Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 156

Thread: LSE/ESTj Subtypes - discussion and examples

  1. #41
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,742
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Bee's knees adj. Something that is frickin' awesome and which possesses the mystical ability to imbue upon those items or concepts to which it is connected with an equivalent quality of frickin' awesomeness.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  2. #42
    idolatrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    413
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think sexual jokes can be funny, if they are actually, you know, amusing. I've been told I have a 'dirty mind', but that's only around good friends, and there's definitely a time and place for all jokes, particularly those of a sensitive nature. I definitely wouldn't tell sexual jokes at work (though that has a lot to do with what I do atm). Not sure what that has to do with being an ESTj-Si though.

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munenori2 View Post
    Bee's knees adj. Something that is frickin' awesome and which possesses the mystical ability to imbue upon those items or concepts to which it is connected with an equivalent quality of frickin' awesomeness.
    Dude! You did not use the "bee's knees". I use that!!!! No one uses that!!! Ahaha. I use it cause this old guy I knew used it and I didn't know what he was talking about, but then he told me and I thought it was silly. Sometimes I throw it in there with people I think might know it!

    Oh yeah, and thanks for the descriptions ofthe ESTJ-Si people you know. This does help and I do see some of these qualities in the ones I know, it's just that, they seem not to hold themselves to the same standards as they expect everyone else to be at. I mean the ones I know, not all ESTJ-Sis.

    Thanks munenori2 : )
    Last edited by Christy B; 04-15-2008 at 07:52 AM.
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idolatrie View Post
    I think sexual jokes can be funny, if they are actually, you know, amusing. I've been told I have a 'dirty mind', but that's only around good friends, and there's definitely a time and place for all jokes, particularly those of a sensitive nature. I definitely wouldn't tell sexual jokes at work (though that has a lot to do with what I do atm). Not sure what that has to do with being an ESTj-Si though.
    Are you ESTJ-Si?

    I also sometimes think sexual jokes are funny. It doesn't have to do with being ESTJ-SI, I just made a comment about how the ones I know do things including making dumb sexual jokes and being creepy by touching people. Not all ESTJ-Si are like this. And maybe somepeople want to be touched! Who knows. . .

    My sample of Si-ESTJ is obviously very limited and probably not a fair representaion of the type.
    Last edited by Christy B; 04-15-2008 at 08:41 AM.
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  5. #45
    idolatrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    413
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy B View Post
    Are you ESTJ-Si?
    yeah. I think so.

  6. #46
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idolatrie View Post
    yeah. I think so.
    I'm not ESTj, but welcome to the forum.

  7. #47
    idolatrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    413
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    I'm not ESTj, but welcome to the forum.
    thanks Cyclops.

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idolatrie View Post
    yeah. I think so.

    Oh cool! I think you are the only one here. Maybe you can set things straight. Welcome. Hope I haven't offended you . . .
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  9. #49
    idolatrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    413
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thanks Christy! Haha, no, can't say I've been offended - I'm not in any way responsible for others of my type, so hey. I've kind of already listed what does annoy me, and discussion like that totally isn't on the list.

    I'm happy to give my perspective on things, though I'm not entirely sure what I can contribute to this thread given there's no questions or anything.

  10. #50

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Maybe Eunice has some questions for you since she started this thread? Maybe she wants to meet you?!

    How did you find out about socionics, or what got you interested?
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  11. #51
    idolatrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    413
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy B View Post
    How did you find out about socionics, or what got you interested?
    haha, that's an interesting story actually. I've always talked about people and the way they interact with my ENFp best friend. We've known each other since high school, and are now doing the same thing in university. Back in high school, we'd procrastinate by doing online quizzes and stuff like that, including personality typing. Suffice to say we totally mistyped according to MBTI, given we'd inevitably end up as the SAME TYPE and worse still, introverts. Then a couple of years past, we got healthier as individuals (aka, grew up) and she stumbled across socionics. I gather she messed around with it for a while, thoroughly got into it, and typed herself, me, and our friends. Because we *always* drag each other into what we do (which is neatly explained by our activity partner relationship), she kept on mentioning this to me. While I was happy to discuss people and relationships as always, the whole discourse of it alienated me. I'd refer to it as 'that letter thing', and refuse to use the terms, instead referring to an individual she'd type as representing the whole type.

    OK, am getting long-winded here. Basically, we were in a situation where I couldn't escape her indoctrination, and finally caved and actually learnt the functions etc etc. Which created this whole shortform for us to then apply to talking about the people around us (in an analytical way). I personally love it because the categories intuitively make sense to me, and I find the description of the type we have me down as as resonating with me. I can see how the structure so clearly applies to how I interact with various people. And yeah, it's now a bit of an obsession of ours.

    and why do I think that's interesting? well, it's that same ENFp that dragged me to this forum - she's unefille here. so, you know, any mistakes or misapprehensions I have about types should have the blame for laid squarly at her feet.
    Last edited by idolatrie; 04-16-2008 at 12:41 PM.

  12. #52
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    unefile knows a few ISTp's yeah? You should try get an INFj and four of you hook up to form and experience a socionics quadruple

  13. #53
    idolatrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    413
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    unefile knows a few ISTp's yeah? You should try get an INFj and four of you hook up to form and experience a socionics quadruple
    we have, actually. we know a surfeit of ISTps, but are falling down in the INFj category, unfortunately! but she mentioned one extracurricular activity we do where she's met some of the ISTps, where we also know an INFj. a couple of weeks ago we had a meeting for that activity involving a delta quadruple. and well, it was all kinds of awesome? the two guys (ISTp and INFj) are both extreme capable guys who have been enormously supportive of us. we see them as senior to us in the hierarchy (they are one year senior to us and have more experience in the committee) but it was an extreme comfortable meeting. unefille and I get totally different things out of interacting with our duals (obviously!), and interact well with our mirrors so yeah, good times. the two guys are also very close friends.

    haha, actually the ISTp she's interested in (different one!) has an INFj (we think, but I'm wavering) best friend - but (un)fortunately I'm totally not interested in him, and honestly that would just get waaaaay too incestuous. we spend too much time together as it is.

    but yeah, hanging out with deltas brings me joy.

  14. #54

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default LSE-Si

    How can you talk to this type without pushing them away? Or what would push away an LSE-Si?

    Does being too serious seem like familiarity that is frightening???

    Also, how can you let them know that you are their friend and that they can trust you. That you won't stab them in the back, or hurt them.
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  15. #55
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy B View Post
    How can you talk to this type without pushing them away? Or what would push away an LSE-Si?

    Does being too serious seem like familiarity that is frightening???

    Also, how can you let them know that you are their friend and that they can trust you. That you won't stab them in the back, or hurt them.
    I don't understand the bold part. For me, no, being serious is not a drawback in any way. I'm learning that EII and LSE forms of appeal are actually different from the norm, particularly when you look at how beta (Se+Fe) romances are portrayed on TV.


    As for letting an LSE know you won't stab them in the back, reach out to them (or respond when they reach out to you), and be consistent. Don't fuck with them.

    Try not to do things like leave out of the blue, or distance yourself, or cut yourself off from the LSE, especially if there is something planned. The more sporadic you are, the less appealing it is.

    This is especially true in the "feeling you out" stage. An LSE is essentially blind to people's relationship statuses in terms of what you feel towards them. So having a more steady approach is appealing. If you're coming up all over the charts - interested, not interest; here, not here - then its very stressful to deal with that, and it is very difficult to invest into that.

    What's more, if you do start to invest in that, and then there are major changes or someone becomes sporadic or just disappears, then the LSE is like.... ??? Keep in mind there is no room for intuition here. It is hard for us to guess, and even harder to have faith in that such a guess is right, particularly in terms of relationships. So my best advice here is don't assume too much.

    If something changes, tell the LSE. If things are the same, even consider telling the LSE.

    What makes me trust people the most is when they consistently tell me things, and those things are consistently true. I don't particularly care whether I want to "hear" those things or not, it doesn't matter if things are pleasant or not. In fact, I, personally, will appreciate someone even more if they do tell me those things that are difficult to hear.


    So basically, a positive example of trust would be:
    - tells me the truth about things, whether it is "favoruable sounding" or not
    - consistently let's me know what is going on
    - doesn't change plans on a whim, or at least if this happens, I am informed
    - if you believe in something, living it in your everyday actions.

    a negative example would be:
    - doesn't tell me truth in general
    - particularly avoids telling me the truth if it sounds "unfavourable sounding"
    - doesn't care to let me know what's going on (doesn't return texts or phone calls)
    - changes plans on a whim, and often forgets to tell me
    - professes beliefs, or considers them, and then frequently acts out of alignment with those beliefs.
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  16. #56
    LϺαο Not A Communist Shill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Beijing
    TIM
    TMI
    Posts
    19,136
    Mentioned
    506 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    The logical subtype of the ESTj seems more 'aloof' and 'serious' than the sensing subtype, from the descriptions.

    From what I gather, the sensing subtype is more nervous than the logical subtype, and they reveal themselves through jokes or through slightly oblique references etc. (ESTjs are supposed to be concrete in what they say, but I think the description suggests that the Si subtype maybe doesn't give the correct weight to the things they say sometimes, because they think people will see them as boring old farts...or something). The description refers to how the talk briskly...I think I have encountered this sort of person before .

    Sometimes you say things that you think other people may not appreciate or may seem silly. The impression I get is that the ESTj-Si subtype talks quickly and softly etc. because they hope someone will pick up what they say and appreciate it, while others will not understand and say things like 'I'm sorry...what did you say?'.

    It's easy to see why an ESTj-Si individual would like an INFj-Ne as a partner - the INFj-Nes are able to discern what the ESTj is really saying and act accordingly. They thus end up amplifying each other until they become an unstoppable force and all that sort of thing.

    I don't think an ESTj-Si subtype would enjoy long pauses in conversations with strangers in particular (but who would?), and they like someone who is perceptive (they don't want to reveal much about themselves because this may well leave them vulnerable, so someone who can infer things through hesitations etc. is obviously good).

  17. #57

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    The logical subtype of the ESTj seems more 'aloof' and 'serious' than the sensing subtype, from the descriptions.

    From what I gather, the sensing subtype is more nervous than the logical subtype, and they reveal themselves through jokes or through slightly oblique references etc. (ESTjs are supposed to be concrete in what they say, but I think the description suggests that the Si subtype maybe doesn't give the correct weight to the things they say sometimes, because they think people will see them as boring old farts...or something). The description refers to how the talk briskly...I think I have encountered this sort of person before .

    Sometimes you say things that you think other people may not appreciate or may seem silly. The impression I get is that the ESTj-Si subtype talks quickly and softly etc. because they hope someone will pick up what they say and appreciate it, while others will not understand and say things like 'I'm sorry...what did you say?'.

    It's easy to see why an ESTj-Si individual would like an INFj-Ne as a partner - the INFj-Nes are able to discern what the ESTj is really saying and act accordingly. They thus end up amplifying each other until they become an unstoppable force and all that sort of thing.

    I don't think an ESTj-Si subtype would enjoy long pauses in conversations with strangers in particular (but who would?), and they like someone who is perceptive (they don't want to reveal much about themselves because this may well leave them vulnerable, so someone who can infer things through hesitations etc. is obviously good).
    Ooh. This is a little tricky for me. I am not good at understanding if I have crossed a line with the Si. I feel like maybe I'm intruding when I ask questions because they sort-of make jokes about personal issues, where the Te type might just tell me straight up "yes", "no" or "I don't want to talk about it". I know better when to give them space. Maybe sometimes I think the Si wants space, but maybe the ywant me to support them. Uh-oh. This is tricky and somewhat confusing to me.
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  18. #58

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    I don't understand the bold part. For me, no, being serious is not a drawback in any way. I'm learning that EII and LSE forms of appeal are actually different from the norm, particularly when you look at how beta (Se+Fe) romances are portrayed on TV.


    As for letting an LSE know you won't stab them in the back, reach out to them (or respond when they reach out to you), and be consistent. Don't fuck with them.

    Try not to do things like leave out of the blue, or distance yourself, or cut yourself off from the LSE, especially if there is something planned. The more sporadic you are, the less appealing it is.

    This is especially true in the "feeling you out" stage. An LSE is essentially blind to people's relationship statuses in terms of what you feel towards them. So having a more steady approach is appealing. If you're coming up all over the charts - interested, not interest; here, not here - then its very stressful to deal with that, and it is very difficult to invest into that.

    What's more, if you do start to invest in that, and then there are major changes or someone becomes sporadic or just disappears, then the LSE is like.... ??? Keep in mind there is no room for intuition here. It is hard for us to guess, and even harder to have faith in that such a guess is right, particularly in terms of relationships. So my best advice here is don't assume too much.

    If something changes, tell the LSE. If things are the same, even consider telling the LSE.

    What makes me trust people the most is when they consistently tell me things, and those things are consistently true. I don't particularly care whether I want to "hear" those things or not, it doesn't matter if things are pleasant or not. In fact, I, personally, will appreciate someone even more if they do tell me those things that are difficult to hear.


    So basically, a positive example of trust would be:
    - tells me the truth about things, whether it is "favoruable sounding" or not
    - consistently let's me know what is going on
    - doesn't change plans on a whim, or at least if this happens, I am informed
    - if you believe in something, living it in your everyday actions.

    a negative example would be:
    - doesn't tell me truth in general
    - particularly avoids telling me the truth if it sounds "unfavourable sounding"
    - doesn't care to let me know what's going on (doesn't return texts or phone calls)
    - changes plans on a whim, and often forgets to tell me
    - professes beliefs, or considers them, and then frequently acts out of alignment with those beliefs.
    Totally relate to this kind of interaction.

    As for the negative examples what if you ask a question and because the person doesn't want to lie, but cannot tell you exactly what has happened or what has gone on, just doesn't say anything. Like they sincerely cannot tell you. . .
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  19. #59
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Depends on how important the matter is. The more important, the more pressure will be applied. Pressure forces people to tell the truth, to lie (and thus compromise themselves), or to make you know that the person really isn't going to back down (read some E8 descriptions...).

    If it is a minor detail and clearly none of my business, then so be it. But personally I always remember who doesn't want to tell me what. People hide things for a reason, whether it is real significance, fear, or whatever, there's something telling about what people hide.
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  20. #60
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,742
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy B View Post
    How can you talk to this type without pushing them away? Or what would push away an LSE-Si?

    Does being too serious seem like familiarity that is frightening???

    Also, how can you let them know that you are their friend and that they can trust you. That you won't stab them in the back, or hurt them.
    Honesty is the best policy. Be sincere. Show 'em you fo real. Play around a bit, but only if that's you. If they can't handle that, then eff em. Wordz from a drunk guy in Kansas yo!
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  21. #61

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Depends on how important the matter is. The more important, the more pressure will be applied. Pressure forces people to tell the truth, to lie (and thus compromise themselves), or to make you know that the person really isn't going to back down (read some E8 descriptions...).

    If it is a minor detail and clearly none of my business, then so be it. But personally I always remember who doesn't want to tell me what. People hide things for a reason, whether it is real significance, fear, or whatever, there's something telling about what people hide.
    Yeah I know the E8 well. . . but. . .
    What if it is too messed up to talk about? Ever. To anyone. Or what if someone asked you not to say anything? Sometimes people ask me not to talk about what they have told me, and you can also tell what is OK to talk about and what should not be told. I won't tell if someone has asked me not to.

    I have been in situations where the LSE wants to know something from me, but I cannot tell them (even if I REALLY want to). I can tell that this makes them immediately distant (I can actually feel their enegry sort of shut off). I have to try and get them back to me because I don't want them to think they can't trust me, it's just that every once and a while there are some things that cannot be talked about.

    If they do begin to trust me again, later the LSE will usually ask me the same question again, to see what I will say or to see if information has changed. This kind of bugs me because it means they are testing me. Usually this doesn't matter, because I am not lying and I do want them to trust me so I will just repete myself as if it was the first time they were asking, but sometimes it is frustrating because I want to ask them, what makes it OK for you to grill everyone else????

    I have noticed that LSEs hold back information all the time. The ones I have known IRL like to ask lots of questions and expect direct answers, but often won't want to disclose any information that they think may be detrimental to getting what they want out of a situation. They may even lie themselves!!! (or at least “twist” the truth to the point that they may as well be blatantly lying)

    PS not talking about any LSEs we have in this forum- only the ones I have known IRL.
    Last edited by Christy B; 05-11-2008 at 11:36 AM.
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  22. #62

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munenori2 View Post
    Honesty is the best policy. Be sincere. Show 'em you fo real. Play around a bit, but only if that's you. If they can't handle that, then eff em. Wordz from a drunk guy in Kansas yo!
    Thanks drunk guy!!!! : )
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  23. #63
    idolatrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    413
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    First off, totally agree with what SubT described for ESTj-Si. That's so bang on it's creepy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy B View Post
    Ooh. This is a little tricky for me. I am not good at understanding if I have crossed a line with the Si. I feel like maybe I'm intruding when I ask questions because they sort-of make jokes about personal issues, where the Te type might just tell me straight up "yes", "no" or "I don't want to talk about it". I know better when to give them space. Maybe sometimes I think the Si wants space, but maybe the ywant me to support them. Uh-oh. This is tricky and somewhat confusing to me.
    Yeah, I use sort-of jokes to deflect and try to draw attention away from something I don't really want to talk about. Or I don't think the other person is interested in. But if they persist, I'll usually take it seriously if I see they are sincere and not just, you know, making small talk. If I want space and really don't want to talk abotu something, I'll probably change the subject quite overtly. If I don't try to move things on obviously, then I'm probably open to discussing that topic more. I don't know. I mean, if I think someone is being sincere, I do think I'd usually be sincere back and take their questions in that spirit. But if I feel I'm being interrogated, I'll start to wonder why and try to suss out the other person's motivations. Other people are tricky and confusing to LSEs too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy B View Post
    This kind of bugs me because it means they are testing me. Usually this doesn't matter, because I am not lying and I do want them to trust me so I will just repete myself as if it was the first time they were asking, but sometimes it is frustrating because I want to ask them, what makes it OK for you to grill everyone else????
    Umm...it's really hard to comment since I don't know the whole situation there. But I think it is unlikely an LSE would try to 'test' someone emotionally. I mean, that would be one of the worst things to do to me, so why would I do it to others? If someone keeps on bothering you to tell them something you can't, and you've made that clear to them, then they're being a dickhead. Irregardless of whatever type they are. It does seem like a sort of weird thing to do too - if someone told me they cannot answer my question because of a promise they made to someone else, I'd just accept that and leave it. I don't like the idea of um...stepping on anyone else's relationships and that seems like I'd be presuming my friendship superseeds the other one. (Which is something I wouldn't assume.)

    Why don't you ask them what makes them think it is ok to keep on badgering you with the same question? If they have no idea that they're doing it, then it would let them know they are. And if they do know, then that should be a pretty clear message to stop doing it anymore. Again, I feel I have to plaster a caveat all over this that I don't have a clue as to what situation you're describing here, so I may be way off base.

    In terms of how to interact with LSE-Si in general, I completely agree with what UDP described. Um, going off what SubT added in, I totally love it when people pick up on my bizarre little references I throw in to conversation randomly. But I'd hardly expect people to get them usually. It's just nice when it does happen. It is really...um, comforting to find someone who 'gets' me and all my bredth of interests like that.

    Time is a huge factor in convincing me someone is a good friend and not going to betray me. Time in the sense that it sets up a pattern of behaviour I have experienced and can trust will continue.

    Not sure if I've addressed what you're asking. Those are some broad questions! Let me know if I can clarify something, because I'm not sure I'm on the right track here...
    allez cuisine!

  24. #64
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy B View Post
    Yeah I know the E8 well. . . but. . .
    What if it is too messed up to talk about? Ever. To anyone. Or what if someone asked you not to say anything? Sometimes people ask me not to talk about what they have told me, and you can also tell what is OK to talk about and what should not be told. I won't tell if someone has asked me not to.
    Oh. Well if it is something "someone else" said to you, that's different I guess. I can understand and respect that sort of trust. My initial reaction to what I bolded is "that doesn't exist".

    There is a two-fold answer to that - one, personally, I don't think anything is ultimately so significant that cannot be mentioned. I am not afraid of anything, and I've heard a ton of shit, and I've interrogated a ton of shit out of people, and I've found answers to questions that you probably aren't suppose to find, so to me "too messed up to talk about" just doesn't exist. That comes across as something you are unable to deal with, or an excuse to not talk about something or face a situation, which I have always and will always adamantly oppose. Two, hmm, I forgot, but I'll get around to it. I think it is related to the nature that being able to talk about something allows you to overcome it.

    Oh wait, I remember - how much you can disclose stuff to someone is directly related to how much you trust them, sort of. You can always filter what you disclose. But how much of those "hard things" you talk to someone, or let them know, is directly proportional to your level of involvement, significance, and so on - in the pragmatic terms. (and again, based on my preferences I suppose).

    So the more you don't talk about things or don't want to address issues, I sort of see that as the level of closeness we have.

    --- Ideally, with my closest person or SO, I'd want to be able to talk about everything. I would not enjoy holding back, or, being told that things aren't to be spoken of (generally).


    I have been in situations where the LSE wants to know something from me, but I cannot tell them (even if I REALLY want to). I can tell that this makes them immediately distant (I can actually feel their enegry sort of shut off). I have to try and get them back to me because I don't want them to think they can't trust me, it's just that every once and a while there are some things that cannot be talked about.
    .....? What does that mean? What sort of thing can't you talk about? And why can't you talk about it? Because it is too difficult for you to speak about? That whole thing doesn't really register. Because, imo, the whole idea that "I want to but I really can't" is sort of an excuse to yourself. If you wanted to tell him you would, but you're choosing not to. That's fine - just be upfront about it, and don't fool yourself or play the cop out.

    If they do begin to trust me again, later the LSE will usually ask me the same question again, to see what I will say or to see if information has changed. This kind of bugs me because it means they are testing me.
    Yes
    Usually this doesn't matter, because I am not lying and I do want them to trust me so I will just repete myself as if it was the first time they were asking, but sometimes it is frustrating because I want to ask them, what makes it OK for you to grill everyone else????
    Heh heh heh... part of the problem is that it has to do with insecurity about information - we want IT ALL. Everything. Secondly, it can be somewhat enjoyable to force stuff out of people. Thirdly, it lets you know where the other person stands, as I described above, in relation to you. It is somewhat of a physical way to measure things, although it is unpleasant, and often leaves people uneasy. Again, I see this as a very E8 thing, because it is very instinctual, and very much just getting down to the core of who you are as a person and how you relate to me. In some ways, it doesn't matter what you say or what the subject matter is, it is testing you, always, to see where you stand on things. Testing you, and testing the situation, to understand the power dynamics that are at play.

    It is somewhat of a constant analysis of your character, ideology, trust levels, what you think is important or not, who is important to you.... it is very probing. It is interesting to find these things out, and, it's a bit like shaking something buried in sand - you want to see what is really there, and get past the little bits of fleeting material that covers up who you really are.

    I have noticed that LSEs hold back information all the time. The ones I have known IRL like to ask lots of questions and expect direct answers, but often won't want to disclose any information that they think may be detrimental to getting what they want out of a situation. They may even lie themselves!!! (or at least “twist” the truth to the point that they may as well be blatantly lying)
    Yes. No one said LSEs or E8s are very "fair". Making an appeal to this might get you something or at least cease the relentlessness for a while - if it seems legitimate, maybe. I don't like lying, but I know a lot of people who don't care about that. And yes, I try to keep information relevant to what is being discussed. And absolutely there is some holding back - which is again related to what I said above, about trust. It goes for me too - I won't say much if I don't think you're really worth talking to.

    Information is a valuable and scarce resource. Not just information, but accurate, relevant, and high-influence information. It is something to be noted.

    PS not talking about any LSEs we have in this forum- only the ones I have known IRL.
    You're talking about me whether you realize it or not; no, we've not had much interaction along these lines thus far, but it applies to me very much.
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  25. #65
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It should be noted that much of the interrogation that is insecurity based is because LSEs are not very good at interpreting people's motives via intuition. We simply don't get it. So we use facts to establish people's motives and see how they deviate from things - your actions will reveal your ethics to us, so to say.

    But it should also be noted that some people find genuine interest in being an asshole, probing, pushing information out of people, finding questions to things. And/or, understanding a situation as deeply as possible. When I honestly, really, truly want to understand something, then I ask every possibly question about it. I don't particularly care if it is inappropriate, because I think that inappropriate label inhibits the flow of information. And that doesn't mean I'm being an ass, either, it means it is simply something I'm interested in and therefore want to know as much as possible about it. There is a big difference between being an ass (which is generally done somewhat lightheartedly), and being sincerely interested, although at first glance the person in the receiving end might not be able to tell the difference.

    Sometimes I forget to tell people the difference or make it clear when I am really just interested in something. I can be very blunt, although especially if you seem someone respect-worthy I try to be considerate in my approach. And I am (slowly) learning that being more affable and on good terms with people generally allows access to better information. The problem with that is I don't like anything remotely resembling kissing anyone else's ass.
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  26. #66

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Oh. Well if it is something "someone else" said to you, that's different I guess. I can understand and respect that sort of trust. My initial reaction to what I bolded is "that doesn't exist".

    There is a two-fold answer to that - one, personally, I don't think anything is ultimately so significant that cannot be mentioned. I am not afraid of anything, and I've heard a ton of shit, and I've interrogated a ton of shit out of people, and I've found answers to questions that you probably aren't suppose to find, so to me "too messed up to talk about" just doesn't exist. That comes across as something you are unable to deal with, or an excuse to not talk about something or face a situation, which I have always and will always adamantly oppose. Two, hmm, I forgot, but I'll get around to it. I think it is related to the nature that being able to talk about something allows you to overcome it.

    Oh wait, I remember - how much you can disclose stuff to someone is directly related to how much you trust them, sort of. You can always filter what you disclose. But how much of those "hard things" you talk to someone, or let them know, is directly proportional to your level of involvement, significance, and so on - in the pragmatic terms. (and again, based on my preferences I suppose).

    So the more you don't talk about things or don't want to address issues, I sort of see that as the level of closeness we have.

    --- Ideally, with my closest person or SO, I'd want to be able to talk about everything. I would not enjoy holding back, or, being told that things aren't to be spoken of (generally).


    .....? What does that mean? What sort of thing can't you talk about? And why can't you talk about it? Because it is too difficult for you to speak about? That whole thing doesn't really register. Because, imo, the whole idea that "I want to but I really can't" is sort of an excuse to yourself. If you wanted to tell him you would, but you're choosing not to. That's fine - just be upfront about it, and don't fool yourself or play the cop out.

    Yes
    Heh heh heh... part of the problem is that it has to do with insecurity about information - we want IT ALL. Everything. Secondly, it can be somewhat enjoyable to force stuff out of people. Thirdly, it lets you know where the other person stands, as I described above, in relation to you. It is somewhat of a physical way to measure things, although it is unpleasant, and often leaves people uneasy. Again, I see this as a very E8 thing, because it is very instinctual, and very much just getting down to the core of who you are as a person and how you relate to me. In some ways, it doesn't matter what you say or what the subject matter is, it is testing you, always, to see where you stand on things. Testing you, and testing the situation, to understand the power dynamics that are at play.

    It is somewhat of a constant analysis of your character, ideology, trust levels, what you think is important or not, who is important to you.... it is very probing. It is interesting to find these things out, and, it's a bit like shaking something buried in sand - you want to see what is really there, and get past the little bits of fleeting material that covers up who you really are.

    Yes. No one said LSEs or E8s are very "fair". Making an appeal to this might get you something or at least cease the relentlessness for a while - if it seems legitimate, maybe. I don't like lying, but I know a lot of people who don't care about that. And yes, I try to keep information relevant to what is being discussed. And absolutely there is some holding back - which is again related to what I said above, about trust. It goes for me too - I won't say much if I don't think you're really worth talking to.

    Information is a valuable and scarce resource. Not just information, but accurate, relevant, and high-influence information. It is something to be noted.

    You're talking about me whether you realize it or not; no, we've not had much interaction along these lines thus far, but it applies to me very much.
    What do you do with the information you are looking for, once you have it?
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  27. #67
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Do? That's an unusual question. As I said, it goes into my understanding of who you are, the situation at play, and everything related. I don't use it to sell on the black market. I use it to understand whatever is going on more fully.

    Why is that significant? To me, there are so many different ways things could be interpreted or said or meant. Furthermore, what you say is evidence to see how trustworthy you are in the future. If you lie to me about an explanation, then I see how that factors into things. Why did you lie, what were you protecting, what does this say about you, what do you think about me, what do you think about the situation. It's not just what you did, it is why, and it is how that influences everything else.

    I suppose the core root of things is I like understanding things and the dynamics of information and seeing how and why things play out. If I'm not keeping track of that I don't feel like I'm involved in anything, and I don't feel like I'm "doing my job". It seems to be something that very few people do anyways, or at least how I do it, so, someone's got to. And I like to, so.... yes. That's one part of it all perhaps.
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  28. #68
    Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,451
    Mentioned
    148 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Depends on how important the matter is. The more important, the more pressure will be applied. Pressure forces people to tell the truth, to lie (and thus compromise themselves), or to make you know that the person really isn't going to back down (read some E8 descriptions...).

    If it is a minor detail and clearly none of my business, then so be it. But personally I always remember who doesn't want to tell me what. People hide things for a reason, whether it is real significance, fear, or whatever, there's something telling about what people hide.
    "Pressure" - don't you realize that's at least a little bit related to the EII's PoLR? And that, therefore, they're not likely to respond particularly well to that?

    Like Christy said, sometimes I can't talk about whatever it is I want private for right/wrong reasons, whether because of a promise or lack of solid information (i.e. avoiding gossip) or just a hesitancy to break confidence. But there are other times, too, where I just don't want to talk about it. To push past those boundaries I set up, especially if I'm sure of those boundaries, that is trespassing on private property. To do something like that is a great way to push me away, actually.

    There are some things I don't discuss even with those who are closest to me. There are some things that I only talk about with those closest to me. And there are different things that I'm comfortable talking about with different people.

    If you say, "It's all or nothing" then it'll be nothing. I will only give you as much of myself as I want to. And if you make yourself unpleasant or hurtful, then why in the world would I want to entrust myself to you?

    Hm, I'm getting kind of riled up here. I just... really don't like it when people push me. It makes me agitated and... angry and... I don't know. I don't know exactly how to deal with it, except push back and put up walls and retreat to someplace safer.

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Heh heh heh... part of the problem is that it has to do with insecurity about information - we want IT ALL. Everything. Secondly, it can be somewhat enjoyable to force stuff out of people. Thirdly, it lets you know where the other person stands, as I described above, in relation to you. It is somewhat of a physical way to measure things, although it is unpleasant, and often leaves people uneasy. Again, I see this as a very E8 thing, because it is very instinctual, and very much just getting down to the core of who you are as a person and how you relate to me. In some ways, it doesn't matter what you say or what the subject matter is, it is testing you, always, to see where you stand on things. Testing you, and testing the situation, to understand the power dynamics that are at play.
    I really don't like this paragraph. "Enjoyable to force stuff out of people"? "Power dynamics"? "Testing you, always"? That is not something I like very much at all.
    Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.

  29. #69
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minde View Post
    "Pressure" - don't you realize that's at least a little bit related to the EII's PoLR? And that, therefore, they're not likely to respond particularly well to that?
    Don't you realize that I knew all of that well before I started writing that post?

    I was not writing a post on "how to get along best with EIIs"
    Yes, your polr ought to feel properly burned after reading that.
    Consider it an expose of the dark side of things.
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  30. #70
    Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,451
    Mentioned
    148 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Don't you realize that I knew all of that well before I started writing that post?

    I was not writing a post on "how to get along best with EIIs"
    Yes, your polr ought to feel properly burned after reading that.
    Consider it an expose of the dark side of things.
    I'll consider it in any way I please, thank you.

    And, you're right, it isn't a thread on how to get along best with EIIs. It's a thread on how to get along best with LSEs, specifically of the Si variety. You posted as a representative of LSE, telling us how best to get along with you. You described your desires and natural inclinations.

    Apparently, the way you naturally operate, I'm not built to deal well with that.

    Which could lead to several conclusions/extrapolations, including 1) you're not really LSE, 2) I'm not really EII, 3) we're both the types we say we are and duality isn't all that the myths of socionics say it is, and/or 4) this difficulty is not socionics related.
    Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.

  31. #71
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minde View Post
    I'll consider it in any way I please, thank you.
    Taking this personally are you?

    And, you're right, it isn't a thread on how to get along best with EIIs. It's a thread on how to get along best with LSEs, specifically of the Si variety. You posted as a representative of LSE, telling us how best to get along with you. You described your desires and natural inclinations.

    Apparently, the way you naturally operate, I'm not built to deal well with that.

    Which could lead to several conclusions/extrapolations, including 1) you're not really LSE, 2) I'm not really EII, 3) we're both the types we say we are and duality isn't all that the myths of socionics say it is, and/or 4) this difficulty is not socionics related.
    I don't think you are understanding clearly the difference between healthy state of affairs and not being healthy. It sounds a bit like you are still defensively overreacting here, but if it helps you to see me as some other type go right ahead.

    "You described your natural inclinations", I described all of them, good and bad, yes.

    Do you think your negative behaviors are going to attract your dual either? Hardly.


    Quote Originally Posted by esper View Post
    Hmm This has been a very interesting conversation. It makes me think that, no matter how much two types are supposed to get along, if one is acting pretty badly or is unhealthy/underdeveloped, it really won't work out. I can think of ways a person of any function could use it badly, even in the eyes of a person who values that function.

    As far as the "grilling" thing, don't get me wrong, UDP, I'm sure you are much more put-together than those LSE whom I've experienced, but the one I'm thinking about is just...pathetic. And this is noted by pretty much all who know them, not just me, so I know it's not just a type thing. They'll grill and grill people, but never get out any real information. You just keep telling them, "No, I'm not forming an evil plot against you" over and over again; in fact, you really didn't even notice them or care about them enough in the first place to even think anything negative about them, that is, until they keep grilling you. And then, when you've said, maybe 5 times, that you don't think anything bad about them, and they still say, "Well, you do," then you think something bad about them--i.e. they're an idiot. It isn't really an effective way to get any real information out of you. This particular LSE, btw, can't keep hardly any friends, and I'm not even kidding. Any they have they'll eventually push away, being convinced that they're "against them" and they have no way to prove themselves true. They just bottle up and burn with anger for seemingly ever until it becomes too much for their friends. That just...sucks... I'm sure a better LSE wouldn't be so blind.
    It is the mark of an insecurity, aggressive insecurity that is unleashed on other people. It is not a healthy state of affairs at all. It can lead to paranoia. And it is a sure fire way to destroy relationships.
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  32. #72
    Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,451
    Mentioned
    148 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Taking this personally are you?
    I don't like it when people tell me what to think. You can give me information, that's fine; but let me make my own conclusions.

    If that's what you mean by "taking it personally" *shrug* I guess so. Am I supposed to be distant and impersonal?

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    I don't think you are understanding clearly the difference between healthy state of affairs and not being healthy. It sounds a bit like you are still defensively overreacting here, but if it helps you to see me as some other type go right ahead.

    "You described your natural inclinations", I described all of them, good and bad, yes.

    Do you think your negative behaviors are going to attract your dual either? Hardly.
    *raises eyebrows* Hm. "Negative behaviors" huh? And what would those be, in your opinion?

    You say I'm not understanding something. Okay, I'm open to that possibility. Please explain then - what do you think I am not understanding?

    Also, if my logic in my previous post was in any way wrong, please feel free to correct that as well.
    Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.

  33. #73
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by esper View Post
    The LSE I've experienced is pretty haphazard as far as schedule. They'll just decide to do something and then work on it until kingdom come or circumstances force them to stop. They're not really consistent with schedule. Most of the people they are comfortable around don't have a schedule either. What DOES make the LSE secure, however, is when you don't stop working once you've started until you're done. And you get the same things "done" every day. It's more like, consistency of having done the thing rather than the precise scheduling of everyday activities that has a real impact on whether or not they regard you highly. IME, that is more the basis of it. Do you think this is correct?
    Hmm somewhat. I do think what I said about changing plans on a whim sounds more IJ. What you said works. I really don't like stopping something once it is started, I think that is process>result or something like that. And I generally am the last ones at meetings, etc. I am not sure what exactly it is that would be secure in that way. I don't keep a definite schedule, and I do make changes based on what things are feeling like or as contingencies come up - to contrast with an LSI, they get really upset if things change AT ALL from what they said it was supposed to be like (when more unhealthy). So yeah, maybe it is best defined as an ability to consistently carry though and do things - "just as long as you get done what needs to be done", sort of. Is that what you are trying to get it?

    I hate having things "in the dark" or lying. It just messes with me; so I go to great lengths to avoid untruthfulness. I usually say even negative comments, however, in a kind of happy tone without thinking about it, to like, try to make them feel better. I think thats what makes the LSE suspicious of me, like "Oh, this happiness might be fake and sinister because it has the ability to augment my emotional disposition! She must be trying to cover up the fact that she really doesn't like me! Maybe she is plotting against me!!!" But, like, if I try to be very blunt and not add that extra encouragement in my vocal tone, the LSE reacts the same way, perhaps because by that time they notice it as a change in the way I naturally act.
    Yeah. It can seem like you are trying to pull something. It seems the best thing to do is to try to get the LSE to realize that's just who you are. That's what I try to do, and socionics has helped with that. But like on my dinner with an INFp, it was just strange and totally off-putting, because she was really trying to create a positive atmosphere. It actually turned me off from her a little bit, but I understood why she was doing it, so, that helped me appreciate it somewhat.

    If this particular LSE was more put-together perhaps they could realize its just the way I am. I naturally insert subtle cheer into my voice, which I guess subconsciously is just to help people feel better, not to manipulate them or "cover up" some bad feeling about them. I rarely actually hate anyone.
    Yes. (I read the post going top down and responding to it as I read it, heh)
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  34. #74
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minde View Post
    I don't like it when people tell me what to think. You can give me information, that's fine; but let me make my own conclusions.

    If that's what you mean by "taking it personally" *shrug* I guess so. Am I supposed to be distant and impersonal?
    I don't recall telling you what to think. But apparently you've been offended somehow - sorry, that wasn't my attention.

    *raises eyebrows* Hm. "Negative behaviors" huh? And what would those be, in your opinion?

    You say I'm not understanding something. Okay, I'm open to that possibility. Please explain then - what do you think I am not understanding?

    Also, if my logic in my previous post was in any way wrong, please feel free to correct that as well.
    You're logic is fine, but your sense of alarm, and questioning of socionics principles seemed (possibly) out of place.

    When you gave your 1,2,3,4, it seemed like you were interpreting everything I said in the long post, about pressure and stuff, as the LSE's natural inclinations. It sounds like you overreacting/ed (you said "I'm getting riled up here"), and seem to have interpreted the (blatant, I thought) negative qualities that I described in that post (such as pressuring, excessive interrogating, and forcing), as "the norm". As what I do every day to get by, and how I interact. And consequently how all LSEs secretly or blatantly interact. In short, that you are taking negative qualities as the norm, rather than what I was trying to do in that situation - have a discussion about them in general.

    ..... I disagree with that interpretation. If that was not your interpretation, then I'm wrong, and so be it.

    Perhaps you'd like to give us your take on why you appear upset at this time?
    PS: or am I wrongly assuming that you are upset in the first place
    Last edited by UDP; 05-12-2008 at 01:24 AM. Reason: added ps
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  35. #75
    Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,451
    Mentioned
    148 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes, you seem to think I'm more upset than I actually am. Yes, thinking about being forced to do things against my will got me a little internally riled. But a quick step back, a recognition to myself of what was happening in me, and I regained stability.

    Are you saying that everything you described up there, about what you like and prefer in terms of getting information out of people, is unhealthy behavior?

    I'm not talking about when you specifically said, "this is unhealthy." I mean things like this:

    Depends on how important the matter is. The more important, the more pressure will be applied. Pressure forces people to tell the truth, to lie (and thus compromise themselves), or to make you know that the person really isn't going to back down (read some E8 descriptions...).

    If it is a minor detail and clearly none of my business, then so be it. But personally I always remember who doesn't want to tell me what. People hide things for a reason, whether it is real significance, fear, or whatever, there's something telling about what people hide.
    and

    Heh heh heh... part of the problem is that it has to do with insecurity about information - we want IT ALL. Everything. Secondly, it can be somewhat enjoyable to force stuff out of people. Thirdly, it lets you know where the other person stands, as I described above, in relation to you. It is somewhat of a physical way to measure things, although it is unpleasant, and often leaves people uneasy. Again, I see this as a very E8 thing, because it is very instinctual, and very much just getting down to the core of who you are as a person and how you relate to me. In some ways, it doesn't matter what you say or what the subject matter is, it is testing you, always, to see where you stand on things. Testing you, and testing the situation, to understand the power dynamics that are at play.
    Am I wrong to interpret all of this as what you, a representative of LSE, tend toward?

    You're talking about me whether you realize it or not; no, we've not had much interaction along these lines thus far, but it applies to me very much.
    Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.

  36. #76

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So is it a problem with Ni that makes the LSE need to ask questions, and get information like NOW? It seems like one Polar (or whatever they are called) has the potential to hurt the other's Polar (for the EII the Se). Maybe this teaches us to be delicate with our dual's Polar and we can also kind of get over our own issues with Polar? By the LSE learning to trust the EII without pushing too much, and the EII learning to get over some Se issues by providing more information than they would normally, but in a safe environment, maybe they can work on their Polar issues. . . uuhhh

    (I don't know enough about socionics to make any assumptions here. I only kind of know about the first two functions of some types and am not sure how Polars work really. . .)
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

  37. #77
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    "Come with me if you want to live"
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,907
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minde View Post
    Yes, you seem to think I'm more upset than I actually am. Yes, thinking about being forced to do things against my will got me a little internally riled. But a quick step back, a recognition to myself of what was happening in me, and I regained stability.

    Are you saying that everything you described up there, about what you like and prefer in terms of getting information out of people, is unhealthy behavior?
    No, not everything.

    I'm not talking about when you specifically said, "this is unhealthy." I mean things like this:

    Depends on how important the matter is. The more important, the more pressure will be applied. Pressure forces people to tell the truth, to lie (and thus compromise themselves), or to make you know that the person really isn't going to back down (read some E8 descriptions...).

    If it is a minor detail and clearly none of my business, then so be it. But personally I always remember who doesn't want to tell me what. People hide things for a reason, whether it is real significance, fear, or whatever, there's something telling about what people hide.
    There are some healthy and unhealthy aspects of it. The healthy person is more persistent when there really is an issue, and will get to the bottom of things (thus more consideration). The unhealthy person will not be able to distinguish much between what is a "minor detail and clearly none of my business", and important things, and just be pressuring everything, as a norm.

    I don't go around seeing who I can pressure info out of for fun, nor would I associate "applying pressure" with "healthy LSE", in the general sense. But I don't think that a health LSE never applies any pressure at all. To say things in socionics terms, is a strong, but unvalued function.

    and
    Heh heh heh... part of the problem is that it has to do with insecurity about information - we want IT ALL. Everything.

    Secondly, it can be somewhat enjoyable to force stuff out of people.

    Thirdly, it lets you know where the other person stands, as I described above, in relation to you. It is somewhat of a physical way to measure things, although it is unpleasant, and often leaves people uneasy. Again, I see this as a very E8 thing, because it is very instinctual, and very much just getting down to the core of who you are as a person and how you relate to me. In some ways, it doesn't matter what you say or what the subject matter is, it is testing you, always, to see where you stand on things. Testing you, and testing the situation, to understand the power dynamics that are at play.
    Am I wrong to interpret all of this as what you, a representative of LSE, tend toward?
    [/quote]
    Problem and insecurity should be noted. Yes, I have problems with getting information out of people, especially if I am insecure. That fits under the unhealthy category.

    The comment about having fun forcing out of people is a separate matter, it is more lighthearted in terms of just seeing what people are willing to divulge. As I said, I don't go around pressuring people to see what I can get out of them for fun, that is not part of my everyday activity of things I do to enjoy myself.

    The third part, yes. The "testing" aspect is a reality, whether it is a pleasant one or not. That was being extremely direct and not sugarcoating anything, in how I worded things. Everything about someone reveals information, and I find it hard to use another word than testing people. Power dyanamics refers to being attune to what is actually going on in the situation, not necessarily who has more power than the other person. But what is going on, and why.

    I don't think LSE's are necessarily thinking about this all the time, but I'd be surprised if they would say they are not cognizant of it, totally blind to it. It is very related, yes. It has to do with being aware of what is affecting the situation.

    As esper was saying, an unhealthy LSE is hyper or over sensitive to this. He is thinking everything a threat, pressures when it is unnecessary (or more so, pressure when the net effect is actually negative, and not even resulting in anything good, at all). The healthy LSE knows when to use force and persistence appropriately. I do believe the healthy LSE is aware of power dynamics and who is influencing what - it is a matter of realizing what is really going on in a situation, all the concrete, realistic factors.

    You're talking about me whether you realize it or not; no, we've not had much interaction along these lines thus far, but it applies to me very much.
    For clarity, that was in specific reference to the negative qualities that esper was describing. I have those negative qualities too, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was a common negative quality of LSEs, especially if they are in an unhealthy moment or state.
    Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
    If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.

    ~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
    ~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.

  38. #78
    Lobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    TIM
    EII 6w5
    Posts
    2,080
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    There is a two-fold answer to that - one, personally, I don't think anything is ultimately so significant that cannot be mentioned. I am not afraid of anything, and I've heard a ton of shit, and I've interrogated a ton of shit out of people, and I've found answers to questions that you probably aren't suppose to find, so to me "too messed up to talk about" just doesn't exist. That comes across as something you are unable to deal with, or an excuse to not talk about something or face a situation, which I have always and will always adamantly oppose. Two, hmm, I forgot, but I'll get around to it. I think it is related to the nature that being able to talk about something allows you to overcome it.
    I think that you might have certain types of questions in mind by writing this.


    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Oh wait, I remember - how much you can disclose stuff to someone is directly related to how much you trust them, sort of. You can always filter what you disclose. But how much of those "hard things" you talk to someone, or let them know, is directly proportional to your level of involvement, significance, and so on - in the pragmatic terms. (and again, based on my preferences I suppose).

    So the more you don't talk about things or don't want to address issues, I sort of see that as the level of closeness we have.

    --- Ideally, with my closest person or SO, I'd want to be able to talk about everything. I would not enjoy holding back, or, being told that things aren't to be spoken of (generally).
    In terms of level of "closeness," I see disclosing information about other people to be irrelevant. There is a lack of patience in wanting things done at the time you want, rather than when someone feels safe or prepared to do so. You are right that you should be able to talk about everything to someone you are close to, but there are exceptions (at least to me) that have absolutely nothing to do with how much care or love a person that you choose not to talk about. For example, I personally would never talk about something a friend told me not to tell anyone about, which only concerns him/herself.

    When I ask someone about something, and they don't want to talk about it, I simply say that "if you want you can tell me when you are ready, because I would really like to know." Or if it's something that they don't want to talk about ever, so long as it's something that doesn't affect me, then I have to respect that. LSEs and ESEs don't work that way, and I do think they have to be "trained" to be patient and actually trust. This is how it could workout at the beginning level:
    1) "Do you trust me?" -> "Yes"
    2) "I'm going somewhere today and I will be back in (time frame), and I won't tell you what I did until I get back" -> "..."
    3) When you get back, you say what it was.
    4) Increase the time frame and go back to (1).

    This might drive them a little crazy, pay no mind to the complaining. It's for their own good. Another thing is to always, always, "grill back." I don't believe in vengeance, but you sometimes have to treat people as they treat you so they can realize what they are doing if it's going too far. Also, a good thing would be to never disclose things that are uncomfortable for you to talk about, unless they disclose something as well, and THEY have to do it first. I'm serious in that there has to be some sort of training involved, and things that you just have to impose in order for things to work out. The paranoia things has to be worked out in some way or another.

  39. #79
    Minde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amongst the stars
    TIM
    EII/INFj E9w1sp
    Posts
    4,451
    Mentioned
    148 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    No, not everything.


    There are some healthy and unhealthy aspects of it. The healthy person is more persistent when there really is an issue, and will get to the bottom of things (thus more consideration). The unhealthy person will not be able to distinguish much between what is a "minor detail and clearly none of my business", and important things, and just be pressuring everything, as a norm.

    I don't go around seeing who I can pressure info out of for fun, nor would I associate "applying pressure" with "healthy LSE", in the general sense. But I don't think that a health LSE never applies any pressure at all. To say things in socionics terms, is a strong, but unvalued function.

    Problem and insecurity should be noted. Yes, I have problems with getting information out of people, especially if I am insecure. That fits under the unhealthy category.

    The comment about having fun forcing out of people is a separate matter, it is more lighthearted in terms of just seeing what people are willing to divulge. As I said, I don't go around pressuring people to see what I can get out of them for fun, that is not part of my everyday activity of things I do to enjoy myself.

    The third part, yes. The "testing" aspect is a reality, whether it is a pleasant one or not. That was being extremely direct and not sugarcoating anything, in how I worded things. Everything about someone reveals information, and I find it hard to use another word than testing people. Power dyanamics refers to being attune to what is actually going on in the situation, not necessarily who has more power than the other person. But what is going on, and why.

    I don't think LSE's are necessarily thinking about this all the time, but I'd be surprised if they would say they are not cognizant of it, totally blind to it. It is very related, yes. It has to do with being aware of what is affecting the situation.

    As esper was saying, an unhealthy LSE is hyper or over sensitive to this. He is thinking everything a threat, pressures when it is unnecessary (or more so, pressure when the net effect is actually negative, and not even resulting in anything good, at all). The healthy LSE knows when to use force and persistence appropriately. I do believe the healthy LSE is aware of power dynamics and who is influencing what - it is a matter of realizing what is really going on in a situation, all the concrete, realistic factors.
    But Se is supposed to be an unconscious function. Which means you shouldn't be thinking consciously about it, right?

    Also I don't think you answered two of my questions. The first was - What if the person you're asking questions of just doesn't want to talk about it? The second was - What "negative behaviors" were you seeing in me, the ones that will push away my dual?

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    For clarity, that was in specific reference to the negative qualities that esper was describing. I have those negative qualities too, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was a common negative quality of LSEs, especially if they are in an unhealthy moment or state.
    I wonder what idolatrie would say about that... From what I can tell, she doesn't seem to have many of these "normal" traits. I could be wrong, though, of course.
    Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.

  40. #80

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    854
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idolatrie View Post
    First off, totally agree with what SubT described for ESTj-Si. That's so bang on it's creepy.



    Yeah, I use sort-of jokes to deflect and try to draw attention away from something I don't really want to talk about. Or I don't think the other person is interested in. But if they persist, I'll usually take it seriously if I see they are sincere and not just, you know, making small talk. If I want space and really don't want to talk abotu something, I'll probably change the subject quite overtly. If I don't try to move things on obviously, then I'm probably open to discussing that topic more. I don't know. I mean, if I think someone is being sincere, I do think I'd usually be sincere back and take their questions in that spirit. But if I feel I'm being interrogated, I'll start to wonder why and try to suss out the other person's motivations. Other people are tricky and confusing to LSEs too!



    Umm...it's really hard to comment since I don't know the whole situation there. But I think it is unlikely an LSE would try to 'test' someone emotionally. I mean, that would be one of the worst things to do to me, so why would I do it to others? If someone keeps on bothering you to tell them something you can't, and you've made that clear to them, then they're being a dickhead. Irregardless of whatever type they are. It does seem like a sort of weird thing to do too - if someone told me they cannot answer my question because of a promise they made to someone else, I'd just accept that and leave it. I don't like the idea of um...stepping on anyone else's relationships and that seems like I'd be presuming my friendship superseeds the other one. (Which is something I wouldn't assume.)

    Why don't you ask them what makes them think it is ok to keep on badgering you with the same question? If they have no idea that they're doing it, then it would let them know they are. And if they do know, then that should be a pretty clear message to stop doing it anymore. Again, I feel I have to plaster a caveat all over this that I don't have a clue as to what situation you're describing here, so I may be way off base.

    In terms of how to interact with LSE-Si in general, I completely agree with what UDP described. Um, going off what SubT added in, I totally love it when people pick up on my bizarre little references I throw in to conversation randomly. But I'd hardly expect people to get them usually. It's just nice when it does happen. It is really...um, comforting to find someone who 'gets' me and all my bredth of interests like that.

    Time is a huge factor in convincing me someone is a good friend and not going to betray me. Time in the sense that it sets up a pattern of behaviour I have experienced and can trust will continue.

    Not sure if I've addressed what you're asking. Those are some broad questions! Let me know if I can clarify something, because I'm not sure I'm on the right track here...
    You are totally on the right track here! Thanks
    EII 4w5

    so/sx (?)

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •