Function summary

[Hugo]

I search for new possibilities and originality. I am creative. I come up with new and unique ideas.


I strive for comfort and good health. I have a good sense of what is beautiful.


I am motivated, decisive and commanding. I rigidly defend my interests.


I think about what will happen in the future, including possible danger. I am imaginative.


I am active in budgeting and everyday chores, including finances and household economy. I am business minded.


I am tactful and diplomatic when dealing with others, which helps me to maintain stable relationships.


I am enthusiastic and positive. I freely and openly show my emotions.


I separate things of primary importance from things of secondary importance. I am analytical.

[XcaliburGirl]

Personally, I like the following definitions:

Potential energy
Transformation of potential energy into the the kinetic
Kinetic energy
Use of the kinetic energy
Time
the Attraction- repulsion
Space
Relationships

Needs some elaboration, though.

I separate things of primary importance from things of secondary importance. I am analytical.

I have trouble wrapping my mind around this, for some reason.

[Hugo]

Personally, I like the following definitions:

Potential energy
Transformation of potential energy into the the kinetic
Kinetic energy
Use of the kinetic energy
Time
the Attraction- repulsion
Space
Relationships

Needs some elaboration, though.

I separate things of primary importance from things of secondary importance. I am analytical.

I have trouble wrapping my mind around this, for some reason.

The definitions you have given are difficult to relate to, but as you said they need elaboration.

With regards to , INTjs "slice" information into two categories: "most important" and "not as important".

[XcaliburGirl]

The definitions you have given are difficult to relate to, but as you said they need elaboration.

I might try to flesh them out (at least according to my current understanding), but I'm not really sure yet.

With regards to , INTjs "slice" information into two categories: "most important" and "not as important".

I guess what I mean is I keep trying to catch myself doing it or remember a specific instance and I can't: I just draw a blank...like my mind won't let me go there. So either I don't do that, or it's so automatic that I don't realize it.

[HarryBottom]

I am enthusiastic and positive. I freely and openly show my emotions.

Neither of those things nessisarily have to go with Fe. Just becuase you are feeling/showing emotion doesn't mean it's positive, and it doens't mean your enthusiastic. You can very well be the complete opposite. Also, the second part is a bit too vauge. I have Fe as a creative function, so maybe thats the reason, but I don't go around advertising and flaunting my emotions to everyone. Infact, I am very secretive with many of the negitive ones. I freely express positive emotions I guess, so you could say that. And Fe people's faces seem to be extremely expressive of their emotions.

[Hugo]

Hi Harry,

What do you think should replace the elaboration?

However, from what you say, it seems my elaboration of is OK since you say you freely express positive emotions. Although I do understand that emotions can be positive or negative.

[HarryBottom]

it seems my elaboration of is OK since you say you freely express positive emotions.

Yah, but it sounds too much like your saying that = Positive emotions. It doesn't. I show positive emotions when I have them, but doesn't most everybody?

[Hugo]

I see your point. Socionics seems like one big blur.

[Hugo]

it seems my elaboration of is OK since you say you freely express positive emotions.

Yah, but it sounds too much like your saying that = Positive emotions. It doesn't. I show positive emotions when I have them, but doesn't most everybody?

Actually, I don't think everybody does show positive emotion, for example ISTps and INTps.

[Angel von Himmel]

it seems my elaboration of is OK since you say you freely express positive emotions.

Yah, but it sounds too much like your saying that = Positive emotions. It doesn't. I show positive emotions when I have them, but doesn't most everybody?

Actually, I don't think everybody does show positive emotion, for example ISTps and INTps.

ESTps and ENTps do not always readily show positive emotions either.

[HarryBottom]

True, thus why I prefaced the word everybody with the word most. There's always an exeption.