Gilligan, didn't you notice how similar his picture was to Ashton's? I doubt they're both LSIs
Gilligan, didn't you notice how similar his picture was to Ashton's? I doubt they're both LSIs
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Re: Side discussion, Te PolR
It's not actually bullshit, they probably compared the marginal productivity of benefits with the marginal revenue given by them and the marginal costs of an added benefit, and adjusted tha latter so that Benefit=MR-(MC+mark-up)Originally Posted by force my hand
This is a good counterpoint; however, I'm skeptical that if your sector was doing well, you would not question your lay-off. It seems overly accepting of the circumstances when we know both factually and intuitively that people in the working environment get screwed over all the time. For example, my company had a profit of $200 million last year, yet they scaled back their benefits package due to cost. I call bullshit on that, and I'm not convinced it's because I have aPolR.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Could be, but he didn't make that explicit, so I couldn't tell. In any case I didn't give an ehtical evalutation of the downsizing, just told how I thought they calculated it.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I didn't get that impression from what he said at all.
Te PoLR?
I'm having difficulty spotting my Te PoLR (assuming I'm IEI)... Has anyone noticed evidence of Te PoLR in my case?
Re: Te PoLR?
Basically Te for IPs is the ability to be of an opinion without caring one whit of the opinion of others and live by that opinion. So, this question here exhibits that you are incapable of not caring about whether someone else has seen your PoLR. If you had high Te, you had simply said. "Te PoLR doesn't affect me." and only said that if someone else questioned you about it. So yes, I do see your Te PoLR.
First eliminate every possible source of error. Thence success is inevitable.
Re: Te PoLR?
Te PoLR is the skepticism of concrete "facts" in favor of subjective, personal reasoning processes. They mistrust Te information and prefer to make decisions and formulate opinions "themselves".
Yeah. Basically, they develop an understanding of something and then favor that understanding over the information you present to them, no matter how untrue it shows their own personal understanding to be. (I assume a Ti type could explain things in a way that they'd be willing to adopt though.)
That's not Te PoLR - that's being a human. Also, were it so, one might extrapolate that as people grow older and more rigid in their views, they somehow acquire the Te PoLR trait.
In my opinion, a typical Te PoLR manifestation looks like this: "Well, it's all fancy and logical-like, your explanation is, but in REAL LIFE, <insert whatever here>..."
ILI, INTp
I know a whole lot of people who aren't like that.
How stubborn and ignorant. I don't think anyone should be so sure of himself. There are so many things out there in the world which we don't know, and information is always changing rapidly.
Well... from my perspective at least.
They're not that stubborn.... they just don't want to admit that they're wrong about Te. Their PoLR gets hit when somebody corrects them about some factual data.
They have to cling to their Ti understanding (unless a new Ti understanding is created).
I once wrote a description of Te PoLR that everyone seemed to like. I'll go dig it up; I think it's still somewhere on socionix.
Not at all.That's not Te PoLR - that's being a human. Also, were it so, one might extrapolate that as people grow older and more rigid in their views, they somehow acquire the Te PoLR trait.
In my opinion, a typical Te PoLR manifestation looks like this: "Well, it's all fancy and logical-like, your explanation is, but in REAL LIFE, <insert whatever here>..."
Scratch that, it's crap.
Snakeingrass, you're talking about Te>Ti.
Isn't it so easy to say worldy-wise things over the internet?How stubborn and ignorant. I don't think anyone should be so sure of himself. There are so many things out there in the world which we don't know, and information is always changing rapidly.
The problem here is that people are talking about "ignoring factual data" like that's something people just do. IEIs don't "ignore factual data;" if they're presented with facts, then typically they believe them as readily as anyone else. If you tell your IEI friend "Hey, I changed my mind, I decided to paint my house red instead of blue like I told you!" he's not exactly going to start screaming "NO YOU'RE LYING TO ME YOU SAID IT WAS GOING TO BE BLUE AND THAT WAS PART OF MY WORLDVIEW SO YOU CAN GO TO HELL!" The problem is that IEIs are bad at implementing factual data in every-day life and work; they need the help of someone who can tell them why it is relevant to what they're trying to accomplish in order to fully understand and make use of the new information.
Re: Te PoLR?
PerfectBasically Te for IPs is the ability to be of an opinion without caring one whit of the opinion of others and live by that opinion. So, this question here exhibits that you are incapable of not caring about whether someone else has seen your PoLR. If you had high Te, you had simply said. "Te PoLR doesn't affect me." and only said that if someone else questioned you about it. So yes, I do see your Te PoLR.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Compare Te "help" to that of Ti.
