Seeking your Role

[UDP]

I wonder if other people can relate to this


It seems that what I really seek most is my role function: all be it . Do you relate to that -- consciously or subconsciously seeking your role? Or is that assessment more related to my function of than the "Role" catagory itself.

[Joy]

Perhaps you value Fe and Fi?

[UDP]

Hmm, perhaps I put it wrong.


I seek Fi because I want to know how to act in an Fe atmosphere. I value Fi yes of course, but Fe is definitely my dual seeking.

I'm curious about a relationship between the two: Role and Dual seeking.

Role Function
weak
accepting

Your role function never wants to stand out. You always try to go with the normal social behavior in this function, because you are unsure of it. You do not like criticism in this function therefore you won't give it.



Suggestive Function
weak
accepting

Your suggestive function has difficulty working on it's own. You take criticism well in this function, as it is seen as concern. This function causes your dependency and childishness, as you need help with it but do nothing to ask for it. If you do not recieve help, you feel like an abandoned child (why is nobody helping me?)

[Joy]

Your dual seeking is a little baby that can't do anything for itself and you know it, and your role tries to make up for it (and can't really do a good job of it overall).

Your hidden agenda likes to think it's strong (even though it's not), and you don't think your PoLR should have to be strong as a result.

[UDP]

(In other words, I am in the process of making some sort of connection)


UDP "Role and D.Seeking (suggestive) are the inverted forms of one function... so what does that mean?"


For an LII, it basically seeks help in terms of ethics or F
For an ILI, it basically seeks help in terms of sensing or S
For an ESE, it basically seeks help in terms of thinking or T
For an SEE, it basically seeks help in terms of intuition or I

LII looks for its role, which is an introverted function, in the form of F
ILI looks for its role, which is an introverted function, in the form of S
ESE looks for its role, which is an extroverted function, in the form of T
SEE looks for its role, which is an extroverted function, in the form of I

Those functions are in opposite orientation because they must be receptive to the dual...

LII looks to accept role, which coincides with and welcomes from dual
ILI looks to accept role, which coincides with and welcomes from dual
ESE looks to accept role, which coincides with and welcomes from dual
SEE looks to accept role, which coincides with and welcomes from dual




Now, that was all just functional algebra I guess. It is theoretical and I just came up with it now.

Does that seem to make sense to you? Does that relate to your situation?

Or would you change the words I used in between the functions, etc?

[Joy]

As far as the hidden agenda and PoLR, here's an oversimplified example:

The INxj thinks, "I shouldn't have to worry about being strong because I am healthy." The ENxj thinks, "I shouldn't have to worry about being healthy because I am strong."

[UDP]

Your dual seeking is a little baby that can't do anything for itself and you know it, and your role tries to make up for it (and can't really do a good job of it overall).

Your hidden agenda likes to think it's strong (even though it's not), and you don't think your PoLR should have to be strong as a result.

I realize that is true for me. I've actually tired to work on it, but it is beyond me it seems. It appears to be a blindspot of sorts.....

which makes me wonder about trying to find "my role" (of ) in regard to that.

[Joy]

This is one of those "everyone" statements that we thought we may be able to use to give type clues about.... but doesn't everyone value building and maintaining close relationships?

[UDP]

As far as the hidden agenda and PoLR, here's an oversimplified example:

The INxj thinks, "I shouldn't have to worry about being strong because I am healthy." The ENxj thinks, "I shouldn't have to worry about being healthy because I am strong."

Hmm, well I didn't really ask about Polr or HA.

And as for "I shouldn't have to worry about being strong" -- I totally disagree, speaking for myself. I cannot depend on anyone to be strong for me, I couldn't bear that anyways.
And an INFj I know is very concerned about being strong, in particular, her own physical strength. She looks delicate and such, and can be submissive, but she does not thing she 'shouldn't have to worry about strength at all'.

[Joy]

Yeah, INTjs don't want someone to be strong for them (they don't see why anyone should need to be "strong" like that), they want someone to take care of them.

That INFj could be compensating for her PoLR.

[UDP]

I don't really want anyone to take care of me.

I believe me and the INTj are both reacting to their polr.... and I think I am going to question most people's common interpretation of Se especially in terms of POLR.


"They don't see why anyone should need to be 'strong' like that"
-what does that mean?

I don't understand.