Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: LIE/ESI Storytime

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    TIM
    LIE/ENTJ
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default LIE/ESI Storytime

    Hi Everybody! First post here. Thought I would share my story about my experience with my dual.

    After getting my ass handed to me by dear Ausra/Aushra in her LIE/ESI duality manifesto, I decided to apply the sponge method. Take in the ideas worth learning and spit out the ones not worth learning.
    I took her bias into account while reading and thought. Wow, this is how an ESI must feel with a very undeveloped person, nevermind an LIE. But, I could see how LIEs unchecked and never socially corrected could devolve into true nightmares.

    I'm not claiming to be amazing or perfect. But, I at least acknowledge the profitable and useful aspects of good and respectful communication. All of that because LIE perception seems to be incredibly varied. I thought it was important to dictate what kind I was at least. On to the story!
    For the first time, I dated my dual consciously knowing their type. He asked me out and our conversations in the beginning were so strange. He was testing me periodically to check if I remembered what I had said, or if I kept my promises. Once I broke continuity of what I said on purpose and he pointed it out. To which I said, I did that on purpose, I know you're testing me. I guess I was testing his reaction to direct confrontation there, since I wanted to see how he would respond. I ended up giving him the out anyways, it was obvious that level of confrontation was uncomfortable for him.

    His aversion to setting clear dates and his preference to ask if I was free on the same day. His aversion to anything sexual until we've established a degree of relations. The classic Dreiser stare. I was able to break his facade and seriousness with my humor. He was always throwing options at me (always welcome imo) and I was always happy to tell him how or what to do (which seemed welcome on his part). He was very adamant about wanting to pursue serious relations, which was fine by me.

    Then, he shared that he didn't want romantic relations. That was also no problem to me at all. We've only been on a few dates, no biggie. I also figured as much since his work life became very busy (promotion).

    I thought that would be the end of it, but a few days after he really wanted to meet. Until now, he's never tried to convince me one way or another, so I bit and went to meet him. We went out to dinner and he told me that he did want romantic relations, but he didn't have enough time and that he felt guilty. I told him that I was disappointed when he shared he didn't want something romantic with me, but I understood. I then implicitly shared that his issues weren't super problematic for me. (Implicit, because I'm not explicitly giving anybody the green light to disrespect my time) Also even with his cancellations and time issues, they were always with notice and I'm (low key) never mad at flaking in general. I always perceived it as more time given to me. We then proceeded to have some ambiguous conversation that left him feeling like we weren't dating and left me feeling like we were. L o l, he cleared that up for me, we're not. He told me he'd like to be friends and I said okay. (We dated sporadically for 1 month, really no opportunity to develop serious feelings or feel any loss)

    This part is my assumption and opinion though. He seems so rigid like he's suffocating over his own rule system. I always (nearly recklessly) feel like nothing can stop me from doing something if I wanted it bad enough and he seems to live in a world where it wouldn't take much to stop him.

    tl;dr I think this duality works out more easily if the two parties were introduced at a time before ESI's develop their "in and out" groups. How else do those walls break? You can't! You gotta be in them walls in the first place. Or at least that's how it feels without some external factors forcing interaction.

    If you disagree with some of my assumptions or conclusions, please explain why! I'm welcome to having my mind changed if you can do it

  2. #2
    &papu silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,077
    Mentioned
    456 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    I keep reading this and it doesn't sound anything like an ESI.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    TIM
    LIE/ENTJ
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That could totally be true. It's common to assume duality and I wouldn't consider myself an authority on typing yet

  4. #4
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    173 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    The barrier to most relationships is baggage, not type; type only determines how the baggage may be handled or piled into the space. Type is overshadowed by stuff like upbringing, personal views, education, having been abused, religion, culture, etc. so don't be surprised when duality falls flat......

    a.k.a. I/O

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,759
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Look man I'm not going to try and use socionics here because there is very little context to work with here.

