Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 93

Thread: Differentiating Te vs Se

  1. #1
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Differentiating Te vs Se

    How do you guys differentiate the two?

    One is trying to implement logical information, the other is trying to implement force.

    But I feel like on the surface, or even online, they may appear very similar to each other:

    --LSE/SLE often get confused for each other
    --A wise old man SLE may come off like a LIE
    --Trump is typed ENTJ in MBTI and SEE/SLE in socionics.
    --Te/Se-ego trolling appear similar

    What possible cues, speech-patterns, mannerisms, behaviors, signs, etc do you look for? I had some ideas but please share yours.

  2. #2
    thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,283
    Mentioned
    301 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Really LIEs are more similar to SLEs than LSEs are. MBTI Te is like socionics Se so that explains the Trump typing.

    Te is dry and about matters of factual accuracy and effective work practice. I'm not sure what it would have to do with trolling?

  3. #3
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    3,061
    Mentioned
    228 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If mbti types trump LIE it is probably because of Dominant subtype.
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    13,053
    Mentioned
    1199 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    read Jung
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  5. #5
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    3,061
    Mentioned
    228 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    read Jung
    I agree. @peteronfireee Jung mentions that Se can seem "rational" although it is irrational. Read the section about Se in chapter X of Psychologicsl Types
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)

  6. #6
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Some Jung:

    6. Sensation

    Sensation, in the extraverted attitude, is most definitely conditioned by the object. As sense-perception, sensation is naturally dependent upon the object. But, just as naturally, it is also dependent upon the subject; hence, there is also a subjective sensation, which after its kind is entirely different from the objective. In the extraverted attitude this subjective share of sensation, in so far as its conscious application is concerned, is either inhibited or repressed. As an irrational function, sensation is equally repressed, whenever a rational function, thinking or feeling, possesses the priority, ie. it can be said to have a conscious function, only in so far as the rational attitude of consciousness permits accidental perceptions to become conscious contents; in short, realizes them. The function of sense is, of course, absolute in the stricter sense; for example, everything is seen or heard to the farthest physiological possibility, but not everything attains that threshold value which a perception must possess in order to be also apperceived. It is a different matter when sensation itself possesses priority, instead of merely seconding another function. In this case, no element of objective sensation is excluded and nothing repressed (with the exception of the subjective share [p. 457] already mentioned). Sensation has a preferential objective determination, and those objects which release the strongest sensation are decisive for the individual's psychology. The result of this is a pronounced sensuous hold to the object. Sensation, therefore, is a vital function, equipped with the potentest [sic] vital instinct. In so far as objects release sensations, they matter; and, in so far as it lies within the power of sensation, they are also fully accepted into consciousness, whether compatible with reasoned judgment or not. As a function its sole criterion of value is the strength of the sensation as conditioned by its objective qualities. Accordingly, all objective processes, in so far as they release sensations at all, make their appearance in consciousness. It is, however, only concrete, sensuously perceived objects or processes which excite sensations in the extraverted attitude; exclusively those, in fact, which everyone in all times and places would sense as concrete. Hence, the orientation of such an individual corresponds with purely concrete reality. The judging, rational functions are subordinated to the concrete facts of sensation, and, accordingly, possess the qualities of inferior differentiation, i.e. they are marked by a certain negativity, with infantile and archaic tendencies. The function most affected by the repression, is, naturally, the one standing opposite to sensation, viz. intuition, the function of unconscious perception.

    7. The Extraverted Sensation Type

    No other human type can equal the extraverted sensation-type in realism. His sense for objective facts is extraordinarily developed. His life is an accumulation of actual experience with concrete objects, and the more pronounced he is, the less use does he make of his experience. In certain cases the events of his life hardly deserve [p. 458] the name 'experience'. He knows no better use for this sensed 'experience' than to make it serve as a guide to fresh sensations; anything in the least 'new' that comes within his circle of interest is forthwith turned to a sensational account and is made to serve this end. In so far as one is disposed to regard a highly developed sense for sheer actuality as very reasonable, will such men be esteemed rational. In reality, however, this is by no means the case, since they are equally subject to the sensation of irrational, chance happenings, as they are to rational behaviour.

    Such a type -- the majority arc men apparently -- does not, of course, believe himself to be 'subject' to sensation. He would be much more inclined to ridicule this view as altogether inconclusive, since, from his standpoint, sensation is the concrete manifestation of life -- it is simply the fulness [sic] of actual living. His aim is concrete enjoyment, and his morality is similarly orientated. For true enjoyment has its own special morality, its own moderation and lawfulness, its own unselfishness and devotedness. It by no means follows that he is just sensual or gross, for he may differentiate his sensation to the finest pitch of æsthetic purity without being the least unfaithful, even in his most abstract sensations, to his principle of objective sensation. Wulfen's Cicerone des r¨cksichtlosen Lebensgenusses is the unvarnished confession of a type of this sort. From this point of view the book seems to me worth reading.

    Upon the lower levels this is the man of tangible reality, with little tendency either for reflection or commanding purpose. To sense the object, to have and if possible to enjoy sensations, is his constant motive. He is by no means unlovable; on the contrary, he frequently has a charming and lively capacity for enjoyment; he is sometimes a jolly fellow, and often a refined æsthete. [p. 459]

    In the former case, the great problems of life hinge upon a good or indifferent dinner; in the latter, they are questions of good taste. When he 'senses', everything essential has been said and done. Nothing can be more than concrete and actual; conjectures that transcend or go beyond the concrete are only permitted on condition that they enhance sensation. This need not be in any way a pleasurable reinforcement, since this type is not a common voluptuary; he merely desires the strongest sensation, and this, by his very nature, he can receive only from without. What comes from within seems to him morbid and objectionable. In so far as lie thinks and feels, he always reduces down to objective foundations, i.e. to influences coming from the object, quite unperturbed by the most violent departures from logic. Tangible reality, under any conditions, makes him breathe again. In this respect he is unexpectedly credulous. He will, without hesitation, relate an obvious psychogenic symptom to the falling barometer, while the existence of a psychic conflict seems to him a fantastic abnormality. His love is incontestably rooted in the manifest attractions of the object. In so far as he is normal, he is conspicuously adjusted to positive reality -- conspicuously, because his adjustment is always visible. His ideal is the actual; in this respect he is considerate. He has no ideals related to ideas -- he has, therefore, no sort of ground for maintaining a hostile attitude towards the reality of things and facts. This expresses itself in all the externals of his life. He dresses well, according to his circumstances ; he keeps a good table for his friends, who are either made comfortable or at least given to understand that his fastidious taste is obliged to impose certain claims upon his entourage. He even convinces one that certain sacrifices are decidedly worth while for the sake of style.

    But the more sensation predominates, so that the [p. 460] sensing subject disappears behind the sensation, the more unsatisfactory does this type become. Either he develops into a crude pleasure-seeker or he becomes an unscrupulous, designing sybarite. Although the object is entirely indispensable to him, yet, as something existing in and through itself, it is none the less depreciated. It is ruthlessly violated and essentially ignored, since now its sole use is to stimulate sensation. The hold upon the object is pushed to the utmost limit. The unconscious is, accordingly, forced out of its me[accent]tier as a compensatory function and driven into open opposition. But, above all, the repressed intuitions begin to assert themselves in the form of projections upon the object. The strangest conjectures arise; in the case of a sexual object, jealous phantasies and anxiety-states play a great role. More acute cases develop every sort of phobia, and especially compulsive symptoms. The pathological contents have a remarkable air of unreality, with a frequent moral or religious colouring. A pettifogging captiousness often develops, or an absurdly scrupulous morality coupled with a primitive, superstitious and 'magical' religiosity, harking back to abstruse rites. All these things have their source in the repressed inferior functions, which, in such cases, stand in harsh opposition to the conscious standpoint; they wear, in fact, an aspect that is all the more striking because they appear to rest upon the most absurd suppositions, in complete contrast to the conscious sense of reality. The whole culture of thought and feeling seems, in this second personality, to be twisted into a morbid primitiveness; reason is hair-splitting sophistry -- morality is dreary moralizing and palpable Pharisaism -- religion is absurd superstition -- intuition, the noblest of human gifts, is a mere personal subtlety, a sniffing into every corner; instead of searching the horizon, it recedes to the narrowest gauge of human meanness. [p. 461]

    The specially compulsive character of the neurotic symptoms represent the unconscious counterweight to the laisser aller morality of a purely sensational attitude, which, from the standpoint of rational judgment, accepts without discrimination, everything that happens. Although this lack of basic principles in the sensation-type does not argue an absolute lawlessness and lack of restraint, it at least deprives him of the quite essential restraining power of judgment. Rational judgment represents a conscious coercion, which the rational type appears to impose upon himself of his own free will. This compulsion overtakes the sensation-type from the unconscious. Moreover, the rational type's link to the object, from the very existence of a judgment, never means such an unconditioned relation as that which the sensation-type has with the object. When his attitude reaches an abnormal one-sidedness, he is in danger of falling just as deeply into the arms of the unconscious as he consciously clings to the object. When he becomes neurotic, he is much harder to treat in the rational way, because the functions to which the physician must appeal are in a relatively undifferentiated state; hence little or no trust can be placed in them. Special means of bringing emotional pressure to bear are often needed to make him at all conscious.

    2. The Extraverted Thinking Type

    It is a fact of experience that all the basic psychological functions seldom or never have the same strength or grade of development in one and the same individual. As a rule, one or other function predominates, in both strength and development. When supremacy among the psychological functions is given to thinking, i.e. when the life of an individual is mainly ruled by reflective thinking so that every important action proceeds from intellectually considered motives, or when there is at least a tendency to conform to such motives, we may fairly call this a thinking type. Such a type can be either introverted or extraverted. We will first discuss the extraverted thinking type.

    In accordance with his definition, we must picture a, man whose constant aim -- in so far, of course, as he is a [p. 435] pure type -- is to bring his total life-activities into relation with intellectual conclusions, which in the last resort are always orientated by objective data, whether objective facts or generally valid ideas. This type of man gives the deciding voice-not merely for himself alone but also on behalf of his entourage-either to the actual objective reality or to its objectively orientated, intellectual formula. By this formula are good and evil measured, and beauty and ugliness determined. All is right that corresponds with this formula; all is wrong that contradicts it; and everything that is neutral to it is purely accidental. Because this formula seems to correspond with the meaning of the world, it also becomes a world-law whose realization must be achieved at all times and seasons, both individually and collectively. Just as the extraverted thinking type subordinates himself to his formula, so, for its own good, must his entourage also obey it, since the man who refuses to obey is wrong -- he is resisting the world-law, and is, therefore, unreasonable, immoral, and without a conscience. His moral code forbids him to tolerate exceptions; his ideal must, under all circumstances, be realized; for in his eyes it is the purest conceivable formulation of objective reality, and, therefore, must also be generally valid truth, quite indispensable for the salvation of man. This is not from any great love for his neighbour, but from a higher standpoint of justice and truth. Everything in his own nature that appears to invalidate this formula is mere imperfection, an accidental miss-fire, something to be eliminated on the next occasion, or, in the event of further failure, then clearly a sickness.

    If tolerance for the sick, the suffering, or the deranged should chance to be an ingredient in the formula, special provisions will be devised for humane societies, hospitals, prisons, colonies, etc., or at least extensive plans for such projects. For the actual execution of these schemes the [p. 436] motives of justice and truth do not, as a rule, suffice; still devolve upon real Christian charity, which I to do with feeling than with any intellectual 'One really should' or I one must' figure largely in this programme. If the formula is wide enough, it may play a very useful rôle in social life, with a reformer or a ventilator of public wrongs or a purifier of the public conscience, or as the propagator of important innovations. But the more rigid the formula, the more, does he develop into a grumbler, a crafty reasoner, and a self-righteous critic, who would like to impress both himself and others into one schema.

    We have now outlined two extreme figures, between which terminals the majority of these types may be graduated.

    In accordance with the nature of the extraverted attitude, the influence and activities of such personalities are all the more favourable and beneficent, the further one goes from the centre. Their best aspect is to be found at the periphery of their sphere of influence. The further we penetrate into their own province, the more do the unfavourable results of their tyranny impress us. Another life still pulses at the periphery, where the truth of the formula can be sensed as an estimable adjunct to the rest. But the further we probe into the special sphere where the formula operates, the more do we find life ebbing away from all that fails to coincide with its dictates. Usually it is the nearest relatives who have to taste the most disagreeable results of an extraverted formula, since they are the first to be unmercifully blessed with it. But above all the subject himself is the one who suffers most -- which brings us to the other side of the psychology of this type.

    The fact that an intellectual formula never has been and never will be discovered which could embrace the [p. 437] abundant possibilities of life in a fitting expression must lead -- where such a formula is accepted -- to an inhibition, or total exclusion, of other highly important forms and activities of life. In the first place, all those vital forms dependent upon feeling will become repressed in such a type, as, for instance, aesthetic activities, taste, artistic sense, the art of friendship, etc. Irrational forms, such as religious experiences, passions and the like, are often obliterated even to the point of complete unconsciousness. These, conditionally quite important, forms of life have to support an existence that is largely unconscious. Doubtless there are exceptional men who are able to sacrifice their entire life to one definite formula; but for most of us a permanent life of such exclusiveness is impossible. Sooner or later -- in accordance with outer circumstances and inner gifts -- the forms of life repressed by the intellectual attitude become indirectly perceptible, through a gradual disturbance of the conscious conduct of life. Whenever disturbances of this kind reach a definite intensity, one speaks of a neurosis. In most cases, however, it does not go so far, because the individual instinctively allows himself some preventive extenuations of his formula, worded, of course, in a suitable and reasonable way. In this way a safety-valve is created.

    The relative or total unconsciousness of such tendencies or functions as are excluded from any participation in the conscious attitude keeps them in a relatively undeveloped state. As compared with the conscious function they are inferior. To the extent that they are unconscious, they become merged with the remaining contents of the unconscious, from which they acquire a bizarre character. To the extent that they are conscious, they only play a secondary rôle, although one of considerable importance for the whole psychological picture.

    Since feelings are the first to oppose and contradict [p. 438] the rigid intellectual formula, they are affected first this conscious inhibition, and upon them the most intense repression falls. No function can be entirely eliminated -- it can only be greatly distorted. In so far as feelings allow themselves to be arbitrarily shaped and subordinated, they have to support the intellectual conscious attitude and adapt themselves to its aims. Only to a certain degree, however, is this possible; a part of the feeling remains insubordinate, and therefore must be repressed. Should the repression succeed, it disappears from consciousness and proceeds to unfold a subconscious activity, which runs counter to conscious aims, even producing effects whose causation is a complete enigma to the individual. For example, conscious altruism, often of an extremely high order, may be crossed by a secret self-seeking, of which the individual is wholly unaware, and which impresses intrinsically unselfish actions with the stamp of selfishness. Purely ethical aims may lead the individual into critical situations, which sometimes have more than a semblance of being decided by quite other than ethical motives. There are guardians of public morals or voluntary rescue-workers who suddenly find themselves in deplorably compromising situations, or in dire need of rescue. Their resolve to save often leads them to employ means which only tend to precipitate what they most desire to avoid. There are extraverted idealists, whose desire to advance the salvation of man is so consuming that they will not shrink from any lying and dishonest means in the pursuit of their ideal. There are a few painful examples in science where investigators of the highest esteem, from a profound conviction of the truth and general validity of their formula, have not scrupled to falsify evidence in favour of their ideal. This is sanctioned by the formula; the end justifieth the means. Only an inferior feeling-function, operating seductively [p. 439] and unconsciously, could bring about such aberrations in otherwise reputable men.

    The inferiority of feeling in this type manifests itself also in other ways. In so far as it corresponds with the dominating positive formula, the conscious attitude becomes more or less impersonal, often, indeed, to such a degree that a very considerable wrong is done to personal interests. When the conscious attitude is extreme, all personal considerations recede from view, even those which concern the individual's own person. His health is neglected, his social position deteriorates, often the most vital interests of his family are violated -- they are wronged morally and financially, even their bodily health is made to suffer -- all in the service of the ideal. At all events personal sympathy with others must be impaired, unless they too chance to be in the service of the same formula. Hence it not infrequently happens that his immediate family circle, his own children for instance, only know such a father as a cruel tyrant, whilst the outer world resounds with the fame of his humanity. Not so much in spite of as because of the highly impersonal character of the conscious attitude, the unconscious feelings are highly personal and oversensitive, giving rise to certain secret prejudices, as, for instance, a decided readiness to misconstrue any objective opposition to his formula as personal ill-will, or a constant tendency to make negative suppositions regarding the qualities of others in order to invalidate their arguments beforehand-in defence, naturally, of his own susceptibility. As a result of this unconscious sensitiveness, his expression and tone frequently becomes sharp, pointed, aggressive, and insinuations multiply. The feelings have an untimely and halting character, which is always a mark of the inferior function. Hence arises a pronounced tendency to resentment. However generous the individual sacrifice [p. 440] to the intellectual goal may be, the feelings are correspondingly petty, suspicious, crossgrained, and conservative. Everything new that is not already contained formula is viewed through a veil of unconscious and is judged accordingly. It happened only in middle of last century that a certain physician, famed his humanitarianism, threatened to dismiss an assistant for daring to use a thermometer, because the formula decreed that fever shall be recognized by the pulse. There are, of course, a host of similar examples.

    Thinking which in other respects may be altogether blameless becomes all the more subtly and prejudicially, affected, the more feelings are repressed. An intellectual standpoint, which, perhaps on account of its actual intrinsic value, might justifiably claim general recognition, undergoes a characteristic alteration through the influence of this unconscious personal sensitiveness; it becomes rigidly dogmatic. The personal self-assertion is transferred to the intellectual standpoint. Truth is no longer left to work her natural effect, but through an identification with the subject she is treated like a sensitive darling whom an evil-minded critic has wronged. The critic is demolished, if possible with personal invective, and no argument is too gross to be used against him. Truth must be trotted out, until finally it begins to dawn upon the public that it is not so much really a question of truth as of her personal procreator.

    The dogmatism of the intellectual standpoint, however, occasionally undergoes still further peculiar modifications from the unconscious admixture of unconscious personal feelings; these changes are less a question of feeling, in the stricter sense, than of contamination from other unconscious factors which become blended with the repressed feeling in the unconscious. Although reason itself offers proof, that every intellectual formula can be no more than [p. 441] a partial truth, and can never lay claim, therefore, to autocratic authority; in practice, the formula obtains so great an ascendancy that, beside it, every other standpoint and possibility recedes into the background. It replaces all the more general, less defined, hence the more modest and truthful, views of life. It even takes the place of that general view of life which we call religion. Thus the formula becomes a religion, although in essentials it has not the smallest connection with anything religious. Therewith it also gains the essentially religious character of absoluteness. It becomes, as it were, an intellectual superstition. But now all those psychological tendencies that suffer under its repression become grouped together in the unconscious, and form a counter-position, giving rise to paroxysms of doubt. As a defence against doubt, the conscious attitude grows fanatical. For fanaticism, after all, is merely overcompensated doubt. Ultimately this development leads to an exaggerated defence of the conscious position, and to the gradual formation of an absolutely antithetic unconscious position; for example, an extreme irrationality develops, in opposition to the conscious rationalism, or it becomes highly archaic and superstitious, in opposition to a conscious standpoint imbued with modern science. This fatal opposition is the source of those narrow-minded and ridiculous views, familiar to the historians of science, into which many praiseworthy pioneers have ultimately blundered. It not infrequently happens in a man of this type that the side of the unconscious becomes embodied in a woman.

    In my experience, this type, which is doubtless familiar to my readers, is chiefly found among men, since thinking tends to be a much more dominant function in men than in women. As a rule, when thinking achieves the mastery in women, it is, in my experience, a kind of thinking which results from a prevailingly intuitive activity of mind. [p. 442]

    The thought of the extraverted thinking type is, positive, i.e. it produces. It either leads to new facts or to general conceptions of disparate experimental material. Its judgment is generally synthetic. Even when it analyses, it constructs, because it is always advancing beyond the, analysis to a new combination, a further conception which reunites the analysed material in a new way or adds some., thing further to the given material. In general, therefore, we may describe this kind of judgment as predicative. In any case, characteristic that it is never absolutely depreciatory or destructive, but always substitutes a fresh value for one that is demolished. This quality is due to the fact that thought is the main channel into which a thinking-type's energy flows. Life steadily advancing shows itself in the man's thinking, so that his ideas maintain a progressive, creative character. His thinking neither stagnates, nor is it in the least regressive. Such qualities cling only to a thinking that is not given priority in consciousness. In this event it is relatively unimportant, and also lacks the character of a positive vital activity. It follows in the wake of other functions, it becomes Epimethean, it has an 'esprit de l'escalier' quality, contenting itself with constant ponderings and broodings upon things past and gone, in an effort to analyse and digest them. Where the creative element, as in this case, inhabits another function, thinking no longer progresses it stagnates. Its judgment takes on a decided inherency-character, i.e. it entirely confines itself to the range of the given material, nowhere overstepping it. It is contented with a more or less abstract statement, and fails to impart any value to the experimental material that was not already there.

    The inherency-judgment of such extraverted thinking is objectively orientated, i.e. its conclusion always expresses the objective importance of experience. Hence, not only does it remain under the orientating influence of objective [p. 443]

    data, but it actually rests within the charmed circle of the individual experience, about which it affirms nothing that was not already given by it. We may easily observe this thinking in those people who cannot refrain from tacking on to an impression or experience some rational and doubtless very valid remark, which, however, in no way adventures beyond the given orbit of the experience. At bottom, such a remark merely says 'I have understood it -- I can reconstruct it.' But there the matter also ends. At its very highest, such a judgment signifies merely the placing of an experience in an objective setting, whereby the experience is at once recognized as belonging to the frame.

    But whenever a function other than thinking possesses priority in consciousness to any marked degree, in so far as thinking is conscious at all and not directly dependent upon the dominant function, it assumes a negative character. In so far as it is subordinated to the dominant function, it may actually wear a positive aspect, but a narrower scrutiny will easily prove that it simply mimics the dominant function, supporting it with arguments that unmistakably contradict the laws of logic proper to thinking. Such a thinking, therefore, ceases to have any interest for our present discussion. Our concern is rather with the constitution of that thinking which cannot be subordinated to the dominance of another function, but remains true to its own principle. To observe and investigate this thinking in itself is not easy, since, in the concrete case, it is more or less constantly repressed by the conscious attitude. Hence, in the majority of cases, it first must be retrieved from the background of consciousness, unless in some unguarded moment it should chance to come accidentally to the surface. As a rule, it must be enticed with some such questions as 'Now what do you really think?' or, again, 'What is your private view [p. 444] about the matter?' Or perhaps one may even use a little cunning, framing the question something this: 'What do you imagine, then, that I really think about the matter?' This latter form should be chosen when the real thinking is unconscious and, therefore projected. The thinking that is enticed to the surface this way has characteristic qualities; it was these I had in mind just now when I described it as negative. It habitual mode is best characterized by the two words 'nothing but'. Goethe personified this thinking in the figure of Mephistopheles. It shows a most distinctive tendency to trace back the object of its judgment to some banality or other, thus stripping it of its own independent significance. This happens simply because it is represented as being dependent upon some other commonplace thing. Wherever a conflict, apparently essential in nature, arises between two men, negative thinking mutters 'Cherchez la femme'. When a man champions or advocates a cause, negative thinking makes no inquiry as to the importance of the thing, but merely asks 'How much does he make by it?' The dictum ascribed to Moleschott: "Der Mensch ist, was er isst" (" Man is what he eats ") also belongs to this collection, as do many more aphorisms and opinions which I need not enumerate.

    The destructive quality of this thinking as well as its occasional and limited usefulness, hardly need further elucidation. But there still exists another form of negative thinking, which at first glance perhaps would scarcely be recognized as such I refer to the theosophical thinking which is to-day rapidly spreading in every quarter of the globe, presumably as a reaction phenomenon to the materialism of the epoch now receding. Theosophical thinking has an air that is not in the least reductive, since it exalts everything to transcendental and world-embracing ideas. A dream, for instance, is no [p. 445] longer a modest dream, but an experience upon 'another plane'. The hitherto inexplicable fact of telepathy is ,very simply explained by 'vibrations' which pass from one man to another. An ordinary nervous trouble is quite simply accounted for by the fact that something has collided with the astral body. Certain anthropological peculiarities of the dwellers on the Atlantic seaboard are easily explained by the submerging of Atlantis, and so on. We have merely to open a theosophical book to be overwhelmed by the realization that everything is already explained, and that 'spiritual science' has left no enigmas of life unsolved. But, fundamentally, this sort of thinking is just as negative as materialistic thinking. When the latter conceives psychology as chemical changes taking place in the cell-ganglia, or as the extrusion and withdrawal of cell-processes, or as an internal secretion, in essence this is just as superstitious as theosophy. The only difference lies in the fact that materialism reduces all phenomena to our current physiological notions, while theosophy brings everything into the concepts of Indian metaphysics. When we trace the dream to an overloaded stomach, the dream is not thereby explained, and when we explain telepathy as 'vibrations', we have said just as little. Since, what are 'vibrations'? Not only are both methods of explanation quite impotent -- they are actually destructive, because by interposing their seeming explanations they withdraw interest from the problem, diverting it in the former case to the stomach, and in the latter to imaginary vibrations, thus preventing any serious investigation of the problem. Either kind of thinking is both sterile and sterilizing. Their negative quality consists in this it is a method of thought that is indescribably cheap there is a real poverty of productive and creative energy. It is a thinking taken in tow by other functions. [p. 446]
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 12-22-2020 at 01:18 AM.

  7. #7
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Most people's thoughts on Te:

    --A neanderthal
    --Spitting out facts and data
    --"Getting stuff done"
    --Running a business
    --Having no profound thoughts

  8. #8
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    3,061
    Mentioned
    228 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So there you have it:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jung
    In so far as one is disposed to regard a highly developed sense for sheer actuality as very reasonable, will such men be esteemed rational. In reality, however, this is by no means the case, since they are equally subject to the sensation of irrational, chance happenings, as they are to rational behaviour.
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)

  9. #9
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    10,958
    Mentioned
    1121 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Se is the sensing of external objects. Your nerves and retina and eardrum and smell receptors sense the external world. They don't make judgements about it.

    Si is the sensing of conditions internal to the body. It applies to one's health, comfort, food, energy reserves, harmonious or cacophonous sounds, physical pain or pleasure.

    Te is the assignment of names to external objects for the purpose of differentiating one "thing" from another. It is flexible in its assignments. For example, a screwdriver can also be a chisel, a balance weight, a battery shorting bar, one part of a set, or the product that you are selling.

    Ti is the categorization of objects into internally generated classification schemes, and is rigid in its definitions. An example of Ti thinking is the Periodic Table. Silver is silver, not gold. And why are you talking about money?
    Also, magic is uncategorizable, and hence to Ti is bullshit.

  10. #10
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    Se is the sensing of external objects. Your nerves and retina and eardrum and smell receptors sense the external world. They don't make judgements about it.

    Si is the sensing of conditions internal to the body. It applies to one's health, comfort, food, energy reserves, harmonious or cacophonous sounds, physical pain or pleasure.

    Te is the assignment of names to external objects for the purpose of differentiating one "thing" from another. It is flexible in its assignments. For example, a screwdriver can also be a chisel, a balance weight, a battery shorting bar, one part of a set, or the product that you are selling.

    Ti is the categorization of objects into internally generated classification schemes, and is rigid in its definitions. An example of Ti thinking is the Periodic Table. Silver is silver, not gold. And why are you talking about money?
    Also, magic is uncategorizable, and hence to Ti is bullshit.
    Hey @Adam Strange

    1. I hear Ben Shapiro is Te-ego. Do you speak/sound like Ben Shapiro IRL? (Or notice any similarities/differences)
    2. What differences do you notice between you and Se-egos

  11. #11
    thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,283
    Mentioned
    301 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asd View Post
    1D Fi
    1D Fi just means being insensitive to people's feelings. LIEs also do this simply by being overly critical of how people are performing tasks. Trolling means in addition that you try to provoke an emotional reaction intentionally by antagonizing people - that's FeSe.

    Te lead types (at least LIEs) do troll sometimes but this is mainly due to Fe role.

  12. #12
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    1D Fi just means being insensitive to people's feelings. LIEs also do this simply by being overly critical of how people are performing tasks. Trolling means in addition that you try to provoke an emotional reaction intentionally by antagonizing people - that's FeSe.

    Te lead types (at least LIEs) do troll sometimes but this is mainly due to Fe role.
    So Se-ego's are more prone to intentionally antagonizing people, while Te-egos do it accidentally?

    I do feel sometimes that Te-egos try to appear more "normal", probably due to their Fi?

  13. #13
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Te

    SPEECH PECULIARITIES

    listing and repeating
    complex sentences using words such as: "then..., then..., then...," "and then..., after which...," or "which"; strings of causes and effects
    "mechanical" similies and metaphors
    describing the interaction and reactions of people using technical terms and analogies
    indicative pronouns ("this," "that") always followed by the name of the object
    illustrating one's reasoning with examples

    DOMINANT FIELDS OF ACTIVITY AND TOPICS OF CONVERSATION

    optimizing actions and processes
    correct actions in various situations
    clarifying information
    perfecting old and inventing new methods and forms of activity
    new constructive applications of objects in a concrete situation

    Se

    SPEECH PECULIARITIES

    metaphors based on physical impact
    frequent switching to the present tense
    frequent switching from imperfect to perfect form of verbs [specific to Russian]
    preference for transitive verbs
    relating spatial relationships to specific objects
    frequent use of indicative pronouns
    frequent use of the imperative form

    DOMINANT FIELDS OF ACTIVITY AND TOPICS OF CONVERSATION

    discussing objects that actually exist and everything that can be done with them (paint, move around, throw out, etc. depending on the context)
    designing things based on what is at hand (creating new forms out of existing materials, and not based on abstract concepts)
    analyzing situations of conflict
    needs: who doesn't have enough of what, who has or has acquired what (with a demonstration)


    ^^^^^^^^Any of these ring true for anyone???^^^^^^^
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 12-22-2020 at 01:21 AM.

  14. #14
    thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,283
    Mentioned
    301 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    So Se-ego's are more prone to intentionally antagonizing people, while Te-egos do it accidentally?
    I'm not sure I would put it that way. Accidentally antagonizing people = weak ethics basically, possibly with some element of Se. LSIs do that quite a bit too. Si-valuing logical types may also be insensitive but without the harshness of Se.

    Intentionally antagonizing people would be Se+Fe so more like an Se lead type (which has either mobilizing or demonstrative Fe), or EIE.

    I do feel sometimes that Te-egos try to appear more "normal", probably due to their Fi?
    I would say that LSEs do this, in the sense of trying to blend in and not raise too much of a commotion (Si). LIEs probably don't care about that at all.

  15. #15
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    3,061
    Mentioned
    228 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Most people's thoughts on Te:

    --A neanderthal
    Do people think that? Te is advanced. Rational and logical. If any function is Neanderthal it is Se and Si. (irrational, sensing = the most primitive)

    I don't really see the connection Te-Se. They are too different in my eyes.
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)

  16. #16
    Akira's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    TIM
    ISTp sxsp
    Posts
    3,340
    Mentioned
    405 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    Se is the sensing of external objects. Your nerves and retina and eardrum and smell receptors sense the external world. They don't make judgements about it.

    Si is the sensing of conditions internal to the body. It applies to one's health, comfort, food, energy reserves, harmonious or cacophonous sounds, physical pain or pleasure.

    Te is the assignment of names to external objects for the purpose of differentiating one "thing" from another. It is flexible in its assignments. For example, a screwdriver can also be a chisel, a balance weight, a battery shorting bar, one part of a set, or the product that you are selling.

    Ti is the categorization of objects into internally generated classification schemes, and is rigid in its definitions. An example of Ti thinking is the Periodic Table. Silver is silver, not gold. And why are you talking about money?
    Also, magic is uncategorizable, and hence to Ti is bullshit.
    Ironically a lot of SLEs believe in magic and else due Ni influence.

  17. #17
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    ILI INTp
    Posts
    758
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Repetition of phrases is an anomaly here, as I try not to repeat words. However, what will happen is I'll see a word, it'll be held in mind, and I'll scatter it throughout. Like anomoly. That's a good one. I'll finish this latter, I gotta go.

  18. #18
    Foxhunt inaLim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    268
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    So Se-ego's are more prone to intentionally antagonizing people, while Te-egos do it accidentally?

    I do feel sometimes that Te-egos try to appear more "normal", probably due to their Fi?
    Accidentally liked this.

  19. #19
    Foxhunt inaLim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    268
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Te
    SPEECH PECULIARITIES
    • listing and repeating
    • complex sentences using words such as: "then..., then..., then...," "and then..., after which...," or "which"; strings of causes and effects
    • "mechanical" similies and metaphors
    • describing the interaction and reactions of people using technical terms and analogies
    • indicative pronouns ("this," "that") always followed by the name of the object
    • illustrating one's reasoning with examples
    DOMINANT FIELDS OF ACTIVITY AND TOPICS OF CONVERSATION
    • optimizing actions and processes
    • correct actions in various situations
    • clarifying information
    • perfecting old and inventing new methods and forms of activity
    • new constructive applications of objects in a concrete situation

    Se
    SPEECH PECULIARITIES
    • minimizing vocabulary (significant words) and maximizing grammar — prepositions and introductory statements
    • frequent use of complex prepositions
    • grammatical form
    • correct phrase construction regardless of whether or not the phrase has meaning
    • use of "geometrical" language in figurative meanings
    DOMINANT FIELDS OF ACTIVITY AND TOPICS OF CONVERSATION
    • certain fields of scientific knowledge: geometry, formal logic, scientific classifications and systematizations
    • cartography; architecture
    • organizing formal structures; defining work duties
    • analytical activities of any kind
    • interaction with formal structures


    ^^^^^^^^Any of these ring true for anyone???^^^^^^^
    That Se sounds like LSI TiSe

  20. #20
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    10,958
    Mentioned
    1121 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Hey @Adam Strange

    1. I hear Ben Shapiro is Te-ego. Do you speak/sound like Ben Shapiro IRL? (Or notice any similarities/differences)
    2. What differences do you notice between you and Se-egos
    @peteronfireee, Peter Shapiro sounds like a duck when he talks. So do I, sometimes. He also speaks fast, but I try to speak clearly.

    Se egos (SLE's come to mind) notice everything and I notice next to nothing in the environment. Also, SLE's can kick my ass, I'm sure.

  21. #21
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by inaLim View Post
    That Se sounds like LSI TiSe
    Yea u were right, I corrected it

    Quote Originally Posted by inaLim View Post
    Accidentally liked this.
    :*
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 12-22-2020 at 01:40 AM.

  22. #22
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    I agree. @peteronfireee Jung mentions that Se can seem "rational" although it is irrational. Read the section about Se in chapter X of Psychologicsl Types
    Hmm so how do we unveil the curtain to reveal that the wizard of oz is just a hoax irrational type

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    Do people think that? Te is advanced. Rational and logical. If any function is Neanderthal it is Se and Si. (irrational, sensing = the most primitive)

    I don't really see the connection Te-Se. They are too different in my eyes.
    @Tallmo + Anyone else. What do you think about these typings:

    Comedian Amy Shumer - Te



    Observation: Very brass/frank but with humor (passionate + cold), good articulator, cracks very crude personal jokes(mom- 2:45) (sister 3:54) Lots of ironic humor/sarcasm (that people may or may not get). This quote illustrates how she gets in trouble: "I always say the wrong thing with celebrities" (6:13).

    Overall impression: Good communicator of information which is passionate + cold in nature

    I think she's Te overall.

    Actor Tom Hanks - Te



    Observations: Streamlining information style of communication, quick and witty, snippy articulation, little bit of a sarcastic/serious vibe but with good humor, very sequential cause/effect story-telling style

    Overall impression: Good communicator of information which is passionate + cold in nature

    I think he's Te overall

    Singer Madonna - Se



    Observations: Madonna describing her super-bowl experience- the focus is on the experience; how nerve-wrecking it was (3:00) , cracks very general jokes (3:40 nipples), warmth in the voice, makes inappropriate joke with a smooth delivery (5:00), talks what she does to make people comfortable during auditions (8:45)

    Overall impression: Very soft aura, but energetic + warm vibe

    I think she's Se overall.

    Actor Leonardo DiCaprio - Se



    Observations: Slow, soft, takes time describing things. Vividly describes his experience making the film (0:53) , "you can't help but feel like you're really there" Describing uncomfortable situation with Rose (2:20) feeling uncomfortable for her, talking about lightening up the mood on set (2:47)

    Overall impression: Very soft aura, energetic + smooth talker vibe

    I think he's Se overall
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 12-22-2020 at 01:25 AM.

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,330
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    Comedian Amy Shumer - Te or Se-centric?
    ISFp -Fe strong extroverted feeling subtype, probably raised by Se or Te as some parent.

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,330
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Maybe in a actual personality the two IEs are hard to differentiate, but as information itself, the only thing they share in common is a kind of objectification of reality.

    Ananke had some best ideas about calling Se are more conventionally intuitive thing. Ask a Se type how and why they think of things and it would be a intuitive type of understanding called "just knowing" using leaps of connections.

    Se is more akin to Ne than it is to Te. Its only really Te when something needs to be accomplished, and better yet, accomplished the best, most efficient way maximizing returns or task completion.
    Last edited by timber; 12-21-2020 at 08:43 PM. Reason: vocabulary

  25. #25
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timber View Post
    Maybe in a actual personality the two IEs are hard to differentiate, but as information itself, the only thing they share in common is a kind of objectification of reality.
    Yea I think the theory makes sense and I have a general understanding. I'm more trying to isolate/quantify it in a practical way to be useable IRL. Like what's the diamond core that can be extrapolated

    Its only really Te when something needs to be accomplished, and better yet, accomplished the best, most efficient way maximizing returns or task completion.
    Hmm they sound like the Terminator lol
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 12-21-2020 at 07:39 PM.

  26. #26
    Rusal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    TIM
    EIE-H
    Posts
    483
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    Do people think that? Te is advanced. Rational and logical. If any function is Neanderthal it is Se and Si. (irrational, sensing = the most primitive)
    A very personal conclusion, since sometimes Ni seems to never have left the ancient hive, and can be seen as far from advanced. Healthy people of the quadras don't have much use for non-valued IEs.


    @peteronfireee, picture this: you are in a car with an SLE, conversation will probably center around what you see (SLs tend to be aware of the environment and are quick to realize things), he might comment on the car and what piece he needs to change. If he’s your co worker he might tell you the changes he is planning on how to proceed at the job, With an LSE co worker in the car, most of the conversation is going to revolve around a new plan he’s been working on to present to the boss, and you’ll recognize the plans because the LSE hoarded the floor in the last work meeting to drone on about his proposed solutions. At the end of the day, LSE is delta, serious and ‘managerial’. This impression of the SLE and LSE is going to be mantained throught the day. The car example is only an oversimplification but it applies. Keywords for SLEs: objects, action that needs to be taken, movement, case-based solution. Keywords for LSEs: deadlines, dates, efficiency, streamlining.
    Last edited by Rusal; 12-21-2020 at 11:25 PM.
    Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.

  27. #27
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rusal View Post
    A very personal conclusion, since sometimes Ni seems to never have left the ancient hive, and can be seen as far from advanced. Healthy people of the quadras don't have much use for non-valued IEs.


    @peteronfireee, picture this: you are in a car with an SLE, conversation will probably center around what you see (SLs tend to be aware of the environment and are quick to realize things), he might comment on the car and what piece he needs to change. If he’s your co worker he might tell you the changes he is planning on how to proceed at the job, With an LSE co worker in the car, most of the conversation is going to revolve around a new plan he’s been working on to present to the boss, and you’ll recognize the plans because the LSE hoarded the floor in the last work meeting to drone on about his proposed solutions. At the end of the day, LSE is delta, serious and ‘managerial’. This impressions of the SLE and LSE is going to be mantained throught the day. The car example is only an oversimplification but it applies. Keywords for SLEs: objects, action that needs to be taken, movement, case-based solution. Keywords for LSEs: deadlines, dates, efficiency, streamlining.
    Nice illustration and breakdown
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 12-21-2020 at 11:24 PM.

  28. #28
    mfckrz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    TIM
    LIE-Ni 8w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    378
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    --Trump is typed ENTJ in MBTI and SEE/SLE in socionics.
    Trump usually gets typed ESTP in MBTI—e.g. https://www.personalitypathways.com/...mbti-type.html

    What possible cues, speech-patterns, mannerisms, behaviors, signs, etc do you look for? I had some ideas but please share yours.
    Te/Se can both be fairly empirical in their reasoning style. But Te will appear more mechanically explanatory, describing causal processes or patterns. While Se will tend to speak more in terms of categorical maxims or descriptive assertions that impute some quality/attribute.

  29. #29
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    3,061
    Mentioned
    228 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post

    @Tallmo + Anyone else. What do you think about these typings:
    I can't watch all those videos now, but Amy seems like a strong Dominant subtype, and I can't say much more. Madonna could be a SLE Harmonizing.
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)

  30. #30
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    3,061
    Mentioned
    228 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rusal View Post
    A very personal conclusion, since sometimes Ni seems to never have left the ancient hive, and can be seen as far from advanced. Healthy people of the quadras don't have much use for non-valued IEs.
    Ni is also relatively primitive because it is an irrational function, but if we compare N and S then S has to be more primitive. It would be strange to say that intuition is more primitive than sensing.
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)

  31. #31
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    10,958
    Mentioned
    1121 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    Ni is also relatively primitive because it is an irrational function, but if we compare N and S then S has to be more primitive. It would be strange to say that intuition is more primitive than sensing.
    Yes, a little bag of chemicals floating in the primordial sea might be able to sense (Se) a chemical gradient in the water, but might not have the machinery to form the "intent" (Ni) to move towards it for food.

  32. #32
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,350
    Mentioned
    990 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    read Jung
    I completely agree, but lots of people experience great difficulty reading Jung. I remember some of the Germans saying there was much lost in translation and it was even difficult for them to read in the original German. It has to be understood intuitively which is also difficult for many people. Especially those who claim to have no intuition.

    Socionics and MBTI have both done a hack job on Jung's work if we are being honest. So have many Jungian analysts because they remain stuck in their interpretations while never incorporating his greatest contribution into their own work, The Red Book.

    I finished reading "The Red Book" and I just received "The Black Books" as a gift. It took Jung years of study and a psychological breakdown to understand things on a purely intuitive level. These books reassure me that I am not now and have never been crazy. I do not care to explain myself on that statement. Not sure I could if I wanted to. The only logical next step anyone here can take is to purposely lose their minds in order to gain...everything. I see some have already started. <3

    Most of what is floated around here today includes stuff like NLP mixed with other cognitive theories. Not saying it is a bad thing. I find a lot of it very interesting. Very few people here have read Jung and understood it so telling them to just read is probably not going to help them understand the psychological types or the functions anyway. I figured that out from my years here when I kept telling people to read Jung.

    The only people truly expanding on Jung's work are hidden away in the dark corners of the internet. It is worth looking for them imo. The Jungian scholars know this but the analysts have a vested interest in only going so far.

    All this is to say, yes read Jung but not to understand socionics.

    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung
     
    YWIMW

  33. #33
    I don't play, I slay. Lolita's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Near Whole Foods
    TIM
    SEE-N™ WPEL™ 863
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don’t understand how people can mistaken a perception function with judgment function. Se is perception of factual reality, it’s static. Te is application of facts, dynamic. While Se needs the assistance of Te to make reality salient, Te can operate by itself divorced from Se.

    SLE and LIE are more similar because they have Se- and Te+. SEE and LSE are more similar because they have Se+ and Te-.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  34. #34
    I don't play, I slay. Lolita's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Near Whole Foods
    TIM
    SEE-N™ WPEL™ 863
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Differentiating Te vs Se

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    So Se-ego's are more prone to intentionally antagonizing people, while Te-egos do it accidentally?

    I do feel sometimes that Te-egos try to appear more "normal", probably due to their Fi?
    Intentionally antagonizing people is actually strong Fe ethics combined with Se so EIE, SEE, ESE in that order. Te leads bulldoze through because they don’t value Fe and 1D Fi so they’re not really “normal,” more like clueless since they’re not suave.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  35. #35
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiana View Post
    I don’t understand how people can mistaken a perception function with judgment function. Se is perception of factual reality, it’s static. Te is application of facts, dynamic. While Se needs the assistance of Te to make reality salient, Te can operate by itself divorced from Se.

    SLE and LIE are more similar because they have Se- and Te+. SEE and LSE are more similar because they have Se+ and Te-.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    For example, if you turned into an LSE, how much different would your posts look?

    Since we're all on a typology forum talking/writing in theory, it can be confusing IRL

  36. #36
    Rusal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    TIM
    EIE-H
    Posts
    483
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    Ni is also relatively primitive because it is an irrational function, but if we compare N and S then S has to be more primitive. It would be strange to say that intuition is more primitive than sensing.
    I could see why Ni+Te could be termed ‘advanced’. But, going by the workings of Ni en Beta, ants should have Ni. Si thrives when stability is reached, and nature is not kind. IEs are not that linear with humans and they paint 'epochs' in terms of what is advanced.
    Last edited by Rusal; 12-22-2020 at 06:23 PM.
    Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.

  37. #37
    I don't play, I slay. Lolita's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Near Whole Foods
    TIM
    SEE-N™ WPEL™ 863
    Posts
    1,148
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Differentiating Te vs Se

    Quote Originally Posted by peteronfireee View Post
    For example, if you turned into an LSE, how much different would your posts look?

    Since we're all on a typology forum talking/writing in theory, it can be confusing IRL
    People don’t “turn” into another type but they could appear like another type depending on their DCNH. My mom is SEE-D and she’s worked in a lot big corporations in the finance department. Her master’s is in economics. The elevated Te+Fe makes her “appear” LSE on the surface. But closer examination, her Fi is too good and those under her charge love her because she was friendly and they felt close to her. She liked celebrating and acknowledging people’s achievements and evoked confidence in her team. Contrast with a real LSE like J Edgar Hoover who yelled at everyone and was hard on people who were loyal to him, even more ruthless towards those he hated because he feared that they’d get out of line so he kept dirt on everyone as a safety measure. That’s evidence of weak ethics- not confident at Fi interpersonal relations (yelling at loyal employees) and distrust of drama and theatrics Fe social maneuvers (he had to keep real dirt on people to control them from acting out).


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  38. #38

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    13,053
    Mentioned
    1199 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    Very few people here have read Jung and understood it so telling them to just read is probably not going to help them understand the psychological types or the functions anyway.
    His typology book is useful to know what are core terms used in Socionics. The difference between 4 functions is said clearly there, to distinguish T and S, what are E/I functions' variants.

    Why English Socionics texts may give such doubts is hard to understand, really. At least, Jung's book is translated not by google.
    It's good to study typology by "study books" made for beginners as by Filatova. Useful to read several of such books from different authors to notice where they match. This approach has low chance to create hard theoretical mess.

    > All this is to say, yes read Jung but not to understand socionics.

    Socionics is Jung's typology with expansions. To understand this helps correct enough typing.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  39. #39
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiana View Post
    Intentionally antagonizing people is actually strong Fe ethics combined with Se so EIE, SEE, ESE in that order.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Why is Fe more associated with bullying than Se? I thought Se was associated with impulsion and Fe associated with putting yourself in people's shoes. Do you see a lot more EIE bullies in comparison to SLE bullies IRL?
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 12-23-2020 at 01:06 PM.

  40. #40
    Haikus Computer Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,434
    Mentioned
    96 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiana View Post
    People don’t “turn” into another type but they could appear like another type depending on their DCNH. My mom is SEE-D and she’s worked in a lot big corporations in the finance department. Her master’s is in economics. The elevated Te+Fe makes her “appear” LSE on the surface. But closer examination, her Fi is too good and those under her charge love her because she was friendly and they felt close to her. She liked celebrating and acknowledging people’s achievements and evoked confidence in her team. Contrast with a real LSE like J Edgar Hoover who yelled at everyone and was hard on people who were loyal to him, even more ruthless towards those he hated because he feared that they’d get out of line so he kept dirt on everyone as a safety measure. That’s evidence of weak ethics- not confident at Fi interpersonal relations (yelling at loyal employees) and distrust of drama and theatrics Fe social maneuvers (he had to keep real dirt on people to control them from acting out).


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Lol

    So, according to this:

    I don’t understand how people can mistaken a perception function with judgment function. Se is perception of factual reality, it’s static. Te is application of facts, dynamic. While Se needs the assistance of Te to make reality salient, Te can operate by itself divorced from Se.
    If a person were to look through your post history to determine your type, what things would determine Se > Te?

    We can get cute with the fancy definitions but if we can't come to agreement (in real life situations) which is which and what is more dominant over the other - it's all useless
    Last edited by Computer Loser; 12-23-2020 at 01:03 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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