Problem Solving - name the functions

[Kim]

I am wondering what is at play here as far as Socionics goes, so please let me know what you think.

I got a phone call from a friend who needed my help in dealing with a certain situation. He told me what needed to be done and I laid out the plan, called people, arranged for my car to be repaired, etc. The next morning when I needed to run around and take care of things, everything fell apart. Car was not ready, backup ride fell through, money was not available as it should have been, it was a mess.

When that happens, I seem to go into "the zone." I assess all possible avenues, I call people and places, and I never get tired of it until I have it all figured out. But I don't only want to solve the problem, I want to solve it efficiently. I HATE having to take extra steps that are not needed. When they are needed, I am totally fine with them. I'd like to say that I am very very good at handling these situations and exceptionally good at dealing with unforeseen problems along the way. I am actually enjoying it even. It took me all day to handle this situation and at the end it was only partially resolved for reasons beyond my control. I will admit I was very very frustrated because I couldn't do anything else.

I met up with a bunch of friends after all this because I needed a few drinks. I walked in and was all pissed off and bitching and raving about the situation, but they all agreed that I looked energized and as if in "my element." They kept saying that a few times and that got me wondering.

I did realize that I love solving problems like that and I get irritated (within the process) when people don't follow my pace (I don't let them know, of course). And I love for it to be fast-paced. Waiting is not my thing (I had to wait for people to call me back and it drove me nuts).

I was just curious if and how this is type-related and which functions are at play. It made me think that my is really pretty decent because I am good at assessing the progress and development of things in terms of being prepared for what could happen. I don't know, you tell me.

[Gilly]

You're analyzing a situation: you see the static states of the problem, then formulate solutions based on what you see as the best course of action. Analyzing the situation is Ne; analyzing which process is likely to produce the most favorable outcome is more Ni.

[Kim]

You're analyzing a situation: you see the static states of the problem, then formulate solutions based on what you see as the best course of action. Analyzing the situation is Ne; analyzing which process is likely to produce the most favorable outcome is more Ni.

Yes, that's what I thought. I was just surprised that my seems as efficient, so to speak as my and that I am so very concerned with the process that is likely to produce that outcome. But then this situations mostly happen because people need my help, so of course I have their well-being in mind and want it all done as quickly as possible. At least in this situation that was the case, which is probably the main reason why I was so frustrated: I couldn't change his situation and thus make him feel better.

[Gilly]

Personally, I'm perfectly aware of the fact that my Ni is in great shape, probably moreso than my Te (which contradicts my claim to logical subtype? Oh well The behavior fits better, and we're talking about unconscious functions, so I can get away with it ).

[Kim]

Personally, I'm perfectly aware of the fact that my Ni is in great shape, probably moreso than my Te (which contradicts my claim to logical subtype? Oh well The behavior fits better, and we're talking about unconscious functions, so I can get away with it ).

I never really thought of my as weak, but I was amazed at how quickly and efficiently it kicked into gear in a way that when I look at it all in retrospect I have to say: done all I could as best as it could have been done.

Looking at it now is so fascinating because it was this awesome interplay of and (and ) with as the driving force. :wink: My worked ok, but I did lose my composure at some stages. Not crucial ones though.

[leckysupport]

Isn't running around and efficiently fixing and organising concrete things more of an ESTp thing?

If so why are most of things she did related to N and not S?

[FDG]

I've seen described on the ENFp descs. of socionics.org what you mention - how in crisis situation the ENFp (they said) literally "comes alive" and steps up.

I think that, other that what Gilly mention, it's a switch from Ne to Se caused by the danger. There's no more consideration of the possibilities or rather, the process is speeded up so that the solution is found in a matter of a very short time. Just a thought without any special backing.

[leckysupport]

Also how does "Analyzing the situation" = Ne when ISTjs are know for their situation analysing skills?

[Gilly]

Depends on the "situation."

[leckysupport]

Depends on the "situation."

Which situations are best suited for which kind of analysis?

Because Kims situation appears very in the moment and concrete. I don't see how you related N functions to strengths which certain S types are famous for carrying out.

[anndelise]

Only cuz I happened to catch this on my break:

it seems to me that what Kim described is a Se role kicking in with a Te HA.
It's the NeFiTe take care of this, and then this, and then take care of that, with the Se kick for actually DOING it.

[Gilly]

Depends on the "situation."

Which situations are best suited for which kind of analysis?

Because Kims situation appears very in the moment and concrete. I don't see how you related N functions to strengths which certain S types are famous for carrying out.

Like I said, it depends on the situation. For physical analysis or solving problems that require interpretations of physical substance, an ISTj is obviously going to have the edge. But when it comes to thinking up alternative solutions to a hypothetical problem and seeing which one is going to work out the best in the end, Ne and Ni are at their finest.

[leckysupport]

It's the NeFiTe take care of this, and then this, and then take care of that, with the Se kick for actually DOING it.

Why isn't it Te which says "take care of this, and then this, and then take care of that"? Doesn't this http://socionics.us/works/semantics.shtml say that Te is about "
perfecting old and inventing new methods and forms of activity".

[leckysupport]

What do you mean by " interpretations of physical substance"?

[XoX]

Isn't running around and efficiently fixing and organising concrete things more of an ESTp thing?

If so why are most of things she did related to N and not S?

Yes, my first impression was that the behavior sounded like Se in "battle mode". Fix on the goal and keep pushing forward until the goal is achieved not even thinking about giving up. The "hunter mode". Very much "living in the moment" as if nothing else exists. But I refrain from further comments at this point. I'm not sure which function does what at this kind of situations. Generally I associate that kind of effectiveness to Se. Of course Te is there too somewhere.

[Kim]

Isn't running around and efficiently fixing and organising concrete things more of an ESTp thing?

If so why are most of things she did related to N and not S?

Yes, my first impression was that the behavior sounded like Se in "battle mode". Fix on the goal and keep pushing forward until the goal is achieved not even thinking about giving up. The "hunter mode". Very much "living in the moment" as if nothing else exists. But I refrain from further comments at this point. I'm not sure which function does what at this kind of situations. Generally I associate that kind of effectiveness to Se. Of course Te is there too somewhere.

But since there were so many drawbacks, pushing forward was not enough. I had to think of new strategies and ways to get things done. Once I had thought those up, I just did it ( , I agree).

Actually, it was not all in the moment, because for some possibilities I had to think long-term and assess if it would be a good idea to go down that path.

[Expat]

From a functional point of view, it was at first focusing on to know the sequence of events, a sense that you had to do it quickly, etc.

Otherwise it could be seen as ENFp going into Resolute mode along the EP temperament towards ESFp.

So shifting from your usual Reasonable, Carefree, Tactical, Infantile mode to Resolute, Calculating, Strategic, Aggressive mode.

So yeah, focusing on Se.

[leckysupport]

Is it just me, but does anyone else see that people here think the result of almost anything that S types do(famously known for) which is useful for anything is somehow cause by N solely? Even when N types don't even do these activities or sometimes find it difficult.

It looks like madness to me.

Can someone please explain this?

[Expat]

Is it just me, but does anyone else see that people here think the result of almost anything that S types do(famously known for) which is useful for anything is somehow cause by N solely? Even when N types don't even do these activities or sometimes find it difficult.

It looks like madness to me.

Can someone please explain this?

Please first explain what you meant.

[leckysupport]

In kims first post she pretty much explained how she loved the thrill of doing activities which appears to me what ESXps are famous for.
Then gillian relates these activities to Ne and Ni, but to me these activities are usually carried out by ESXps in the real world so how is it related to Ne or Ni.

Shouldn't N types be famous for these types of activities if that's true?

[XoX]

Is it just me, but does anyone else see that people here think the result of almost anything that S types do(famously known for) which is useful for anything is somehow cause by N solely? Even when N types don't even do these activities or sometimes find it difficult.

It looks like madness to me.

Can someone please explain this?

Please first explain what you meant.

Well the kind of stuff described in the original example sounds like something the "good old S-secretary" does for living and doesn't find it to be something so special. But when an N-type pulls it off it is celebrated as a great achievement getting "ooh"s and "aah"s and analyzed like "Look at what miracles the N can do when pushed to the max. The S-types can only dream of doing that stuff". Not to say that Kim's actions weren't heroic and something I probably wouldn't be able to pull off successfully

[Expat]

Well, the resolute, ready-for-battle mode is of course natural to .

Where what Kim describes that makes it less typically is that she had at first a sense of what exactly to do among several paths and having once chosen one, she had a good feeling of the timing and cause-and-effect sequences ( ), getting then in mode to implement it.