Situation: There is a nail in the wall.
*SLI hands IEE hammer*
IEE:"What's this for?"
SLI: "You can use it to hit things into walls."
IEE: "Ooohhhh, I get it."
*LSI hands EIE hammer*
EIE: "What do I do with this?"
LSI: "Hit that nail."
EIE: "Ok."
Re: Te PoLR?
Where did that come from?
No no not really, this is EIE-LSI
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
hah i agree!No no not really, this is EIE-LSI
6w5 sx
model Φ: -+0
sloan - rcuei
You know, it's funny you say that because that's what I originally had them labeled, as Beta and Delta instead of Alpha-Gamma. But I had a self-centered moment and decided that I wanted one in my quadraNo no not really, this is EIE-LSI
But yeah, they do actually make more sense the other way around. There is a hint of Ne values in the SEE-ILI one. I'm going to switch back.
INTp
sx/sp
I'm inherently skeptical of "facts" more when they are presented from a source I don't recognize, trust or am generally unfamiliar with. Should a friend inform me of "facts" of their own life, I have no reason not to trust them. (That may prove unfounded with future info). But if you came up to me and said "Drinking coffee causes cancer", well, I'm going to have to investigate that and see for myself, basically, because A.) I drink coffee, B.) I like drinking coffee and C.) I'd rather not have to stop drinking coffee. Plus, the news reports from a few weeks back said moderate coffee-drinking was generally beneficial for you. I like to know my information is accurate.
I generally don't believe a single "report" of facts. There should be a quorum of information to back it up. I can be resistant to new information due to the potential necessity to "reorder" my consensus opinion should the information contradict my current one.
socio: INFp - IEI
ennea: 4w5 sp/sx
**********
That is why I'm skeptical about it (assuming what you said is true). I don't typically do that... I'm interested in seeking truth, so I am *very* unlikely to ignore anything that brings my understanding of something into question.
I could see it as one's PoLR being a blind spot of sorts... So in the case of Te PoLR, perhaps one might not "see" Te because they are to busy concentrating on Fe. Actually I think that's rather what Smilingeyes was saying... I'm not sure about what he said about sticking to an opinion though... something doesn't seem right there.
Congratulations, you're an intelligent human being!
from wikisocion:
infp man says he can't stand dealing with forms and paperwork. he procrastinates on this to the point of self destructiveness. so i interpret this as similar to the above mentioned efficiency issue.The individual is skeptical of basing beliefs, arguments, and actions on external sources of information. For instance, a SEI will rather trust the expertise of someone who seems to have hands-on experience, even if limited, than of someone who demonstrates to have read many books on the same subject. IEIs will base their opinions and views on their own personal insights and be, again, skeptical of "second-hand" factual information that contradicts it. "Don't trust everything you read" is a typical sentiment, especially when applied to sources of information otherwise seen as neutral and reliable, such as encyclopedias and handbooks. He also dislikes dealing with issues involving efficiency, productivity, and factual accuracy of statements; statements are made according to input from other functions, not from double-checks against external facts which are seen as of lesser relevance to the issue at hand. He lacks confidence in his ability to find relevant information in outside sources.
i don't really like forms and paperwork either, but it's for a different reason. it's due to the detail and hating the control of forms or something. but ultimately i get stuff done if it's in my interest. which it usually is.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Sure. But I'd see that as close to direct observation, which would be closer to Si and Se rather than to Te.
But I agree with Joy's formulation, even though it seemed a bit too "fanatical". Everybody, in the final analysis, bases their understanding and/or beliefs on external information or "facts".
As long as you don't think you have understood something, you are easily open to new facts that show up, even those that contradict your not-yet-finished understanding. The more you are persuaded that you understood something, the more skeptical you are of new facts, especially second-hand ones, that contradict your understanding.
This happens to everyone to some extent.
Te PoLR types are inclined to either reach that point too quickly - they decide too quickly that they already have all the facts they need for their understanding - or, sometimes, they feel overwhelmed by all the available facts and sort of despair of ever reaching that understanding on that particular subject.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Elaborating...
Aren't IPs less likely to "live by" any opinion? I would see rationality as being more about being fixed on opinions than irrationality. As for whether or not a TE IP type is less likely to care about the opinions of others in regards to their own opinion than an Fe IP type, I do not know. I do think that you may be categorizing people a little too much here.
That works.