    It seems like you liked each other, but that there were other circumstances at play, and this led to some misunderstanding about expectations. A bit of different approaches to things and not enough excitement to over power the external considerations.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    TIM
    LIE/ENTJ
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That sounds about right actually. If I break it down, my reasoning for justifying his type is not the most robust. Kind of embarrassing, but I guess it happens when you think you experienced duality.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,116
    Mentioned
    107 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aLIEve View Post
    Hi Everybody! First post here. Thought I would share my story about my experience with my dual.

    After getting my ass handed to me by dear Ausra/Aushra in her LIE/ESI duality manifesto, I decided to apply the sponge method. Take in the ideas worth learning and spit out the ones not worth learning.
    I took her bias into account while reading and thought. Wow, this is how an ESI must feel with a very undeveloped person, nevermind an LIE. But, I could see how LIEs unchecked and never socially corrected could devolve into true nightmares.

    I'm not claiming to be amazing or perfect. But, I at least acknowledge the profitable and useful aspects of good and respectful communication. All of that because LIE perception seems to be incredibly varied. I thought it was important to dictate what kind I was at least. On to the story!
    For the first time, I dated my dual consciously knowing their type. He asked me out and our conversations in the beginning were so strange. He was testing me periodically to check if I remembered what I had said, or if I kept my promises. Once I broke continuity of what I said on purpose and he pointed it out. To which I said, I did that on purpose, I know you're testing me. I guess I was testing his reaction to direct confrontation there, since I wanted to see how he would respond. I ended up giving him the out anyways, it was obvious that level of confrontation was uncomfortable for him.

    His aversion to setting clear dates and his preference to ask if I was free on the same day. His aversion to anything sexual until we've established a degree of relations. The classic Dreiser stare. I was able to break his facade and seriousness with my humor. He was always throwing options at me (always welcome imo) and I was always happy to tell him how or what to do (which seemed welcome on his part). He was very adamant about wanting to pursue serious relations, which was fine by me.

    Then, he shared that he didn't want romantic relations. That was also no problem to me at all. We've only been on a few dates, no biggie. I also figured as much since his work life became very busy (promotion).

    I thought that would be the end of it, but a few days after he really wanted to meet. Until now, he's never tried to convince me one way or another, so I bit and went to meet him. We went out to dinner and he told me that he did want romantic relations, but he didn't have enough time and that he felt guilty. I told him that I was disappointed when he shared he didn't want something romantic with me, but I understood. I then implicitly shared that his issues weren't super problematic for me. (Implicit, because I'm not explicitly giving anybody the green light to disrespect my time) Also even with his cancellations and time issues, they were always with notice and I'm (low key) never mad at flaking in general. I always perceived it as more time given to me. We then proceeded to have some ambiguous conversation that left him feeling like we weren't dating and left me feeling like we were. L o l, he cleared that up for me, we're not. He told me he'd like to be friends and I said okay. (We dated sporadically for 1 month, really no opportunity to develop serious feelings or feel any loss)

    This part is my assumption and opinion though. He seems so rigid like he's suffocating over his own rule system. I always (nearly recklessly) feel like nothing can stop me from doing something if I wanted it bad enough and he seems to live in a world where it wouldn't take much to stop him.

    tl;dr I think this duality works out more easily if the two parties were introduced at a time before ESI's develop their "in and out" groups. How else do those walls break? You can't! You gotta be in them walls in the first place. Or at least that's how it feels without some external factors forcing interaction.

    If you disagree with some of my assumptions or conclusions, please explain why! I'm welcome to having my mind changed if you can do it
    You're one of the most me-like LIE whose words I've ever read here.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,116
    Mentioned
    107 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aLIEve View Post
    That could totally be true. It's common to assume duality and I wouldn't consider myself an authority on typing yet
    I have met ESI who acted like this.

  9. #9
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    15,877
    Mentioned
    1519 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silke View Post
    I keep reading this and it doesn't sound anything like an ESI.
    I read it and it sounds EXACTLY like the three ESI’s I’ve gone out with in the past few years. I ask them out, they initially seem eager to go out, then they postpone dates, they equivocate, they tell me they don’t want to be intimate but rather “just want to be friends”, but are still reluctantly agreeable to going out if I keep asking and asking and asking.

    The last one told me she was separated from her husband but still married “for his health care”. I told her that was a convenient condition to be in if she wanted to keep men at a distance. She laughed and agreed, and I left.

    It’s possible to get really tired of this shit and give up on them. Which, when you think about it, is probably the whole point for Fi-doms with strong Se and weak Ni.
    If they just operated from their Se, they’d be, like “Huh. Hot guy. Gimme.” It might take a few snow crashes before they learn caution.

    The only time I had sex with an ESI was many years ago, before my marriage and long before I knew anything about Duality. We first met on the street while we were both walking home from separate bars, each of us drunk out of our minds. We went from walking down the same street to having sex within twenty minutes. Maybe fifteen. We kept having sex all the next day, and talking, even when we sobered up. I’d never before met a woman that I got along with so well.* But I was 26 and she was about 22, maybe too young for her to start dividing the world into friends and enemies.



    *You know, lots of new things are happening to you in your twenties. You discover something that you think is great and say “Wow, I’m glad I discovered this. Now I can get it from anyone.”
    Lol.
    No.
    Last edited by Adam Strange; 01-28-2021 at 02:39 PM.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,116
    Mentioned
    107 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    I read it and it sounds EXACTLY like the three ESI’s I’ve gone out with in the past few years. I ask them out, they initially seem eager to go out, then they postpone dates, they equivocate, they tell me they don’t want to be intimate but rather “just want to be friends”, but are still reluctantly agreeable to going out if I keep asking and asking and asking.

    The last one told me she was separated from her husband but still married “for his health care”. I told her that was a convenient condition to be in if she wanted to keep men at a distance. She laughed and agreed, and I left.

    It’s possible to get really tired of this shit and give up on them. Which, when you think about it, is probably the whole point for Fi-doms with strong Se and weak Ni.
    If they just operated from their Se, they’d be, like “Huh. Hot guy. Gimme.” It might take a few snow crashes before they learn caution.
    If I was in your shoes, I'd want to ask to go meet the legal but not in spirit husband together to get it clear that we were all three on the up and up, and then I'd date the shit out of the ESI.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post

    The only time I had sex with an ESI was many years ago, before my marriage and long before I knew anything about Duality. We first met on the street while we were both walking home from separate bars, each of us drunk out of our minds. We went from walking down the same street to having sex within twenty minutes. Maybe fifteen. We kept having sex all the next day, and talking, even when we sobered up. I’d never before met a woman that I got along with so well.* But I was 26 and she was about 22, maybe too young for her to start dividing the world into friends and enemies.



    *You know, lots of new things are happening to you in your twenties. You discover something that you think is great and say “Wow, I’m glad I discovered this. Now I can get it from anyone.”
    Lol.
    No.

    I know that feel.

  11. #11
    Psychology BSc and statistics MSc Armitage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    The Netherlands
    TIM
    LIE-Ni 2w1-5 SX/so
    Posts
    375
    Mentioned
    82 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aLIEve View Post
    That could totally be true. It's common to assume duality and I wouldn't consider myself an authority on typing yet
    Whilst reading this I thought: "Yup, that's pretty much like the ESI guy who I dated." Most other LIEs in this thread also agree that your description clearly portrays an ESI, hence I believe that you have all reason to be confident of your typing of him.

  12. #12
    Fake Intellectual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Location
    United States
    TIM
    LIE-3Te
    Posts
    55
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    I read it and it sounds EXACTLY like the three ESI’s I’ve gone out with in the past few years. I ask them out, they initially seem eager to go out, then they postpone dates, they equivocate, they tell me they don’t want to be intimate but rather “just want to be friends”, but are still reluctantly agreeable to going out if I keep asking and asking and asking.

    The last one told me she was separated from her husband but still married “for his health care”. I told her that was a convenient condition to be in if she wanted to keep men at a distance. She laughed and agreed, and I left.

    It’s possible to get really tired of this shit and give up on them. Which, when you think about it, is probably the whole point for Fi-doms with strong Se and weak Ni.
    If they just operated from their Se, they’d be, like “Huh. Hot guy. Gimme.” It might take a few snow crashes before they learn caution.

    The only time I had sex with an ESI was many years ago, before my marriage and long before I knew anything about Duality. We first met on the street while we were both walking home from separate bars, each of us drunk out of our minds. We went from walking down the same street to having sex within twenty minutes. Maybe fifteen. We kept having sex all the next day, and talking, even when we sobered up. I’d never before met a woman that I got along with so well.* But I was 26 and she was about 22, maybe too young for her to start dividing the world into friends and enemies.



    *You know, lots of new things are happening to you in your twenties. You discover something that you think is great and say “Wow, I’m glad I discovered this. Now I can get it from anyone.”
    Lol.
    No.
    Strange. The ESI I'm currently dating is very much not prone to postponing anything (in fact that's usually me that has a tendency to do that). She is also much more straightforward about sexual things than I am. She never said "let's just be friends" to me, see went about it in a very straightforward fashion when it came to dating me. This has been the same with basically every ESI and even SEE I've had relations with. I never get friend zoned by them.

  13. #13
    Traversing The Darkness Lady Lunacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    4,035
    Mentioned
    192 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have to say, I'm 100% confident in my own typing and this is nothing like me. Too passive, indirect, nonconfrontational, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange
    If they just operated from their Se, they’d be, like “Huh. Hot guy. Gimme.” It might take a few snow crashes before they learn caution.
    I used to do this. Now I know exactly what I want and what I'm looking for, so it doesn't seem like I'm this way. I'm selective, and then I'm also very clear about whether I want or don't want someone. I very much operate by my own internal system of "relationship recipes" and look for certain values, qualities, traits, that I believe are necessary for both personal compatibility and general/objective relationship sustainability. In other words, I know what I am doing enough to be very decisive, and I am very clear/blunt about my decisions.
    ⊹˳˚ ☾ ˚˳⊹
    xᴇɴᴏᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ʟɪɴɢᴜᴀᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ᴄᴜʟᴛᴜʀᴇ ʙᴜғғ, ᴘsʏᴄʜᴏʟᴏɢʏ/sᴏᴄɪᴏʟᴏɢʏ ɴᴇʀᴅ, ᴀɴᴅ ᴀsᴘɪʀɪɴɢ ᴘᴏʟʏɢʟᴏᴛ.

  14. #14
    Traversing The Darkness Lady Lunacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    4,035
    Mentioned
    192 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fake Intellectual View Post
    Strange. The ESI I'm currently dating is very much not prone to postponing anything (in fact that's usually me that has a tendency to do that). She is also much more straightforward about sexual things than I am. She never said "let's just be friends" to me, see went about it in a very straightforward fashion when it came to dating me. This has been the same with basically every ESI and even SEE I've had relations with. I never get friend zoned by them.
    I'm gonna come be the first to do it then LOL
    ⊹˳˚ ☾ ˚˳⊹
    xᴇɴᴏᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ʟɪɴɢᴜᴀᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ᴄᴜʟᴛᴜʀᴇ ʙᴜғғ, ᴘsʏᴄʜᴏʟᴏɢʏ/sᴏᴄɪᴏʟᴏɢʏ ɴᴇʀᴅ, ᴀɴᴅ ᴀsᴘɪʀɪɴɢ ᴘᴏʟʏɢʟᴏᴛ.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    657
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Nightmare
    introverts are more passive, indirect and nonconfrontational
    so 100% confidence is not warranted