It is the mode that she finds thrilling because it's unusual for her.

A type, having had the same experience, would not find the decisiveness thrilling because they take it for granted; they'd be more pleased that they accurately predicted the sequence of events.

[XoX]

My wife's opinion on this...(apparently ESTj, Si-subtype but not confirmed)

"Very typical path of events when you are trying to organize something concrete (e.g. some event, wedding, ...)"

"May get a bit stressful but at the same time is fun because you feel like you are accomplishing something concrete and is fast paced and energetic"

"Typically people who work in e.g. "event marketing" do that kind of stuff all the time and love it. So if you feel like you are "a fish in the water" when doing that and like doing it then event marketing etc might be a good place to work in"

"Doesn't seem very in the sense that the problems were not anticipated beforehand and backup plans made but instead the behavior in problem situations was reactive (perhaps because there was not enough time to anticipate anything)"

[leckysupport]

Well, the resolute, ready-for-battle mode is of course natural to .

Where what Kim describes that makes it less typically is that she had at first a sense of what exactly to do among several paths and having once chosen one, she had a good feeling of the timing and cause-and-effect sequences ( ), getting then in mode to implement it.

It is the mode that she finds thrilling because it's unusual for her.

A type, having had the same experience, would not find the decisiveness thrilling because they take it for granted; they'd be more pleased that they accurately predicted the sequence of events.

k, cool.

Btw what's the difference between making decisions with Se decisiveness and Ne 'seeing possibilities'. Because a ESXp would just get frustrated and confused if these types of activities demanded too much Ne.
Right? Sorry if I'm being stupid here.

And...

cause and effect directly linked to Ni? This again-->http://socionics.us/works/semantics.shtml would link cause and effect to Te with speech patterns containing "strings of causes and effects".

[Expat]

k, cool.

Btw what's the difference between making decisions with Se decisiveness and Ne 'seeing possibilities'. Because a ESXp would just get frustrated and confused if these types of activities demanded too much Ne.
Right? Sorry if I'm being stupid here.

And...

cause and effect directly linked to Ni? This again-->http://socionics.us/works/semantics.shtml would link cause and effect to Te with speech patterns containing "strings of causes and effects".

According to the same source, Ni is about

interconnections; interdependence of objects, events, and processes
foresight or anticipation (through a sense of processes)

As for the first question, Se decisiveness is about making decisions as to what you're seeing directly in front of you. A wall is blocking your path? You walk through it. A guy is annoying you? You tell him to shut up or hit him. A gorgeous woman enters your field of vision? You hit on her (I am exaggerating but that is the general idea).

Ne is what allows you to see that there are alternatives to just walking through the wall, and Ni is what allows you to see that if you hit the annoying guy, he will sue you.

[Kim]

I don't have much time right now, but I wanted to respond to this:

"Doesn't seem very in the sense that the problems were not anticipated beforehand and backup plans made but instead the behavior in problem situations was reactive (perhaps because there was not enough time to anticipate anything)"

Actually I did anticipate problems beforehand (one example is that I had several ways to organize a car since mine could not be repaired on time). With other things, I could hardly anticipate them because the entire situation was totally new to me.

[leckysupport]

According to the same source, Ni is about

Quote:
interconnections; interdependence of objects, events, and processes
foresight or anticipation (through a sense of processes)

So what's with all the ESTj detectives?

[Expat]

So what's with all the ESTj detectives?

Well in the case of Sherlock Holmes, he's typed as ESTj because he reaches a conclusion on how an external process worked, or how external objects fit together Te , mainly due to Si information (the color of the soil, etc).

Ni is about "if he did this, then that would have happened, and then that, except that in this case this would have been difficult" etc etc.

Now yes, it can be argued that this is as important as Si.

[leckysupport]

What's the difference between this:

how external objects fit together Te

and this?:

interconnections; interdependence of objects, events, and processes

Ni is about "if he did this, then that would have happened, and then that, except that in this case this would have been difficult" etc etc.

That sounds like Ni brought on by Ne, which would easier for a ESTj to do.

"if he did this(possibilies), then that would have happened, and then that, except that in this case this would have been difficult(then Ni and some Te)".

[Expat]

Well, Ni is really about sequential cause-and-effect, even if going into speculations about the future, and the past, or proceeding along "what if" scenarios" (where the first "split" into what-if is more Ne than Ni).

