LSE/ESTj Subtypes - discussion and examples

[tereg]

The point that I'm making is simply that, what you were describing (in isolation) of the desire to have a level of disclosure that an LSE seeks (this part being independent of any type, it's just simply something that an LSE seeks) the response from EIIs in this thread is that it makes them uncomfortable. And that (at least to me) implies the question "If an LSE wants to achieve that level of disclosure (that you have described here and I have laid out in multiple blocks of quotes of yours) is it really something that an EII is comfortable receiving/experiencing/should receive/should experience?"

Edit: In other words, what if, hypothetically speaking, another type actually better prefers and is more comfortable with handling the kind of information that you're seeking to gain? Or conversely, what if, hypothetically speaking, the kind of information that an EII wants to divulge is different than what you want to gain from them?

What the rest of the discussion entailed was describing this sense of... what you were describing isn't intended as malicious, but it clearly created an atmosphere of discomfort. It could be just the way that some of us are interpreting it, but breaking it down very clearly bit by bit concisely, this is what I see:


- Describing an LSE point-of-view you started off by explaining that you want the people you interact with to be able to disclose ANY piece of information, even if it's something difficult to explain, you still would like it if they explained it to you, because information should not be withheld and information is not sacred. Depending on how important something is to an LSE, an LSE will "pressure" them to either choose to tell the truth or choose to lie about it. That is what you said.

- EII says "I don't want to feel like I have to give information, I will give information as I choose. I feel uncomfortable with the notion that you will pressure me if you want a piece of information that you consider important."

- You then say (paraphrasing) "Well, you have to remember that there is a dark side to the LSE and actually, I had already considered that before you said it. Pressuring is not the 'norm' for an LSE."

And I'll wrap up with this. Maybe pressuring isn't the "norm" state-of-mind. But I think it's clear in this thread that you have expressed a fundamental frame of mind, a desire to achieve, again, a level of disclosure that does not leave pieces of information hidden. That's what your personal point of view says. How do you get pieces of information that people withhold? Asking them. Prodding them. Pressuring them (time frame can vary). "We want IT ALL."

Again, please note that I'm not describing a "norm" here. I'm describing something more... it's something that you specifically have described that I have laid out that shows a very strong lean towards achieving, at the very least, a desire of yours to reach that level of disclosure. It's even more basic than a "norm". "Norm" would be a generalization over a span of people, whereas what I'm trying to convey is a very specific point of view that you have clearly laid out in this thread -- that being that you'd like it if people were just open with ALL of their thoughts, and how you go about trying to achieve that.