It almost looks like you might be expecting people to simply agree with the information you present to them without giving them the opportunity to check up on that information themselves. So if someone says they understand that X, and you say that X can't be because of facts A and B; and they argue with you over the validity of A and B... you assume that means they've neglected facts A and B in favor of their subjective view X, and then decide that is Te PoLR. But how could you expect someone to believe A and B just because you say so? That would be rather unwise of them, wouldn't it? Of course this depends heavily on the particular situation. I'm not saying that this is what you're doing--I'm just saying the possiblity arises in my mind. I mean A and B could be very obviously true, and they could just be arguing because they're unwilling to change their belief X, or unwilling to admit that A and B call X into question or disprove X.
That sounds more like neglecting the abstract in favor of the concrete; preferring practice over theory. Isn't that more of an N/S conflict?
Agreed. Not only that, but there is an overwhelming amount of information out there, a lot of which is more false than true.
Makes sense.
Is it possible you just don't like Ti? The point being they use Ti>>>>>>Te, yes?
That makes sense.
@Aka-kitsune: mostly agree.
That's interesting. I'll think about it more.
this is good. and it also then makes sense on why such individuals would value Ti. Ti helps them to organize new ways of understanding they already know rather than introducing new facts and data. Ti would also help them to put all the available facts into an order that they can comprehend more easily.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Makes sense as well.
Yes.
Where Ti PoLR types do not like doing this, or they don't see the point. So either they accumulate facts and data not bothering to put them into order as long as they are useful, or they take as given someone else's understanding without sorting it out themselves - "it's not their job". But in that case, they will take a full Ti understanding as if it were a new fact, imo. So it's the same, in a way.
Sure, and that's one example of why this thing isn't attributable to Te PoLR. My point is that they don't just go around ignoring facts.Sure. But I'd see that as close to direct observation, which would be closer to Si and Se rather than to Te.
I wouldn't disagree with that.But I agree with Joy's formulation, even though it seemed a bit too "fanatical". Everybody, in the final analysis, bases their understanding and/or beliefs on external information or "facts".
As long as you don't think you have understood something, you are easily open to new facts that show up, even those that contradict your not-yet-finished understanding. The more you are persuaded that you understood something, the more skeptical you are of new facts, especially second-hand ones, that contradict your understanding.
This happens to everyone to some extent.
Te PoLR types are inclined to either reach that point too quickly - they decide too quickly that they already have all the facts they need for their understanding - or, sometimes, they feel overwhelmed by all the available facts and sort of despair of ever reaching that understanding on that particular subject.
My problem is that I can't make sense of this "ignoring facts" business. A fact is a fact; as something with a brain you can't just ignore something you know to be true, unless you're a psychopath. They might have a hard time reconciling factual data with their system, as in they'd have some serious thinking to do if the two conflicted, but people don't just ignore facts. You could say that they don't believe everything they hear until it's backed up by a credible resource, but I'm not sure that's type related. If I'm missing something, please explain what is meant by "ignoring factual data."
This is good.
Not bad.Ti PoLR: May then tend to believe multiple contradicting facts at once, and be rather blind to how they are contradictory, or hesitant to reform their beliefs simply because they contradict each other. May doubt their ability to effectively analyze their own belief system???
The other stuff you could do without, IMO.
Re: Te PoLR?
Wit is never wrong, simply unappreciated. :wink:what if someone else's wit is wrong and you have facts to back it up?Basically Te for IPs is the ability to be of an opinion without caring one whit of the opinion of others and live by that opinion. So, this question here exhibits that you are incapable of not caring about whether someone else has seen your PoLR. If you had high Te, you had simply said. "Te PoLR doesn't affect me." and only said that if someone else questioned you about it. So yes, I do see your Te PoLR.
socio: INFp - IEI
ennea: 4w5 sp/sx
**********
that's interesting. I don't see how theories could be considered facts. I guess I do, but would request an example?
My own experiences with INFps and what i think is Te polr is when they have to run an organization or project or something, and someone points out to them, "why are you doing it that way, you don't need to do that." the Polr is hit, faces turn red. Or, the INFp in the same situation rambles with their Ti HA, trying to place their to do lists into logical order. Out loud.
So it is no more Ti-related than to any other function?
This sounds like dee at the moment. Perhaps he's an IEI. (Although SEI is the general consensus currently.)Te PoLR types are inclined to either reach that point too quickly - they decide too quickly that they already have all the facts they need for their understanding - or, sometimes, they feel overwhelmed by all the available facts and sort of despair of ever reaching that understanding on that particular subject.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