  16. #16
    Fake Intellectual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Location
    United States
    TIM
    LIE-3Te
    Posts
    55
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blaecaedre View Post
    @Nightmare
    introverts are more passive, indirect and nonconfrontational
    so 100% confidence is not warranted
    Maybe you should read type descriptions. They don't agree with your idea.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    657
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fake Intellectual View Post
    Maybe you should read type descriptions. They don't agree with your idea.
    most type descriptions should not be trusted to understand Socionics, including the types themselves - considering the incongruence of many of them with the basic descriptions of information elements, dichotomies etc. in Augustinavichiute, Filatova etc. - they are written by people who, presumably to rationalize wrong typings of individuals, hold on to strange ideas like some introverted types being confrontational and direct, even though that is against a basic feature of introversion - preoccupation with the self and activities related to this, relative less attention and energy towards external affairs. with correct typings of yourself and individuals you know it will become clear that introversion as described in, for example, Filatova's book, is largely sound - not to say that everything that Socionics claims is sound.
    i recommend you and Nightmare read the basic theory to gain a foothold with which to develop an understanding of Socionics, not illogical and contradictory secondary descriptions. as I recall you seemed closer to an introvert in the video - LII, ILI. but this can be rejected or verified by understanding your intertype relations with people you know, after typing them properly.

  18. #18
    Traversing The Darkness Lady Lunacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    4,035
    Mentioned
    192 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blaecaedre View Post
    @Nightmare
    introverts are more passive, indirect and nonconfrontational
    so 100% confidence is not warranted
    Clearly not, because I'm about as introverted as it gets and I'm not passive, etc.
    ⊹˳˚ ☾ ˚˳⊹
    xᴇɴᴏᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ʟɪɴɢᴜᴀᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ᴄᴜʟᴛᴜʀᴇ ʙᴜғғ, ᴘsʏᴄʜᴏʟᴏɢʏ/sᴏᴄɪᴏʟᴏɢʏ ɴᴇʀᴅ, ᴀɴᴅ ᴀsᴘɪʀɪɴɢ ᴘᴏʟʏɢʟᴏᴛ.

  19. #19
    Traversing The Darkness Lady Lunacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    4,035
    Mentioned
    192 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blaecaedre View Post
    most type descriptions should not be trusted to understand Socionics, including the types themselves
    When my experiences/personality traits match the type descriptions, I tend to consider that enough to make it valid (while taking typology in general with a grain of salt). In the end, what you think doesn't matter, because whether you agree with it or not, there are many introverts that are not passive, etc. You're free to be delusional if you want to.

    Ultimately, your point of view is coming from reading rather than actual observations. I advise touching grass instead of getting so consumed by the theory.
    ⊹˳˚ ☾ ˚˳⊹
    xᴇɴᴏᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ʟɪɴɢᴜᴀᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ᴄᴜʟᴛᴜʀᴇ ʙᴜғғ, ᴘsʏᴄʜᴏʟᴏɢʏ/sᴏᴄɪᴏʟᴏɢʏ ɴᴇʀᴅ, ᴀɴᴅ ᴀsᴘɪʀɪɴɢ ᴘᴏʟʏɢʟᴏᴛ.

  20. #20
    Traversing The Darkness Lady Lunacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    4,035
    Mentioned
    192 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fake Intellectual View Post
    Maybe you should read type descriptions. They don't agree with your idea.
    It says plain as day that ESIs tend to be confrontational in pursuit of causes, etc. I don't understand why people think ESI is passive. Se makes them not a passive type at all. Even if you take a look at the type without descriptions, it makes 0 sense for an Se type to be passive without some sort of weird circumstances causing it or something (like believing their lack of passivity is morally wrong because of religion, for instance).

