Fe-Valuing: Anyone Else Notice This?

[ooo]

Something you clearly don't know is that one's diction matters as far as being intelligible and properly understood. For example, when you say "no Se," it sounds as if you're invoking MBTI phraseology, and MBTI as a system comes with different concepts, theories and paradigms. Also, to say that Si "forbids" ESEs to "push people" is also problematic; to "forbid" means to make something/some action impossible and seeing as how theoretically there are 7 other functions that to some degree play a role in the psyche and how ESEs have 4D demonstrative Se (where 'the individual is able to be convincingly commanding, tough, challenging, or confrontational for brief periods of time without taking himself too seriously, as a sort of show or game'), obviously Se does actually play a part and serve some purpose, and so using the word "forbid" goes too far.

Lastly, in a lighthearted social situation where ESE briefly became a bit intense and confrontational, an LII would not be utterly put off because they'd more than likely be able to cognitively discern the "lack of seriousness" involved with an occasional, demonstrative "flair up" of a function that is usually not a recurring, important aspect of their duality. You aren't LII, and so flexing Se around you wouldn't be an issue. As I've mentioned to you once or twice before, in certain scenarios, benefactors can be perceived as douchebags that demonstratively do "too much" from the perspective of their beneficiaries.

if you knew the difference between valued and unvalued functions you'd know why forbid fits in this context.

and since you wanna be anal about it, no Se doesn't manifest the same way in quasis, or they'd be identical. the role of Si is exactly there to forbid Se take the lead. yes, Se is delivered, but since Si is valued, Se doesn't play the role that it does in SEEs, which is, again, a social manifestation of power, as in " laugh at my dumb jokes goddamn"

[Alonzo]

if you knew the difference between valued and unvalued functions you'd know why forbid fits in this context.

and since you wanna be anal about it, no Se doesn't manifest the same way in quasis, or they'd be identical. the role of Si is exactly there to forbid Se take the lead. yes, Se is delivered, but since Si is valued, Se doesn't play the role that it does in SEEs, which is, again, a social manifestation of power, as in " laugh at my dumb jokes goddamn"

1.) lol Ummm, no. I know the difference between valued and subdued functions; but if you knew the difference between "forbid" and more appropriate words like subdue/limit/suppress, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

2.) Nowhere did I say or imply that Se plays the same role in ESEs as it does in SEEs; I've actually gone out of my way to mention ESE's demonstrative Se usage, which usually occurs under niche, specific circumstances befitting its IE. I'm not the one here who doesn't know how to properly convey nuance.

[ooo]

1.) lol Ummm, no. I know the difference between valued and subdued functions; but if you knew the difference between "forbid" and more appropriate words like subdue/limit/suppress, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

2.) Nowhere did I say or imply that Se plays the same role in ESEs as it does in SEEs; I've actually gone out of my way to mention ESE's demonstrative Se usage, which usually occurs under niche, specific circumstances befitting its IE. I'm not the one here who doesn't know how to properly convey nuance.

1) they're not called subdued, they're called unvalued. forbid indicates how something can't happen because of a threshold, which is the case here.

2) which is why you agreed on the comment about how a SEE behavior was characteristic of ESEs, makes sense.

[Alonzo]

1) they're not called subdued, they're called unvalued. forbid indicates how something can't happen because of a threshold, which is the case here.

2) which is why you agreed on the comment about how a SEE behavior was characteristic of ESEs, makes sense.

lol "standing your ground" while stringing together words that you think sound good together ≠ making a valid, cogent point.

Subdued functions are those that oppose our preferred functions and they are sometimes referred to as non-valued/unvalued functions; and so, again, you are wrong. And your usage of the word "forbid" was still inaccurate; Si limits Se's expression but in so much as ESEs are still capable of utilizing Se (and with 4D strength), then it can't be "forbidden"--clearly then, there is a Si "threshold" that can be surpassed, even if it's not a usual, customary or particularly comfortable occurrence. How do you still not understand that everyone is capable of everything? That's basic, fundamental, rudimentary shit. Again, just because you push back and say whatever nonsense, does not make it so. It's best to just shut up and not make yourself look more foolish than you already do.