, they might just not be that into me, but assuming they are.....
And thanks for the compliment lol
The impression of narcissism may be from different values. The opponent behaves wrongly - wants too much, while offers a few in return. A few - in your values. The base to suspect other IR, as L*E should perceive each other better.
> My problem with LSE's is that when they insist on telling me to do things their way, a white explosion goes off in my head and I get irrationally defensive.
If your mother was LSE indeed, then you may react such on Te. To be irrationally defensive - to reject the info for your base function would be strange. It's what happens with non-valued functions and more about weak of them.
"Curiouser and curiouser!"
> In fact, most of the time, they would squash the initiatives I suggested, which were intended to make the company profitable in the long run, in favor of getting today's work done today. <...>
I actually started my first company because I invented a patentable process that revolutionized the industry we were in. I showed it to my LSE boss and he ignored it. I asked him if I could claim ownership of the process and he said, "Sure. We have plenty of work filling present orders." His company is now out of business and mine is growing pretty fast.
LSE need the material things like a document with numbers, stats, specialized experts opinions. You could to get the understanding with them by this way - with more concrete and trusted data. If you come to them with visions and assumptions - they will not understand you. Give them a business plan and they'll do.
> I know that LSE's can be very, very successful owners of businesses which don't require much innovation, like construction or rental properties, but they struggle to be at the forefront of R&D.
S types deal worse with innovations. J-S, especially
Narcissism isnt slightly correlated to Te. Te leads arent narcissistic, theyre megalomanic when unhealthy. If ur mom rlly is narcissistic as in hiding her true self under a veil of pretense to the outside world while craving attention shes more likely a type 3 and ESFp
Yes, that's what i meant. 'what is wrong' is that the subjectivity does not bridge itself to broader understanding. Sorry if i was unclear.
About an hour after that I hit myself—really hard—in the face in the grocery store with the handle of a shopping basket. I don’t even know how lol.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
Some perfidious shopping baskets attacked you....
Some perfidious shopping baskets attacked you.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote