PoLR - big zero or stagnant emphasis

[mu4]

There is no function you don't use or can't use, but your ego function usually preempts your super-ego functions, this is especially true during adolescence and early adulthood when one is focused on creating one's identity.

The third function is a bold function, when the first 2 don't work, you start using the third one and often quite fluently. I'm not sure if the third function is a true sore spot, it's more of a inconsistent, unreliable spot.

This is one of the reasons the EP types can be good in emergencies, they all have Ne or Se in the 1st or 3rd functions. Both of these functions are creative and mobile, very good for quick thinking and problem solving.

[Simon Ssmall]

Most descriptions of POLR seem to treat it as an instant pain button, which would lead me to expect some rather ridiculous interactions.

Example:
LSE- Hi! Let's be productive!
SEI- OH MY GOD PLEASE DON'T HURT ME!!!


I'm thinking it might be better to imagine POLR as totally unresponsive rather than actively painful. Individuals would then tend to be confused or mildly irritated by their POLR, or else miss it entirely, rather than finding it threatening or terrifying. The above caricatured example would then be replaced by the below caricatured example:

Example:
LSE- Hi! Let's be productive!
SEI- Productive? You mean like fingerpainting?

This seems to make more sense in general - I can't really imagine an XIE threatened by Si, an XLE terrified by Fi, or an XLI who jumps out the nearest window at the first sign of Fe. Rather, each type just seems totally oblivious to POLR information, and will rarely show any reaction to it, positive or negative.

Reasonable? Evidential? Laughable? Opinions, please.

That is not how SEI would respond. SEI are kind people and willing to please others so they would say yes! They would use their ID functions because is what people coming from type SEI do.

[aestrivex]

Most descriptions of POLR seem to treat it as an instant pain button, which would lead me to expect some rather ridiculous interactions.

Example:
LSE- Hi! Let's be productive!
SEI- OH MY GOD PLEASE DON'T HURT ME!!!


I'm thinking it might be better to imagine POLR as totally unresponsive rather than actively painful. Individuals would then tend to be confused or mildly irritated by their POLR, or else miss it entirely, rather than finding it threatening or terrifying. The above caricatured example would then be replaced by the below caricatured example:

Example:
LSE- Hi! Let's be productive!
SEI- Productive? You mean like fingerpainting?

This seems to make more sense in general - I can't really imagine an XIE threatened by Si, an XLE terrified by Fi, or an XLI who jumps out the nearest window at the first sign of Fe. Rather, each type just seems totally oblivious to POLR information, and will rarely show any reaction to it, positive or negative.

Reasonable? Evidential? Laughable? Opinions, please.

yes. mediated by quadra values, this is exactly how i conceptualize the vulnerable function.




what does mediated by quadra values mean. it means that sometimes an attack on the "blind spot" is more threatening than at other times, largely related to the degree of social responsibility associated with that person's values. to some extent everyone can feel "bad" about realizing that someone else is concerned with this thing that you weren't aware of or cared about, but it hits different types differently.

think about it in the obviously simplistic context of:

LIE: can you get those status reports for me
ESI/EII: oh, right, i forgot about those

LIE: can you get those status reports for me
SEI: oh, ok (unspoken: why can't we all just relax? == i didn't realize that i was supposed to have done this == feel like not living up to responsibilities)


compared to

ESE: come have fun with us
ILI: no, i'm busy (and doesn't aware of or care about spoiling a party)

[mirrorsoul]

Hmm...

That's an interesting concept. Are there other functions that could be a sore spot, if indeed the PoLR was a blind spot? I always thought that the Ignoring function was supposed to be the blind spot. Because you ignored it.

[Airman]

There is no function you don't use or can't use, but your ego function usually preempts your super-ego functions, this is especially true during adolescence and early adulthood when one is focused on creating one's identity.

The third function is a bold function, when the first 2 don't work, you start using the third one and often quite fluently. I'm not sure if the third function is a true sore spot, it's more of a inconsistent, unreliable spot.

This is one of the reasons the EP types can be good in emergencies, they all have Ne or Se in the 1st or 3rd functions. Both of these functions are creative and mobile, very good for quick thinking and problem solving.

Amen

[Exodus]

Most descriptions of POLR seem to treat it as an instant pain button, which would lead me to expect some rather ridiculous interactions.
...
Reasonable? Evidential? Laughable? Opinions, please.

Sometimes it is just a blind spot, but there is definitely a painful aspect to the PoLR. Although you've made it sound silly, sometimes people have spontaneous bad reactions to PoLR (or Role) information and get super-pissed off. It depends on the context; usually people learn to live with it. I would guess it's more obvious with little kids.

Very simply: Your POLR (4th function) is typically a blindspot, until someone else points it out and it hurts bigtime, where your Role function (3rd) is typically a sorespot, something that hurts more often because you're aware of it, but because you're aware of it, hurts less when other people point it out.

Yeah, but it's not even necessarily the aspect of your personality (weakness). It's the actual processing of the information which is annoying and confusing.

[Beautiful sky]

It's a blindspot until it's a sorespot.

Not all information in the PoLR is bad, only information that indicates failure or negative consequences. You may not even get fatigued in this area easily. Different types handle this area differently.

Like I know some very good EIE chefs and some very eccentric ones who have very peculiar tastes.

In fact, I type some of the best chefs in the world are EIE and they're neurotic about the cleanliness, quality, creativity of food to a extent that they have turned it into a perfected craft. The world of haute cusine is full of betas.

Also Si is very personal like all the introverted functions, so it's very possible one EIE will love the nasty bits, offal and focus on it and another will hate it and won't touch anything except for what they find acceptable.

This is just one example but the PoLR Function is a evaluatory function so people make very strong judgements here. However, the judgments can be go one or two directions. It's a area of fear, so it triggers a fight or flight response and many environmental and conditioned factors will affect it.

I am personally avoidant with meeting people, but I know a SLE who is not at all avoidant with getting to know people yet does not really get close to anyone.

Also how people approach your PoLR with id functions is totally different then someone who has your PoLR as a ego function, ultimately this is more important then any sort purely positive or negative.

I know a EIE who is very insistant on me meeting with them and hanging out, and guilts me when I don't do it.

I know a ESE who doesn't do this. This difference in action make a huge difference, which makes me avoid one and not the other.

I know a EII, who tells me that I suck at relationships because I'm too critical and combative in discussions. (They still want a relationship with me, but they make it sound like I need to change for them)

I know a SEI who tells me that even if I am too critical and combative, they still like me and want to be my friend and it doesn't really matter if I change or not. This makes a huge difference.

Because they are trying to get their point across and can't sense if the person has picked up on their point or not so they get more "aggressive" with their approach only to have created an adverse situation for themselves. Through reasoning/reasoned discussions, they become less so aggressive.

[Marietta]

[quote=Nowisthetime;755809]

.
Have you read this?
http://en.socionics.ru/index.php?opt...251&Itemid=139

"This point aches for the reason that it can put only superhigh goals and suffer feeling the discrepancy between itself and its goals."

this description focuses on overdoing it without being elastic. it seems a quite different idea than being oblivious to sth. in various threads opposite behaviours are seen as sign of PoLR. sure it can be explained by inability to be elastic, but when you see sb with a tendency to overdoing sth a lot and another person neglecting it, it's hard to type them both as the same type.

what would a general tendency to neglect vs overdo depend on? if you overdo sth to the extent of no elasticity, you would prolly consider it somehow important (yet painful), right? PoLR is an ego function so theoretically it shouldn't be a blind unconscious spot. a blind weak spot could be HA I think.

is there any consensus at all?

[krieger]

here's another thing i find "strange" about the way PoLRs are interpreted in socionics.

an ESTp's PoLR is usually described as a kind of "bad-ass" disregard for Fi that makes the person fearless toward ethics. the person behaves without ethical restraint and isn't held back by these except when another person reprimands them on an ex-post basis.

an INTj's PoLR is NOT usually described analogously. if it was, people would be describing INTjs as people with a kind of fearless disregard for Se, when usually they instead describe it as cowardice.

and this is how a person like me gets mistaken for an ISTj. all the arguments they think point to Se strength in me are actually arguments for the Se PoLR if they interpreted PoLRs consistently.

[Cat King Cole]

http://socionist.blogspot.com/2007/0...ough-weak.html

The other thing about the PoLR is that you find it uncomfortable to try and figure it out. It's a 1D function that has to approach complex information. People don't like their PoLR to be overtaxed because they'd much rather think about other things. PoLR hits are like "Why are you forcing me to think about this crap?!"

EDIT

I always explain your certainty to myself as being Ti dominance, you're a very Ti sort of person. You're no more Se than me or Richard Dawkins.

So, I'm curious, how can your certainty and logical pressure be considered "Se PoLR"? I can't quite model it in my head as being a badass disregard for Se, except perhaps for just sidestepping any issues of displays of force or coercion.

[krieger]

So, I'm curious, how can your certainty and logical pressure be considered "Se PoLR"? I can't quite model it in my head as being a badass disregard for Se, except perhaps for just sidestepping any issues of displays of force or coercion.

it is that for reasons of what it doesn't do more so for what it does. it states the case for a claim with theoretical backing without regard to how people's practical sense will receive it.

[Cat King Cole]

Gotcha.

In objective terms that's just "restricting" the relevance of your PoLR. This gets away from the PoLR being framed as "badassery" or "crippling weakness".

'Se/"practical sense" is irrelevant--here's my theoretically supported and logically coherent TiNe system.'

EDIT

And precisely for the reason you keep referring back to all of these disembodied abstracts that make my head spin is why I think Se creative is ridiculous for you.

[1981slater]

ROLE: "This is somewhat useful. Wow, I suck at this!"
POLR: (After someone brings it into attention) "You cannot be serious, YOU-CANNOT-BE SERIOUS"

[1981slater]

1st: "If you can't see this, you are doomed"
2nd: "My job"
3rd: "This is somewhat useful. Wow, I suck at this!"
4th: (After someone brings it into attention) "You cannot be serious, YOU-CANNOT-BE SERIOUS"
5th: "Can't somebody else do it?"
6th: "This is fucking awesome. Let me try"
7th: "This is weeeeird"
8th: "This shit has to be dealt with ASAP"

[Ave]

Right. Supervision is directed towards base function, not PoLR.

i like that. the insistence on the idea that supervision derives from a "PoLR" is actually a bias in socionics. the view that it is actually the supervisor's Creating function that supervises the Base function is equally valid under an instrumentalist interpretation of the intertype relations.

i like how this gets rid of the idea that sticking to the fundamental convictions of the Base function is somehow a "safe" way to behave. there are no safe havens!

Well really what you have going on with supervision is the supervisee feeling demeaned by the supervisor's polr, but the supervisor, on the other hand is there to give his dis/aprroval to the supervisee based on how well the supervisee uses the supervisor's control/7th function.


From http://socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/index.html

7. The Control Function: it is easier for an individual to criticize others for mistakes relevant to this function, to control other people's activities, than to demonstrate his/her own initiative.

[717495]

PoLR is both. When there is no around me, then it doesn't usually get stirred up naturally, its a blind spot that I could care less about. When is around me, then I get nervous and feel vulnerable. It feels like trouble. Then you have memories and associations of -PoLR which is in between, like coming up with an idea and reliving how it may be played out, the negative feelings of the past. But it really comes down to knowing the information element as it comes about in real life, and not the oversimplified stereotype of it. If you have naturally experienced it then you don't have to ponder what PoLR is.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

1st: "If you can't see this, you are doomed"
2nd: "My job"
3rd: "This is somewhat useful. Wow, I suck at this!"
4th: (After someone brings it into attention) "You cannot be serious, YOU-CANNOT-BE SERIOUS"
5th: "Can't somebody else do it?"
6th: "This is fucking awesome. Let me try"
7th: "This is weeeeird"
8th: "This shit has to be dealt with ASAP"

Haha. Don't know about the 8th function, though.

[Ave]

Right. Supervision is directed towards base function, not PoLR.

genius.. this makes total sense in my day-to-day interation w/ an ese.. i observe her & she seems to over-do her Fe alot. i think each intertype is a mix of different factors though.

You understand jack shit about the role of a supervisor towards their supervisee, your post is just mental masturbation, at best. What I wrote is practical.

[strangeling]

I don't personally know what to think about socionics at the moment, but there seems to be potential for integrating this idea into psychology for the purposes of helping people understand where problems are coming from. Without talking about the meanings behind the functions and assuming the I/E as implicit in their understanding, the reflection of the superego does act against the ego; this can become a blind spot that erupts into a sore spot because it opposes the actions, but more importantly, the motivations of the ego.

A proper context for this idea is to imagine how opposition of the ego through the superego stimulus of the environment leads to unconscious processing/development of the superid; because the superid represents the opposite introverted/extroverted aspect of the superego, it allows what becomes a sore spot to be corrected. The implicit motivation to correct it is why I suppose it is considered to originate from the unconscious. But if this seems like a bad idea, please share how so that we all may benefit.

[Hitta]

Augustibitchfart defined POLR as a supposed to be the sore spot. Id functions are the blind spot. Though I'd argue that saying that calling the ID is a blind spot is sort of a misnomer. It's more like the natural spot. It's like what the person naturally does without conscious connection. If the Ego functions purpose is to look at boxes focus on boxes, and analyze boxes... it's kind of like the ID functions are the space around the boxes .. the anti space... the natural root perspective beyond conscious interpretation.

Superego is conscious and devalued.... indicating the person is actively aware and is sort of antithetical to it.. The ID is unconscious and devalued meaning that it is sort of what rides underneath a person's fixation, the anti fixation universalized function that sort of defines the root perspective.

[strangeling]

@Hitta

Wouldn't the awareness of the superego in the ego imply an appreciation of the superid? Otherwise, how is the ego supposed to reconciliate that it creates problems in the superego?
When you say that the ID is the blind spot, how does it relate to the ego (and not relate to the ego) for you to know this? It seems an implicit theoretical given that the ego depends and feeds on the ID, so suggesting it is a blind spot, seems hard to currently understand without answers to these questions.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

1st: "If you can't see this, you are doomed"
2nd: "My job"
3rd: "This is somewhat useful. Wow, I suck at this!"
4th: (After someone brings it into attention) "You cannot be serious, YOU-CANNOT-BE SERIOUS"
5th: "Can't somebody else do it?"
6th: "This is fucking awesome. Let me try"
7th: "This is weeeeird"
8th: "This shit has to be dealt with ASAP"

I like this soooo much. 100% true in my experience.

[Brilliand]

1st: "If you can't see this, you are doomed"
2nd: "My job"
3rd: "This is somewhat useful. Wow, I suck at this!"
4th: (After someone brings it into attention) "You cannot be serious, YOU-CANNOT-BE SERIOUS"
5th: "Can't somebody else do it?"
6th: "This is fucking awesome. Let me try"
7th: "This is weeeeird"
8th: "This shit has to be dealt with ASAP"

I'm a bit concerned that functions 1 and 2 don't seem complementary to functions 5 and 6, respectively. Maybe... change function 2 to "Worth doing"?

[Hitta]

@Hitta

Wouldn't the awareness of the superego in the ego imply an appreciation of the superid? Otherwise, how is the ego supposed to reconciliate that it creates problems in the superego?
When you say that the ID is the blind spot, how does it relate to the ego (and not relate to the ego) for you to know this? It seems an implicit theoretical given that the ego depends and feeds on the ID, so suggesting it is a blind spot, seems hard to currently understand without answers to these questions.

Yes, the Super Id is actually a blind spot as well, it's just valued. Freud's model of the structure of the psyche sort of works when looking at Model A. The top outer layer of the iceberg represents the Ego. The Bottom Outer Layer sort of represents the Id. The super ego and the super id are sort of represented by the internal components of the iceberg(the super ego being the top inner component, and the super id being the bottom inner component).

The way that I've always broken down functions has always been related to Model B and the 16 component system so I'll elaborate using that.

Take the ESFj, which uses the (-Fe/+Fi) function in model B and the Fe function in model A. (-Fe/+Fi) is usually classified in most socionics descriptors as the emotions of universalism. ESFjs have a propensity to treat to try to treat everyone as equals and try to remain neutral. This is why they have a very group think emotional base which revolves around treating everyone as an equal part of the equation. The Id correlated function would be (+Fe/-Fi) or Fi in model A. So the ESFj sort of naturally sees uneven biased emotions as the main underlying sort of state(not quite sure how to word this better, hopefully you have a grasp of what I'm trying to state). The -Fe/+Fi(Fe) tries to fixate in on balancing things.... it tries to pull neutrality from an uneven perspectives and tries to take biased emotions and blend them into a larger neutral picture.

The weak functions(the super ego and the super id) inbetween, as motivators. The super id function (-Ti/+Te) / Ti( function in model A),is usually seen in INTjs and ENTps as being the analytical function. It endlessly breaks things down, attempting to approach levels of purity, looking at things from an endless amount of perspectives to attempt to reach some logic of ad infinitum. So in terms of ESFjs, this is an unconscious motivator, as the need to break things down on a unconscious level, causes the ESFj to never be quite satisfied with the level of neutrality, as unconsciously they are continually breaking down things...... to reach a purified base is their underlying valued goal. The -Te/+Ti function or (Te) in model A sort of represents classification logic, or logic of critique. On a conscious level the ESFj is trying to escape this, it's trying to eliminate bias.... it wants to treat everyone universally and has a hard time dealing with prejudice.... and that's sort of what POLR is... the point that is sort of in the way of reaching the primary goal.

[strangeling]

The weak functions(the super ego and the super id) inbetween, as motivators. The super id function (-Ti/+Te) / Ti( function in model A),is usually seen in INTjs and ENTps as being the analytical function. It endlessly breaks things down, attempting to approach levels of purity, looking at things from an endless amount of perspectives to attempt to reach some logic of ad infinitum. So in terms of ESFjs, this is an unconscious motivator, as the need to break things down on a unconscious level, causes the ESFj to never be quite satisfied with the level of neutrality, as unconsciously they are continually breaking down things...... to reach a purified base is their underlying valued goal. The -Te/+Ti function or (Te) in model A sort of represents classification logic, or logic of critique. On a conscious level the ESFj is trying to escape this, it's trying to eliminate bias.... it wants to treat everyone universally and has a hard time dealing with prejudice.... and that's sort of what POLR is... the point that is sort of in the way of reaching the primary goal.

Thanks. That at least helps to put the idea of duality into some kind of perspective on what it is thought to imply, without making assumptions about it. This seems a little different from cognitive processing in general though, although perhaps it's supposed to be for relations to exist in some form. Do you recommend any good material further elaborating this idea?

[Beautiful sky]

My POLR = Sensory overload, confusion when around a lot of sensory thing/items, panic with regards to choosing certain sensory items like everything from food to clothes.

[717495]

Because I tend to see the unvalued functions as the least used, most unvalued aspects, it's like when we grow up we subconsciously chose not to use those functions, there is no need because we see no conscious worth, thus they grow more undeveloped by comparison as the years go on and as we fully grow into our sociotype. Then the most unused out of all of these would be the PoLR, because it's the most unvalued and blind temperament focus. Same temperament types like Fi vs Ti can show some on-the-surface similarity to one another, yet because the PoLR shows no real similarity we aren't really subconsciously located to that form of information like we are the dual-function.

On the other hand with the ignoring function, it's closer but not quite sore. The name extinguishment fits the best because it conflicts directly with the dominant function. ie. Fe on Fi, a full-on ego issue. It's more of an annoyance and diminishing of one's personal worth, ime, and so we have more personal experience with it. There is no one sore-spot function as far as I can tell, but I may be a bit biased about this because I've been around more Fe types than Se types. I've had some Se-ers think I'm dumb and get on my case, and feel a one-way internal conflict, but this is if they bring Se problems to attention. I can enjoy them much better if they're nice and mature and don't stir up problems, which plenty of Se types are.

[Trevor]

dunno how it is for the other PoLR functions..but i think INXj types would end up killing someone and/or getting killed if they were to commit themselves to using their PoLR function. the nature stops this from happening by making PoLR usage veeery uncomfortable and thus hard to sustain. Think of running with your eyes closed and how uncomfortable that is.

(according to some distinguished socionists: when it comes to PoLR, it's all or nothing. In INXj case: the all would lead to killing someone andor getting killed, while nothing is what nature forces you to do by making all comparatively uncomfortable).

[Korpsy Knievel]

(according to some distinguished socionists: when it comes to PoLR, it's all or nothing. In INXj case: the all would lead to killing someone andor getting killed, while nothing is what nature forces you to do by making all comparatively uncomfortable).

This calls to mind a certain LII who related a story about just barely keeping himself under control when his mother's good name was disparaged by a vulgar adolescent. Said LII has never been in a fight in his life, though he claims that, had he allowed his dorky rage full rein, he'd have murdered that nasty teen on the spot with his software engineer's hands.

[mu4]

For a while it was my blind spot, until it became my sore spot, now it's my numb spot.

[marooned]

I like what has been said before that what's sore is actually the HA. The PoLR hit is registered through the HA and one thinks they weren't being good enough at the valued IME that is their HA, so they try to defend the HA and then look like even more of an idiot while they're at it. Of course it can also be a sore spot because one just didn't see it and they can only glance at its shadow through the HA, or at the consequences of having not seen it (having been blind), all the while never being able to fix this "flaw." Perhaps both involve fixation on what is "lacking" (not good enough at HA, having a fatal flaw one can never overcome, etc.). The less insecure one becomes and more centered on their strengths the less they would come to care and could finally accept that they don't care about the PoLR anyway and go back to ignoring it as it was meant to be. Of course certain other people will not like this, but when one isn't insecure they would be less bothered by this and by the criticisms that come with it. Perhaps this below is that sort of transition, where the numb state is just the "I don't care anymore, I am who I am" place.

For a while it was my blind spot, until it became my sore spot, now it's my numb spot.

I would think that the role fct and DS fct can also create sore points arising out of feelings of inadequacy.

[Park]

dunno how it is for the other PoLR functions..but i think INXj types would end up killing someone and/or getting killed if they were to commit themselves to using their PoLR function. the nature stops this from happening by making PoLR usage veeery uncomfortable and thus hard to sustain. Think of running with your eyes closed and how uncomfortable that is.

(according to some distinguished socionists: when it comes to PoLR, it's all or nothing. In INXj case: the all would lead to killing someone andor getting killed, while nothing is what nature forces you to do by making all comparatively uncomfortable).

Fe-PoLR:

[Erk]

More like badassery.

[krieger]

i sort of expected to see the scene in which he blows up the leader thug with the loaded bazooka he just happened to have lying around in a 9m^3 room, sending mr. thug flying thru the wall and not dying himself while doing it.