Te is about factual knowledge of the external world and optimal functioning of the external world.

If you know how a process fits together and use this knowledge, this is Te.

If you perceive how a process will develop bases on incomplete information, that will be Ni.

This is also clear in that page from Rick's site -- sure there are overlaps, but take a look at the whole of each function, rather than the individual items. Then you see what Ni has that Te doesn't and vice-versa.

[leckysupport]

Well, Ni is really about sequential cause-and-effect, even if going into speculations about the future, and the past, or proceeding along "what if" scenarios" (where the first "split" into what-if is more Ne than Ni).

Te is about factual knowledge of the external world and optimal functioning of the external world.

If you know how a process fits together and use this knowledge, this is Te.

If you perceive how a process will develop bases on incomplete information, that will be Ni.

This is also clear in that page from Rick's site -- sure there are overlaps, but take a look at the whole of each function, rather than the individual items. Then you see what Ni has that Te doesn't and vice-versa.

Yep, I know what you're saying. Just it massively contradicts with the ESTj detective sterotype, that's all.

[leckysupport]

No wait it doesn't.

INFps in a detective situation would get a feel for the process of what happened first, but wouldn't check up on what actually happen and would rely on their imagination. Fitting the facts to their imagination

ENTj would get feel of what happens first and would check the facts. But imagination would run away at times and would miss small details.

ESTj would check small details first and correlate with facts. Then try and imagine what happened and get a feel for the process.

I guess a active and uncontrolled imagination is the enemy of a detective.

[Expat]

That's good.

Yes imagination has to be checked against facts, and ENTjs don't like to focus on the kind of Si stuff that Sherlock Holmes loved "the color of the paint on that writing on the wall was too dark to have been painted after yesterday night" etc etc.

[Smilingeyes]

You have to remember that ESTjs are also known as mechanical inventors. When they "solve crimes" they invent how something could have been done. If they find a fact that destroys the first idea they try a second time and continue trying ways to accomplish the crime or make an invention work or whatever until everyone seems to accept that they've solved it.

If you've seen dr House think about the way he solves problems, he solves them by experimenting with patients. That's ESTj. If the patient gets better, good, otherwise one must try again. ESTj don't really care that much about the principle of why something works as long as they can trust that it works. And the usual method of finding out that something doesn't work is by someone coming up and telling them something like "Hey, I couldn't have been the murderer since I was at Malibu only three hours before the time of death." to which the ESTj will answer "Sure you could have, all it would take is a private plane, one which to my knowledge your uncle happens to have. ... (At least that's the way I would have accomplished the murder had I been you.)"

ESTjs are more detailed and data-centered than ENTjs in this, which makes them more concrete and sometimes more convincing since they can often actually show physically how the crime was accomplished and what kind of skills it required. That's the way ESTjs detectives are handled in tv at least.

Excuse me. That was rather random. But true though.

[Smilingeyes]

Ah. I was slow in writing that.

[XoX]

"Doesn't seem very in the sense that the problems were not anticipated beforehand and backup plans made but instead the behavior in problem situations was reactive (perhaps because there was not enough time to anticipate anything)"

Actually I did anticipate problems beforehand (one example is that I had several ways to organize a car since mine could not be repaired on time). With other things, I could hardly anticipate them because the entire situation was totally new to me.

That is probably true. Now that I think about it it is not possible to anticipate all things in that kind of situation. We have arranged a wedding and couple of bigger party things which had many many things go wrong and it was just impossible to anticipate them or prepare for them in a useful way. It was about reacting to problems by quickly searching the best possible alternative paths, making a quick decision and then pushing down the selected path with full speed and without hesitation. So now I feel it is unfair to say that with huge Ni that stuff could be avoided.

So I'm changing my mind a bit...a lot...if you talk about a situation from which you have no experience of then perhaps ENFp and ENTp ARE the best types to pull that off. Ne is very helpful in those cases. ESTp and ESFp can be more effective if they have experience which helps them. With experience you don't rely so much on your creativity etc. you have ready thought out alternative paths which you just apply with lighting speed. Now that I remember my ENTp boss used to be pretty good in situations which call for creative on the spot decision making. And the natural Exxp indecisiveness is gone in a fast paced environment where you don't need to plan ahead.

I'm not sure if I was helpful at all in this thread, lol.