The title speaks for itselft. Please show me the truth!
Why LSEs hate IEIs and love EIIs?
The title speaks for itselft. Please show me the truth!
Both are equally bad at Te, it's just that one appreciates advice that the other type hates to hear.
EIIs also provide LSEs with their suggestive function.
While IEIs annoy them with their PoLr function.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
My LSE friend doesn’t seem to find me irritating at all, unless he doesn’t show it. Sometimes I find him annoying however. Mostly I just find LSE a bit overbearing (leave me alone lol). I enjoy their company, I guess just not for too long.
Well LSE find IEI to be mostly about themselves rather than relationships. Like hermits who stay in their cave and live under their parents or SO’s roof not fully having self esteem or independence. I wouldn’t say they hate IEI. It’s just that they don’t like how IEI mess up things for them like the quality of work and lack of planning as IEI are spontaneous.
They like me because I’m easy to speak with. I make a great sounding board with whom they can bounce ideas off of but I am also practical so I stick with “buy just what’s needed” also I am forgiving and understanding so if they do buy impractical things I just whatever pass it over. I tend to make rather warm and accepting relationships so I tend to not fight with people and strive to please people in general. My softer approach to them lends me to not criticize them as sharply as other types.
As for Te stuff I do like planned actions because my IJ temperament likes stability and predictability. And I do like the process of work like each step done in a sequence
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I make fun of things they care about and they don't understand why. They also tend to feel judged around me.
LSEs and EIIs are both output oriented so can often agree on common priorities and goals whereas IEIs are input oriented so are less likely to share a common direction. LSEs and IEIs can be good friends but good partnerships are less likely. However, I wouldn't use the extreme terms of love and hate as descriptors because both these are possibilities for both partnerships.
a.k.a. I/O
I don't think it's that cut and dry always lol - but I think it has to do with the fact my morality and ethics is more 'shades of grey' and EII is more strict "This is wrong!" in an uptight and serious enneagram One voice with the Fi snarl and everything. /winks at inumbra
To be fair tho, sometimes they are muddled when I want them to be more conviction-y about something and kind of vice-versa. Delta Te valuers especially tend to have a bias at seeing Se evil but not Te evil.
ime, the LSE won't hate the IEI. Not at first at any rate. It goes more like this: the LSE will fall in love with the IEI and admire us very much because they will mistaken us for an EII. They don't really have the Ni to know any better (it is their PoLR) and can be easily duped that way lol. Then once they realize we are IEI and not EII they get confused and stressed and start to lash out like Mel Gibson in a drunken angry rage. An IEI will probably just at this point smile cutely at the LSE Rage when the LSE instead wants the IEI to act more serious and uptight about something like how they subconsciously expect their duals to act. (Beta is Merry quadra & Delta is serious quadra)
I've met a lot more IEIs who were absolutely rigid on the inside - but few were overtly defiant; they just didn't voice their true opinions as openly as EIIs because of their much greater need to fit in and ensure harmonious environments for themselves. EIIs tend to be the more flexible on rules and can usually tolerate more disharmony because of their detached natures. I do agree that EIIs appear far more stern but then they do not have the IEI's chameleon abilities. F-processing has nothing to do with ethics; ethics is learned.Originally Posted by BandD
a.k.a. I/O
I feel like I do this a lot, I'll nod and smile while someone is telling me something and internally be judging them about it lol.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
True, many IEI's tend to have dependency issues - if it is looked from the LSE perspective (and I think "personality pathology" is usually a result of bad circumstances). So I wonder what LSE's sees in IEI's under good circumstances.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
ITR isn't about who you like or dislike, it's about compatibility. I wouldn't say LSEs hate IEIs (usually) but they don't share the same values. And LSEs don't necessarily love EIIs, but after a while they can learn to appreciate each other.
I wouldn't say that, but it depends on what you mean by "equally bad". EIIs Te is much more trainable. IEI's have trainable Se and will be always poor at Te and even if they try to improve they will find it draining and unrewarding.
They can most likely appreciate the direct result of their work. Like, an LSE may be able to respect an IEI like Lovecraft for producing literature though Lovecraft himself never cared about being productive for its own sake in his lifetime. LSE, at least those I have known, tend to dislike anything too imaginative so I also think the finished product of an IEI's work (which tends to be heavy on imaginative themes) is likely to just be overlooked by LSEs.
You fall in love with the person not the type. I fell in love with my SO not his letters
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Makes sense, that's what I've observed as well.
For the record, I can't stand working like this, which is why I think I have an irrational temperament over rational.And I do like the process of work like each step done in a sequence
Exactly
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
