Managing PoLR anxiety

[Luk]

I'd like to postulate that + is the systematic weighting of options.

You didn't specify which one's the Base and which one's the Creative, so you left a lot of room for exploration. Happy to comply! 😊 It's Sunday after all.

I think it goes deeper than that.
Creatively applying logic to develop the potential of the world? (ILE)
Creatively exploring what's hidden to develop the logical coherence of the world? (LII)

You could call this logical weighing of options, if you're okay with conflating Demonstrative Te and Base Ti, since those are the "logics" that guide ILE and LII respectively, and in different ways.
I'm not sure "systematic" is a good word for this and just this.

---

A demanded task from someone else might not be the best weighted option to our current state of systemization.

to LII and ILE

A demand appears to a Creative Ne like someone plucked a single option out of a wide variety. How does a LII analyse if they're picking the right option? Analysis (Ti) and looking for hidden risks (Ni), usually. They don't have all the possibilities ready (3D ), so it takes some effort to decide if a request that came out of nowhere is something they should follow. This will frustrate Se-Base SLE/SEE, who will push harder, and this will exhaust the LII if the LII is to take them seriously.

With the same combination ( + ), an ILE approaches volitional pressuring differently. An ILE is already aware of the weights of every possibility (4D ), so even if the pressuring isn't the most logical, they aren't as worried that it'll set them back. Their Ne is energetic enough to recover from minor setbacks.

Volitional pressuring doesn't affect an ILE as much as it affects a LII. Neither of them likes it, but an ILE is better prepared for compromising Ne.

---

vs and vs

Opposite functions (Ne vs Se) don't really cancel each other out. They just sometimes cannot agree on their assessments. They're different methods to achieve similar things. Applying your willpower onto the world might not encourage development, but your attention will still remain on "what can be done with the world" (), so it's easy to recover from if you have the energy.

"Rival" functions (Ni vs Ne) are the ones that tend to pull in opposite directions. Following one will pull you away from the goals of the other. They are similar methods ("look for what's hidden from view" ) to achieve opposite results. Thinking too much about long chains of causality will make you lose sight of the tactical opportunities.

An ILE is far less likely to follow Ni than a LII because they value Ne so much. An ILE is okayish with occasional bursts of willpower and force.

---

What PoLR feels like. (Maybe)

Due to the habit of avoiding one's PoLR, dealing with it takes effort and feels unnatural. Everyone can do it, but it feels like you're putting your life on hold for something unnecessary. A lot of the energy of your Base goes into assessing whether this one use of PoLR is appropriate. If your Base is relatively strong, you can assess it more easily. If your Base is relatively weak, it will take more effort. If your Creative is relatively unvalued, it won't feel like as big a betrayal to your being to follow this PoLR just this once, assuming it's the right course of action. If your Creative is relatively more valued, you'll be well aware of all the possibilities you're giving up on or how this doesn't even try to look for the best course of action.

[WinnieW]

You didn't specify which one's the Base and which one's the Creative, so you left a lot of room for exploration.

True, but I'm not completely sure about myself what is my base and my creative function. So I decided that based on my PoLR function, and I relate way more to the -PoLR description than the -PoLR description.

It's not that easy for me to write detailed explanations in a lanuage that isn't my native language. But I'll try my best.

Creatively applying logic to develop the potential of the world? (ILE)
Creatively exploring what's hidden to develop the logical coherence of the world? (LII)

Based on that description I'm likely more ILE, but
I don't think that is my vulnerable function and my ignoring function.

You could call this logical weighing of options, if you're okay with conflating Demonstrative Te and Base Ti, since those are the "logics" that guide ILE and LII respectively, and in different ways.
I'm not sure "systematic" is a good word for this and just this.

Maybe I'm challenged by understanding the meaning of some words of the English language to native speakers.
And I don't consider myself to be an expert in Socionics... because my talents are in MINT topics.

Thanks for your detailed description.

[Sol]

So I decided that based on my PoLR function, and I relate way more to the -PoLR description than the -PoLR description.

it's hard to understand directly anything besides strenght and value
also weak functions are lesser clear than strong to distinguish their fine straits directly
you better to use IR effects of irrationaly friendly sympathy with other people to understand your more possible type. and dichotomies

also you may get opinions about your type by a video. as you are so long can't understand own type

[Luk]

True, but I'm not completely sure about myself what is my base and my creative function. So I decided that based on my PoLR function, and I relate way more to the -PoLR description than the -PoLR description.

It's not that easy for me to write detailed explanations in a lanuage that isn't my native language. But I'll try my best.


Based on that description I'm likely more ILE, but
I don't think that is my vulnerable function and my ignoring function.


Maybe I'm challenged by understanding the meaning of some words of the English language to native speakers.
And I don't consider myself to be an expert in Socionics... because my talents are in MINT topics.

Thanks for your detailed description.

There are many different kinds of LII and ILE. And the distinction between mirror types isn't always obvious or applicable. For a little while I thought I was ILE. I certainly acted that way. I think it's reasonable that you don't fit perfectly in either. Or that you are truly one of the two, but your functions manifest atypically due to special circumstances.

Those two descriptions aren't exclusive to ILE and LII respectively. They're just the most natural thought patterns that they might form. Reality is a lot more nuanced.



Try to find out what your 4D IM Elements are () and how you use them. They determine how you use a lot of the "weaker" ones.

Also, I believe that if you understand why PoLR exists at all, at a fundamental level, you can make much better use of socionics.
And it might not end up being how everybody understands it, but it's still "real world" useful.

[WinnieW]

There are many different kinds of LII and ILE...

Those two descriptions aren't exclusive to ILE and LII respectively...

I guess there is a reason why people created systems of subtypes, because there are a lot of people which are unable to identify themselves with a type description entirely.

[Luk]

I guess there is a reason why people created systems of subtypes, because there are a lot of people which are unable to identify themselves with a type description entirely.

One could keep endlessly categorising until we reached 8 billion categories and even then we might still not have enough.

My problem with the system of subtypes is that I could never find its first principles. Only the conclusions, which didn't exactly inspire confidence. "Ne subtype is this, while Ti subtype is that." Sure, but whyyy?