Stratievskaya article on patterns of beta NF defenses

[grumpyvic81]

So I'm interested in these patterns (regardless of whether we call them sociotype stuff).

From here https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...Stratiyevskaya


EIE: "He protects himself fiercely and aggressively, saying things that sound extremely convincing, while in actuality having few "trump cards" or even in complete absence of them. That's who will defend his point of view to the very end, to the last breath, and will never consider himself guilty. Defending himself, the EIE always attacks (as is typical of an "obstinate" determined "strategic" type). If he cannot find an appropriate logical argument, he often gets personal, switches things around, and moves the blame to someone else's shoulders, trying to divert suspicions from himself. (Arguments of "decisive" resolute "subjectivists" are akin to a war – to win all methods suffice)."

IEI: "Following his intuitive program, the IEI can discreetly bring the opponent toward the "trap" at the right time, can baffle and slay him with glaring absurdity of his counter-arguments, turning a defense into an attack. As a "tactician", the IEI works great on the defensive, and often seems invulnerable in a dispute, despite the fact that all of his/her supposedly devastatingly crushing counter-arguments at closer inspection look to be "woven out of nothing" – out of a "mirage", out of "emotional foam", from absurd conclusions and "soap bubbles"."


My question is, does anyone have concrete examples of these strategies? From actual situations or it can be made up too fine if it illustrates them well. Thanks!

[Beautiful sky]

I don't have any examples but I can tell you from having long time EIE friend that she is just reserved but externally emotive. So maybe she doesn't get involved in a lot of political situations. I as an INFJ do. I am very political and if I have made incorrect assessments I do or will admit to my own guilt. I have the biggest guilt center. I think that Fe types just don't have as a big guilt center as myself as an EII. It has to do with Fi/Fe

[Smilex]

So I'm interested in these patterns (regardless of whether we call them sociotype stuff).

From here https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...Stratiyevskaya


EIE: "He protects himself fiercely and aggressively, saying things that sound extremely convincing, while in actuality having few "trump cards" or even in complete absence of them. That's who will defend his point of view to the very end, to the last breath, and will never consider himself guilty. Defending himself, the EIE always attacks (as is typical of an "obstinate" determined "strategic" type). If he cannot find an appropriate logical argument, he often gets personal, switches things around, and moves the blame to someone else's shoulders, trying to divert suspicions from himself. (Arguments of "decisive" resolute "subjectivists" are akin to a war – to win all methods suffice)."

IEI: "Following his intuitive program, the IEI can discreetly bring the opponent toward the "trap" at the right time, can baffle and slay him with glaring absurdity of his counter-arguments, turning a defense into an attack. As a "tactician", the IEI works great on the defensive, and often seems invulnerable in a dispute, despite the fact that all of his/her supposedly devastatingly crushing counter-arguments at closer inspection look to be "woven out of nothing" – out of a "mirage", out of "emotional foam", from absurd conclusions and "soap bubbles"."


My question is, does anyone have concrete examples of these strategies? From actual situations or it can be made up too fine if it illustrates them well. Thanks!

As for the INFp-thing. Think of anything by S Baron Cohen.

The ENFj-thing is more difficult to pinpoint. The ENFj are slower in making their real point. They're a process type, so to really understand what's going on, you'd need to follow them a long time. It's more of a continuum of things. But deep heartfelt hate is there and so is deep wisdom and you're asking what's in between.

[Smilex]

I think this is a fine historical version of an ENFj voice:

Therefore let everyone who can, smite, slay, and stab, secretly or openly, remembering that nothing can be more poisonous, hurtful, or devilish than a rebel ... For baptism does not make men free in body and property, but in soul; and the gospel does not make goods common, except in the case of those who, of their own free will, do what the apostles and disciples did in Acts 4 [:32–37]. They did not demand, as do our insane peasants in their raging, that the goods of others—of Pilate and Herod—should be common, but only their own goods. Our peasants, however, want to make the goods of other men common, and keep their own for themselves. Fine Christians they are! I think there is not a devil left in hell; they have all gone into the peasants. Their raving has gone beyond all measure


and from the same person:

Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. May God help me. Amen.

[persimmonism]

For IEI I know what she's talking about but can't think of any concrete examples right now.

IEI argues by knowing how certain words/attitudes they can adopt & possibly use to insinuate certain things will affect the person in question. What types of things will hit the person where they are the most defenseless. Use their tendencies against them. Try to find the perfect phrase to pierce right through the person. If it is a longer term thing, every small action/comportment is designed to show resistance or prove my point or ideally, subtly get the person to see my point of view and hopefully understand that I'm right. why "triumph"/overpower in an argument if you can get to the root and actually convince them. like winning a battle versus a war for a bad metaphor. well, that's my ideal goal, but it doesn't often work like that lol. Playing the long game.
(ex about long-game-ness: even at age 5, if I lied to my parents, i was very serious about remembering it for months so that I wouldn't ever act inconsistently with what I said or be discovered for lying and thus making them less likely to believe what I say in the future aka maintaining perceived integrity. i was never a "carefree" child i took everything and myself way too seriously lol)

yeah, so, to win against an IEI you should be/act impervious to what they communicate through Fe. act like nothing they say or do affect or get to you. they play close attention to how you react to things and use it to inform their methods so don't give them much to go off of-- don't be transparent, be very hard to grasp and read. be able to read them and their motives well (though you can't really control this) and u can freak them out, intimidate them in this manner. it scares me when, in a conflict, I realize someone knows or predicted something about me that I didn't expect. i calculate things not only based on the other person but also based on what i think they know/realize about me. so in doing this you diminish my power in the situation, which will scare me. i'm not sure if all IEIs are like this, but I tend to view myself in a sort of black and white way-- so in this case I'm either powerful or powerless, all you have to do is tip the scale slightly towards "powerless" and I'll do the rest of the work for you lol. but IEIs can also adapt well even if stuff like this happens.

I'll post later with some more concrete stuff, if I can think of something.

[grumpyvic81]

For IEI I know what she's talking about but can't think of any concrete examples right now.

IEI argues by knowing how certain words/attitudes they can adopt & possibly use to insinuate certain things will affect the person in question. What types of things will hit the person where they are the most defenseless. Use their tendencies against them. Try to find the perfect phrase to pierce right through the person. If it is a longer term thing, every small action/comportment is designed to show resistance or prove my point or ideally, subtly get the person to see my point of view and hopefully understand that I'm right. why "triumph"/overpower in an argument if you can get to the root and actually convince them. like winning a battle versus a war for a bad metaphor. well, that's my ideal goal, but it doesn't often work like that lol. Playing the long game.
(ex about long-game-ness: even at age 5, if I lied to my parents, i was very serious about remembering it for months so that I wouldn't ever act inconsistently with what I said or be discovered for lying and thus making them less likely to believe what I say in the future aka maintaining perceived integrity. i was never a "carefree" child i took everything and myself way too seriously lol)

yeah, so, to win against an IEI you should be/act impervious to what they communicate through Fe. act like nothing they say or do affect or get to you. they play close attention to how you react to things and use it to inform their methods so don't give them much to go off of-- don't be transparent, be very hard to grasp and read. be able to read them and their motives well (though you can't really control this) and u can freak them out, intimidate them in this manner. it scares me when, in a conflict, I realize someone knows or predicted something about me that I didn't expect. i calculate things not only based on the other person but also based on what i think they know/realize about me. so in doing this you diminish my power in the situation, which will scare me. i'm not sure if all IEIs are like this, but I tend to view myself in a sort of black and white way-- so in this case I'm either powerful or powerless, all you have to do is tip the scale slightly towards "powerless" and I'll do the rest of the work for you lol. but IEIs can also adapt well even if stuff like this happens.

I'll post later with some more concrete stuff, if I can think of something.