    Assertiveness is part of Extroversion in Big 5, but people who only read fail to realize people are not so easily fit into boxes. I don't know why that happens, either, considering even Big 5 itself makes room for things like an assertive introvert. You can be high in assertiveness facet without being high in other parts of Extroversion.
    ⊹˳˚ ☾ ˚˳⊹
    xᴇɴᴏᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ʟɪɴɢᴜᴀᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ᴄᴜʟᴛᴜʀᴇ ʙᴜғғ, ᴘsʏᴄʜᴏʟᴏɢʏ/sᴏᴄɪᴏʟᴏɢʏ ɴᴇʀᴅ, ᴀɴᴅ ᴀsᴘɪʀɪɴɢ ᴘᴏʟʏɢʟᴏᴛ.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    657
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Nightmare
    >i'm about as introverted as it gets
    doubtful, considering your degree of conflict-seeking
    >I'm not passive
    introverts are more passive than extraverts, not necessarily totally passive
    and this makes introversion less likely for you, too
    >When my experiences/personality traits match the type descriptions, I tend to consider that enough to make it valid
    when your experiences/traits match erroneous descriptions of ESI, then the likelihood that you are ESI decreases
    >there are many introverts that are not passive
    they are more so than extraverts, in general - i.e. passivity is a significant marker of introversion
    >Ultimately, your point of view is coming from reading rather than actual observations.
    laughable point, considering your dependence on bogus descriptions rather than just following from the basic theory
    >It says plain as day that ESIs tend to be confrontational in pursuit of causes, etc
    anyone can be confrontational, but ESIs, being introverts and Fi types, are some of the least conflict-seeking types. ''in pursuit of causes'' also sounds more like an objectivist Ti/Fe valuing expression or the idealist mind of an intuitive. or an extravert
    another strike against shitty descriptions
    >Se makes them not a passive type at all.
    Se is, like other extraverted functions, concerned with the external. there is nothing more ''active'' about Se than the other extraverted functions, only it is the function most exclusively concerned with material things. XSI can be more possessive, hands-on, career-focused etc. than other introverts.

  22. #22
    Fake Intellectual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Location
    United States
    TIM
    LIE-3Te
    Posts
    55
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    It says plain as day that ESIs tend to be confrontational in pursuit of causes, etc. I don't understand why people think ESI is passive. Se makes them not a passive type at all. Even if you take a look at the type without descriptions, it makes 0 sense for an Se type to be passive without some sort of weird circumstances causing it or something (like believing their lack of passivity is morally wrong because of religion, for instance).

    Assertiveness is part of Extroversion in Big 5, but people who only read fail to realize people are not so easily fit into boxes. I don't know why that happens, either, considering even Big 5 itself makes room for things like an assertive introvert. You can be high in assertiveness facet without being high in other parts of Extroversion.
    Yup. blaecaedre is over-simplifying Renin's ideas, which aren't even really a good way to type. In big 5, I'm an introvert, despite being ENTj in Socionics.

  23. #23
    Traversing The Darkness Lady Lunacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    4,035
    Mentioned
    192 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fake Intellectual View Post
    Yup. blaecaedre is over-simplifying Renin's ideas, which aren't even really a good way to type.
    Not to mention acting like he knows people better than they know themselves, lmao. "I doubt you're an introvert" really? Cuz like I literally just sit in my room for months and get exhausted by brief interactions on voice chat or in person. My introversion is extreme, I am sensitive to interaction. Lmao. Lemme tell ya, so extroverted. I notice patterns where Se is moreso used behind Fi, also. Even in Reinin I am ESI. I'm a fucking meme when going by descriptions. That's good enough for me. It's just sad when someone who has seen like 2 sentences from you comes along trying to tell you who you are...like "wow, some people are that far gone into typology," kind of sad. I guess only extroverts are abusive, too, since introverts are passive (and thus it is implied that aggression is only seen in extroverts)

    In big 5, I'm an introvert, despite being ENTj in Socionics.
    Yeah, that can happen as well. The system is a neat little box and human beings are not, basically.
    Last edited by Lady Lunacy; 11-04-2022 at 09:44 PM.
    ⊹˳˚ ☾ ˚˳⊹
    xᴇɴᴏᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ʟɪɴɢᴜᴀᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ᴄᴜʟᴛᴜʀᴇ ʙᴜғғ, ᴘsʏᴄʜᴏʟᴏɢʏ/sᴏᴄɪᴏʟᴏɢʏ ɴᴇʀᴅ, ᴀɴᴅ ᴀsᴘɪʀɪɴɢ ᴘᴏʟʏɢʟᴏᴛ.

  24. #24
    Traversing The Darkness Lady Lunacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    4,035
    Mentioned
    192 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blaecaedre View Post
    @Nightmare
    >i'm about as introverted as it gets
    doubtful, considering your degree of conflict-seeking
    >I'm not passive
    introverts are more passive than extraverts, not necessarily totally passive
    and this makes introversion less likely for you, too
    >When my experiences/personality traits match the type descriptions, I tend to consider that enough to make it valid
    when your experiences/traits match erroneous descriptions of ESI, then the likelihood that you are ESI decreases
    >there are many introverts that are not passive
    they are more so than extraverts, in general - i.e. passivity is a significant marker of introversion
    >Ultimately, your point of view is coming from reading rather than actual observations.
    laughable point, considering your dependence on bogus descriptions rather than just following from the basic theory
    >It says plain as day that ESIs tend to be confrontational in pursuit of causes, etc
    anyone can be confrontational, but ESIs, being introverts and Fi types, are some of the least conflict-seeking types. ''in pursuit of causes'' also sounds more like an objectivist Ti/Fe valuing expression or the idealist mind of an intuitive. or an extravert
    another strike against shitty descriptions
    >Se makes them not a passive type at all.
    Se is, like other extraverted functions, concerned with the external. there is nothing more ''active'' about Se than the other extraverted functions, only it is the function most exclusively concerned with material things. XSI can be more possessive, hands-on, career-focused etc. than other introverts.
    The only thing I'm going to reply to is that I am not conflict-seeking. I'm simply unafraid of conflict and will use it as a necessary means to an end. I don't LIKE/SEEK conflict. I'm not even clarifying that for you, but for other readers who are interested in how ESIs are. As for you, I'll let you think whatever you want. Arguing with you about who I am or what I'm like is not a productive or desirable use of my time. I know myself, you don't know me. End of discussion. I do not need validation or care what type you think I am. You're derailing this thread by battle typing, anyway, which is already annoying enough.
    Last edited by Lady Lunacy; 11-04-2022 at 09:40 PM.
    ⊹˳˚ ☾ ˚˳⊹
    xᴇɴᴏᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ʟɪɴɢᴜᴀᴘʜɪʟᴇ, ᴄᴜʟᴛᴜʀᴇ ʙᴜғғ, ᴘsʏᴄʜᴏʟᴏɢʏ/sᴏᴄɪᴏʟᴏɢʏ ɴᴇʀᴅ, ᴀɴᴅ ᴀsᴘɪʀɪɴɢ ᴘᴏʟʏɢʟᴏᴛ.

  25. #25
    Clarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Location
    On Semi-Hiatus.
    TIM
    6w5 ISTJ Sp/Sx
    Posts
    730
    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blaecaedre View Post
    most type descriptions should not be trusted to understand Socionics, including the types themselves - considering the incongruence of many of them with the basic descriptions of information elements, dichotomies etc. in Augustinavichiute, Filatova etc. - they are written by people who, presumably to rationalize wrong typings of individuals, hold on to strange ideas like some introverted types being confrontational and direct, even though that is against a basic feature of introversion - preoccupation with the self and activities related to this, relative less attention and energy towards external affairs. with correct typings of yourself and individuals you know it will become clear that introversion as described in, for example, Filatova's book, is largely sound - not to say that everything that Socionics claims is sound.
    i recommend you and Nightmare read the basic theory to gain a foothold with which to develop an understanding of Socionics, not illogical and contradictory secondary descriptions. as I recall you seemed closer to an introvert in the video - LII, ILI. but this can be rejected or verified by understanding your intertype relations with people you know, after typing them properly.
    As much as I understand theory, I think that subtypes might make individuals more or less confrontational than their base types. I'd expect H subtypes (DCNH) to generally be less confrontational than D or N subtypes for example.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •