Originally Posted by
Nobody
Maybe this helps,
I originally self-typed as ILI because I value my close friendships and have a kind of valuation towards harmony or helping people and positive relationships. And I felt that I'm much more intuitively attuned over being a rigid rational type.
What changed my mind -> although Socionics typically defines Fi in many ways, including relationships and such (which I do value), when I'm around Fi egos I realized we don't really get along. For example, they will value things, such as religion or not saying things that might be seen as racist or insensitive to someone's suffering, things like that. But I like to poke fun at those things and make stupid/silly jokes about everything. I kind of see myself as an eternal kid in a way where I don't take those things seriously and just want to have "emotional fun", but that doesn't mean I don't take my positive friendships and relationships seriously. I mean I will even make fun of my own suffering because, I don't know, it's just funny to me for some reason. But it does mean I irk Fi egos. So that's something Socionics misses imo. But as an LII, minus Fi, I otherwise get along with almost anyone. Though I am enneagram 9, so that might factor into it as well.
As for rationality vs irrationality, I was reading a book about Jung that mentioned towards the end of Jung's life he started to see types in terms of basic groupings, such as NT, ST, NF, SF. To him that came first. So LII have strong Te and Ni and ILI have strong Ti and Ne (though observing function should theoretically be subdued in favor of leading function). So they can be very similar. So for me the big takeaway is super id differences. ILI seem to like Se things, like taking risks on intuitive understandings or taking direct action based on their intuitive perception of things, which can bug Si-valuers. LII seem to like Fe things, like being silly and making jokes about serious things and doing things more for the emotional entertainment, things that can often irk Fi valuers. Of course both can like either too, but I think it's more what you default to. And I think it's a bit different between types.
For example,
LII can take risks based on intuition, but in my experience it's more a Ti thing, where I analyze risk and kind of know what I'm getting into before getting into it. Like investing, I will group into high-risk/high-reward (and subsequently low-risk/low-reward) or low-risk/undervalued (moderate reward). Moderate reward is almost guaranteed to make a decent amount of money, whereas low-risk/low-reward probably won't be a lot of money (but is still safe), while high-risk can make a lot of money, but you are more likely to lose money; and I also don't really believe in short-term investing. I like to balance them all so I have a chance to make a lot of money, while never putting myself in a position to lose money. So for me, it's all calculated. An ILI as an irrational, has more of a tendency to bet on pure perception of the situation, analysis comes as an after-thought or something to boost the legitimacy of their position and they might invest in short-term or long-term depending on their perception of things. For example, crypto used to be something that had the potential to replace the banks and credit companies; it never happened, but an ILI might have bet on that potential. I think they like high-risk/high-reward investing and are more likely to get rich, but also more likely to lose money as well and more likely to bet based on perception of circumstances, rather than logic and reasoning.
ILI can also like positive emotional atmosphere, but they don't really need it. They can be fun to work with, but then you can irk them and they might blow up, but it's short-lived and they will just be normal afterward. As an Si valuer, it takes me awhile to get back to normal. I sometimes think this is Te/Fi in general, where they are focused more on the goal and see relationships as something important to help reach goals, so interpersonal conflict is almost accepted as normal and okay as long as it doesn't deter from the goal; it's like they share some kind of relationship vision and so conflict is okay in light of that. As an LII, this is actually pretty unacceptable. I will drop team participation if things get too negative and shitty overall and have no problem doing that; I don't care how much we all have to "lose" if I'm going to be treated like shit in a team, so I think I do value Si and Fe in that regard.
And I could be wrong, but this is what I've learned throughout the years about people and myself, regardless of whether or not this is really socionics or just something else in terms of psychology. And so I no longer type ILI anymore.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote