That's an "Aristocratic" trait while ESI are democratic, as is the entire Gamma quadrant. You sure you aren't mistaking ESI for some other type?Originally Posted by Audacious
That's an "Aristocratic" trait while ESI are democratic, as is the entire Gamma quadrant. You sure you aren't mistaking ESI for some other type?
No, although ESI is democratic, ESI is also wired in this weird way.
https://www.wikisocion.net/en/index....ile_by_Gulenko
At first acquaintance sharply divides people into two categories - "his own" and "others". Others mostly cease to exist for him, but to his own he becomes deeply attached. He is often sharp and uncompromising with strangers, but forgives a lot for those who are in his inner circle. Demonstrates his attitude towards someone by managing psychological distance, first distancing a person, then bringing them closer.
“There is currently no text in this page. You can search for this page title in other pages, or search the related logs, but you do not have permission to create this page.”
Change DarkAngelFireWolf69 to Gul(remove)enko in the link. Easter eggs are fun, but this one is too frequent and makes the forum unprofessional, consider removing it @mu4
As usual, I will only speak for myself. I don't want it to come off as though I'm acting like I'm 'the archetypal ESI by which all descriptions of ESIs are compared to' when I speak on whether something is accurate for me personally. I speak with “me/I, as one ESI,” rather than “ESIs in general” only because I feel uncomfortable saying “Yes, I'm this way, so ESIs are this way” and can't speak for others. I'm merely offering my one firsthand perspective and single vote to be considered along with the feedback of others. With that clarified to avoid misunderstandings…
I see my close connections as “my people.” It ties in with the sense of close connection that I have with them, not aristocracy. It's not based upon categorization, it's based upon intimacy levels. It's those I feel closely connected to, and thus protective of, loyal to, and so on.
@Milo I do think that's a good point though, and something to keep in mind if typing.
Last edited by Fluffy Princess Unicorn; 10-29-2021 at 05:51 PM.
I believe that the interpretation of ESIs as dividing people into "his own" and "others" is an error on the part of Gulenko due to his Fi blindness and the fact that he's sitting on the side of the table with opposite values and isn't naturally attuned to Gamma values.
Instead, I believe what Strat said, which was that ESIs divide the world into groups which are either "for" them or are "against" them, in the sense that ESIs are mainly concerned with whether or not a person is going to cause them moral problems in the future. Because ethical Fi is their main program for interpreting the world and Ne and Ni are areas of weakness, and their Se "push" serves the Fi.
So ESIs can be adamant about their ethical stands (you see that in the posts above) and really do ignore other people's viewpoints. I can't tell you how many times an ESI has told me "You don't know me. You don't know what I'm thinking." Lol. Right. You're the only person in the world who thinks your thoughts, and I'm simply not capable of understanding them. Of course. (This is sarcasm, if you can't tell.)
ESIs aren't wired any differently than any other Gamma. You just have to strip the definitions down to the exact truth to see this.
Too black and white. If you know psychology/the DSM, etc…this is actually how “splitting” in narcissism works. It's not a normal, healthy way of seeing the world.
I evaluate whether a person is a threat to me/others based on what their character is like, but that's about it.
What's the context for this?I can't tell you how many times an ESI has told me "You don't know me. You don't know what I'm thinking." Lol. Right. You're the only person in the world who thinks your thoughts, and I'm simply not capable of understanding them. Of course. (This is sarcasm, if you can't tell.)
Btw, I did originally ask for more clarity to try to understand their viewpoint. When I was ignored by them (skipped over while they only responded to others on this thread) rather than them explaining, I was uncertain and then edited the info out of my post and moved on. So I don't exactly appreciate this.
It takes a lot of focus for me to reply to some of these posts, and I don't always have the time or the energy to make a decent reply. And sometimes I forget altogether.
I'll try to answer your question tomorrow.
The question was to Audacious. I wanted to know why they saw it as being defensive in response to Ne PoLR.
I will respond to you later. I need some time to think about this.
Reply With Quote