Wow thanks this is great. I can definitely think of examples of certain people doing this. Yes, I think my best defense against all that reframing via subtle and sometimes not-so-subtle drama and such, is to act like I'm not affected by the Fe communication. Actually when I act that way, I ACTUALLY am not affected anymore by the Fe stuff from them because I am determined to find out the truth at that point and so I just make myself cold inside and so I can oppose their emotions. Yeah I have upset IEIs before e.g. when I did get advice from other IEI lol to figure out their motives. But sometimes I do this simply by having the (likely) IEI interact enough with me, letting them become really emotional and let them blurt out useful info when carried away enough. I remember one example where I didn't even expect this piece of info coming to me from them and I actually didn't know what to do with it on the spot - tbh I kinda wanted to be in denial about it at first - so I just put it away. But I put it to good use later when the opportunity came up ......... Also once I cut off an IEI after figuring out their real motives, but I cut them off simply because I wasn't sure if they wouldn't be able to still placate me with some good Ni + Fe move or whatever and this is stupid and it's prob a Fe HA/Fi PoLR thing but I just felt it would be so rude to remain cold in the face of that at that point....this is hard to explain but yeah. So I cut them off using what I've learned about them and I was actually better off that way.

[persimmonism]

Wow thanks this is great. I can definitely think of examples of certain people doing this. Yes, I think my best defense against all that reframing via subtle and sometimes not-so-subtle drama and such, is to act like I'm not affected by the Fe communication. Actually when I act that way, I ACTUALLY am not affected anymore by the Fe stuff from them because I am determined to find out the truth at that point and so I just make myself cold inside and so I can oppose their emotions. Yeah I have upset IEIs before e.g. when I did get advice from other IEI lol to figure out their motives. But sometimes I do this simply by having the (likely) IEI interact enough with me, letting them become really emotional and let them blurt out useful info when carried away enough. I remember one example where I didn't even expect this piece of info coming to me from them and I actually didn't know what to do with it on the spot - tbh I kinda wanted to be in denial about it at first - so I just put it away. But I put it to good use later when the opportunity came up ......... Also once I cut off an IEI after figuring out their real motives, but I cut them off simply because I wasn't sure if they wouldn't be able to still placate me with some good Ni + Fe move or whatever and this is stupid and it's prob a Fe HA/Fi PoLR thing but I just felt it would be so rude to remain cold in the face of that at that point....this is hard to explain but yeah. So I cut them off using what I've learned about them and I was actually better off that way.

Ooh, so that thing you did with the first IEI prob really disarmed them.
It sucks that you've had such bad experiences with IEIs. I hope that one day you'll find a good one.

Something messy i originally intended to post but got too lazy to edit for better readability, if you're interested.

Conversely, here's the method of "arguing" that an IEI might use (using a huge sample size of Myself) if the goal isn't simply to win at all costs..

Involves more compromisation, responsiveness to clear logic, desire to de-escalate and promote the fact that it's not a conversation against but two people wishing to work together:
deliberately not getting emotionally heated and deliberately not taking offense at things, showing that they assumed the person didn't mean to attack them but rather just explain a point of view (regardless of it's true or not) and kind of be like, okay so what can we do.. take genuine interest in what the person is saying and trying to UNDERSTAND what they're saying and make it clear that they are trying to do so(showing genuine curiosity via Fe) and taking turns. the goal is to promote a shared point of view that this is a discussion. show zero malice. smile genuinely. (preferably not fake-genuinely lol) So that's how I'm good at de-escalating things.


I've come to realize it's quite Fe/Ti rather than Fi/Te. it is harder with Serious quadra because they don't seem responsive to "logic" or whatever. For example, when ILE and I argue, ideally, with Fe we maintain the fact and keep reassuring that we are on the same side and share goodwill throughout (with Serious, it's like they tell you it once and I know they mean it, but i always get scared and i need to always be reassured via outward emotional display, which Fi won't provide), with Ti we say exactly what we feel even if it's ugly, and we try to make sense of things together and work things through from there. With Fi/Te I feel like everything has to be so personal and illogical. my goal is to get it so we can really understand each other as well as possible.

i think i could get accused of rationalizing things too much, but with the right person, it is not viewed this way. for almost everyone except a couple of people, i would not be so emotionally invested into arguments and try to almost-100% resolve them, so I'll be fine with not being so invested in trying to understand each other and doing what i personally view as "superficially" resolving things-- it is resolved and we are happy, but i don't feel like we really understood each other as much as possible (probably because i feel that it's not possible just due to how we each see things differently) and really addressed the roots of the problem. i haven't come to feel closer to understanding them in the process, but simply resolved the issue itself and the relationship at this moment..