Differences between ILE-ENTp and SLE-ESTp

[Wynch]

Edit: is there in English the expression "to hide behind one's finger"? Yeah, that's a Fi-PoLR one, IMO.

Can you elaborate on what it's supposed to mean? I'm not familiar with an idiom of the same wording, but we may have something else.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Maybe he means giving someone the finger and saying, "screw you", otherwise no eyed dear.

[Wynch]

Ah, that could be it.

[Wynch]

Maybe it's just me, but I'm not doing that. In such circumstances I get angry and either leave (and never visit that place again) or complain - going to ask for explanations from a responsible, etc.

I think maybe you misunderstood the situation? In most places in North America men are allowed to have their shirts off in public, but not women. Even when it is legal for women to have their shirts off (where I live), most don't ever do it, not even on the beach, because it isn't socially acceptable. I was saying that if I decided I wanted to take my shirt off, I would just do it and say hell to the taboo. There's no one to complain to about it, it's the outdoors.

Other times I behave naturally, as this is how I'm used to, nothing special. For example I have a peculiarity: when I'm at a desk at a workplace, I always take my shoes or boots off and place my feet on my sitting chair, you know like Turkish style, or Japanese style (on my knees), and different position which I change regularly. Of course, I'm doing that at home as well - except the shoe part .
I don't ask whether it's allowed or not, I simply do it, it is unlikely to hear "yes, please, take your shoes off here in the office" . If the owners or managers have a problem with that, they just have to tell me, I'm not trying to "challenge the convention" - that's absolutely of no interest to me.

I do that too, except I take my shoes off and prop my feet on my computer.

It means that you pretend to do/appear in some manner, but it's obviously not that. In general this is told to a person who uses a lot of euphemisms or avoids to address the subject directly. Like let's say someone comes to evict you from your house and he begins by telling you that he just came to talk to you.

Certainly I knew this expression but I forgot it, I'll look for it on the web, must be something similar.

That's actually hilarious. The image of someone hiding behind their finger is so perfect.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Yeah, thinking about it, I think it's like you just see from behind your finger that you're "behind" something, but actually your body is visible - and the finger is part of your body as well .

How can you be invisible while you post? 5ish or 15ish, as long as you post, you're visible, thinking that someone is identifying you with that green widget is a delusion.

It is true that when you're invisible, one can't see your current activity on your profile, like what thread are you currently viewing, although that was not what you were thinking about.

Wow, u r such an LSE. (j/k)

IMO the more you try to hide, the more you make people curious. I'm still interested in your pictures,

ENFps can like it.

[xerx]

I don't mind offending someone to get him to see possibilities. With some exceptions.

[Blaze]

That said, the experimental aspect is still quite accurate imo. I think it comes out most in new social circumstances. Myself and my ILE friend share in common a tendency to steamroll social awkwardness. We dislike the feeling of awkward silences or people's social discomfort so we kind of pretend we're overly familiar with everyone and throw caution to the wind. It's kind of a "what do I have to lose?" attitude. That frequently results in trumping awkward with awkward, but we're completely willing to shrug that off at our own expense. Again, it comes back to this idea of making a mockery of taboo. Everythings awkward? Well why don't we point out how awkward it is by being EVEN MORE AWKWARD. We don't mind breaking the ice by being outrageously inappropriate.

totally.

i agree with Nowisthetime, too. someones we overcompensate our Fi polr by becoming overly stupidly rigid about what we think is Fi kind of stuff. trying to follow the rules i suppose. which we can only do for brief moments. lol

[Wynch]

Yeah I know, when no one does that it feels a bit awkward, instead of relaxing, you become some sort of curiosity and target for different remarks.

But I don't think this is about taboo, but about like/dislike. Although I could not blame anyone, I prefer not to see the boobs of every woman there, so most likely I'd feel bad or disgusted about some, so the place would probably loose me as a client, as long as I'm not feeling good.

I assume more likely Fe Rational types use to ask for banning such things?

It is a taboo in North America. It's a different environment here than it is in Europe. In Vienna I could go to the Danube and women would be topless all over the place. There wasn't a real issue with it, it's a beach/park. Here in North America even on a beach if a woman were to take off her bikini top and lie in the sun people would wonder what the hell was going on because that's not socially acceptable at all. The only place where it's really acceptable for women to go topless is inside their house or on a beach for nudists. Actually, I wouldn't be suprised if when I went to the beach near my house and lay topless in the sun that someone would try to kick me off the beach for public indecency, not realizing that in Ontario that's perfectly legal.

Clearly not me. Neither one or the other, neither to make a statement - this, in any case no - nor "because I can", but because it came to my mind and I see no problem in that. Everything "social" is out of question, and IME this is applicable to ILEs. But I see SLEs doing that, maybe more the "because I can" thingie.

I think the average ILE is aware that social conventions exist and that they're making conscious decisions to break those conventions. When I'm making a statement, it's because I see no problem in what I'm doing. If I saw a problem with it, I wouldn't do it. But at the same time I know that while I don't see a problem with it, other people do. In those cases a part of me wants the people who have a problem with it to say something so that I can correct them in their thinking. In my mind, their stance on the subject is unreasonable, after all I don't see a problem with it. When I think someone is unreasonable in their position I feel I need to correct them. It's why to this day I still can't resist challenging you on your opinion of my type

And Vero, I criticize the behavior you talk about in your second paragraph, if you read my debate with crazed or strrrng about using an ideal as a cause compared to having it merely a conclusion of your reasoning; also I wrote about this when I made the difference between what I call non-conformists and "non-conformists" - the quotes being exactly what makes them rather antonyms, "non-conformists" being fake non-conformists, they don't do things differently because they found more proper that way, but for the sake of being different. I think that's more Fi valuing.

I'm not intentionally looking to challenge the taboos or ethical rules, I basically don't give a shit about them, unless they interfere with my purposes or leave me a bad taste. Only then I check for them and usually find them absurd, but not always. (one previous example was that ridiculous squared hat of the graduates). And the other ILEs, apart me, I perceive them living in their world and not interested in taboos or what other people do - I'd say that I'm one of the most socially-oriented ILEs I know, maybe since this damn Socionics - IMO it is a misrepresentation of this type to say that they look for provocations to pick intellectual fights.

First, you're assuming that someone who hasn't explained the rational for non-conformity is somehow ingenuine in their behaviour, which is unfair. Additionally, I think you're over-generalizing. For instance, the case of my experimentation is an example of non-conformity in the face of a system that doesn't work. The system of formal greeting processes and the proper distance with new acquaintances creates unnecessary awkwardness, so rather than settle for a system that doesn't work, my friend and I try something different. This experimentation is often haphazard and we're partly curious to see how people will react to our antics, but it is ultimately motivated by an ineffective system.

Second, as a woman, social taboos very frequently interfere with my purposes and leave me with a bad taste. Perhaps this is part of the disconnect between the experiences of male and female ILEs that Blaze and I have noted in the past. We come from different social experiences where expectations are also notably different. In the case of women those demands are often pretty ridiculous and don't have any basis in logic.

Yes, an occasion to make your point is always welcome. But I usually stick into the discussion and say what I wan to say, I find a connection between what was saying and my subject and this is not so hard to do. It's not so hard to talk with you about Fi-PoLR and somehow the subject to be linked with Cyclops' pictures. <- see? it's already connected, it just misses a controversial element that will make it stick, like something that will be asked about or denied (for example that Cyclops is so anal about his pictures because he's one of those anal IEEs). That kind of things, all things are connected with each other, in one way or another.

I don't know what your point is here. It's not as though I've said that ILEs go out of their way to pick a fight for no reason. Something around them will remind them, they make a connection, and that's where it starts. In the case of my example about taking off my shirt, I said it in reference to Nowisthetime's teacher.

I said: "Under these circumstances..."

The circumstance was from Nowisthetime's post: "At the same gathering some of the men took their shirts off because the sun was shining and we were sitting outside"

The teacher commented on the injustice and I said that I wouldn't have bothered with ranting about injustice. If I felt it was stupid that men could go shirtless and I couldn't (like it is in North America) then I would just take off my shirt. And yup, part of me would want someone to challenge me so I could establish exactly why this social custom was unreasonable.

[strrrng]

Lol, true, though not at all obvious based just on knowledge of elements. I've actually thought it might be an argument against this type in the beginning.

ILE and SLE I know reasonably well differ in age, social circle, family situation etc., so I'm not sure how much of my observations are socionics-related, but I'd say the former is definitely more "pushy" about some matters (or maybe I just don't like poor Se). When dealing with issues typically associated with Fi, ILE will be more awkwardly direct and forceful, jumping to conclusions, where SLE would rather be uncertain or hesitant. I know it may sound as if I got their typings backward, but that's only when it comes to Fi. I suspect it could be because of blocks - when dealing with PoLR, people seem to quickly default to their super-ego block over a stronger alternative pairing of elements, as if it was unstable. An example of this behaviour in ILE would be going over the top with hostility, basically declaring war over a slight. Or when using Se-role, totally trumping over their relations with others. In the case of SLE, it isn't really a problem, I'd rather say he's sometimes clueless as to where he stands with people or how his actions affect the relation. So when he doesn't think about it, he might show crudeness like silverchris described, but when he does, it results in uncertainty how to act (which is probably unnerving to a Se-ego) - again, something like silverchris's example, this time of asking if it's alright to use their friendship as an argument .

I agree completely about the SLE thing. (mentioned this once, I think)... literally spent 3 hours with an Se-SLE female discussing interpersonal strategies to better aid her power plays against a manipulative boyfriend. it wasn't treated as overtly significant, but it was obvious that every reaction she got from him was taken in on shaky ground, leading her to constantly reassess his intentions and whatnot (though, comically, never losing sight of her possessing a superior position of power, tangibly -- i.e. "I'm more attractive, he wants me to introduce him to my family -- fuck that, I don't need you -- etc. etc.). it got to the point where I basically had to ghostwrite text messages for her; yet unsurprisingly, she took my advice with passive agreement, as if I was merely clarifying what she knew vaguely beforehand. at one point she blithely says, "you're fuckin cool, dude" and offers more weed; this again illustrated the effect that gradual NiFe appropriate actions induced in her, regarding my position in her own hierarchy and the sense of personal boundaries (with beta STs, as long as you 'play by their rules' and demonstrate an understanding of their import, their favor increases exponentially, with personal disposition subserved to hierarchical standing). it was a comedic illustration of duality...

Hmm. I've had a lot of SLE friends and relatives over the years, and what sticks out to me is them being quite sensitive towards issues of whether someone likes/dislikes them. The vast majority have all been kind and caring people ( PoLR is frequently misconceived as making people cunning assholes, this just isn't true). They also frequently go to great lengths to make sure everyone's having a good time, things like that are important to them—to the point that many take it personally if you aren't. As a rule, I find SLEs have a lot of emotional vulnerability that the stereotypes don't avail.

Surprisingly, I have little to no experience with ILEs in any relational capacity, so I can't comment on that.

yeah, I agree about the emotional vulnerability. a lot of SLEs actually feel relatively 'soft' to me, in the sense of being quite malleable and genuinely open to emotional/personal input that can yield greater insight into their motivations and better clarify approaches they take toward others. the light-hearted naivete that accompanies this trait, makes it all-the-more endearing lol.

Perhaps i should start reading art of war, the prince etc.....

they are both invaluable

[redbaron]

I didn't read through this thread.

Fi polr is so funny. Stuff comes out that they didn't think through first or can't possibly know (or be bothered with) how it's going to affect the other person. In a way, it's a healthy way to be. I love people who speak their mind bluntly. If an SLE says something that might be interpreted negatively by someone in the room, I might add a comment that tones it down a notch. Or laugh, indicating that the comment was okay with me and nobody else should be offended. Smoothing it over is my job when I'm around these types and I do it automatically without even realizing it.

ILEs seem more child-like, wide-eyed, clueless about it. ILEs *might* be more inclined than SLEs to be sad if they knew how their comment was coming across? That could be wrong though. Maybe it's just the ones I know.

SLEs seem more confident (at least in their presentation), and not caring as much what others think of them. SLEs might shrug and write off the person who was offended with "whatever".

[mfckr]

^^^ Just sounds like impulsiveness, not unique to PoLR.

[xerx]

^^^ Just sounds like impulsiveness, not unique to PoLR.

It's practically the definition of Fi PoLR. Ti PoLR would be impulsive in the implied sense, but about Ti related stuff.

ILEs seem more child-like, wide-eyed, clueless about it. ILEs *might* be more inclined than SLEs to be sad if they knew how their comment was coming across? That could be wrong though. Maybe it's just the ones I know.

That's actually true of me and a few other ILEs. We have a better idea of how our comments can come across because of Ne (still nowhere near as good as IEEs), since we can keep track of other people's mental states better than anyone else.

[silverchris9]

ILEs seem more child-like, wide-eyed, clueless about it. ILEs *might* be more inclined than SLEs to be sad if they knew how their comment was coming across? That could be wrong though. Maybe it's just the ones I know.

SLEs seem more confident (at least in their presentation), and not caring as much what others think of them. SLEs might shrug and write off the person who was offended with "whatever".

I think I agree. I think that SLEs tend to be like me/maybe IEIs in that they have a very limited circle of people whose opinions they care about. If you are not in that circle, they don't care. But if some IEI whose opinion they valued was offended by something they said, it would be a big deal. Whereas I think ILEs are more likely to be to sad if they feel like they're really hurting just about anyone. Perhaps an aristocratic/democratic thing?

[redbaron]

I think I agree. I think that SLEs tend to be like me/maybe IEIs in that they have a very limited circle of people whose opinions they care about. If you are not in that circle, they don't care. But if some IEI whose opinion they valued was offended by something they said, it would be a big deal. Whereas I think ILEs are more likely to be to sad if they feel like they're really hurting just about anyone. Perhaps an aristocratic/democratic thing?

yeah that sounds right.