Never mind. You are just not even trying to get the point here and this is just a lame cop-out...Originally Posted by Joy
Never mind. You are just not even trying to get the point here and this is just a lame cop-out...
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
I believe your (and other's) point is that I should have said, "Are you sure he's ISTj? How do you know?" instead of giving an example of something that could be said in conversation. Next time I'll be sure to quadruple read my posts to make sure there's nothing in them that could possibly be torn apart through pointless semantics debates.
Yes, do that.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
this thread = +2 for the entire forum
That's a very good concise way of putting it.
This, too.Te: If the facts () are correct, then the structural integrity of the system (
) will follow.
Ti: If the structure of the system (
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
The issue can be solved by saying that there is no objectively true reference material from which extract whether a person is ISTj or ESTj unless we have access to a moltitude of material.
Joy, avoid speaking about Te because none of your posts contain any. They are empty ramblings. Logos makes it clear here:
Yes. The other issue which I realized while looking at Joy's original post was that she herself never submits her own criteria for why she may even suspect the original person of being an ISTj
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
But there are other things to consider.
Socionics is both Ti and Te, perhaps a very good balance of both. By that I mean that it is Ti consistent: you can look at it from the point of view of how the functions fit together, how the psyche ordering determines the relationships, etc. Which is what Ti types most enjoy doing.
But it's also Te because it's supposed to really work in practice, it's supposed to explain and even predict how real, observable people interact.
Now, a person can have their own version of Socionics where all everything fits together, and have internally consistent versions of what an ISTj is. And another person can have an equally consistent version of another system and what an ISTj is.
Let us call those versions ISTjA and ISTjB.
Perhaps, if compared as to their expected behavior and motivations, ISTjA = ISTjB (or very similar); perhaps ISTjA =/= ISTjB, or even ISTjA = ESTjB.
From the point of view of Te, the only way to choose between ISTjA and ISTjB is to check how their respective systems (including the relationships of all the XXXxA and XXXxB types) fit reality; and Te would choose, say, the "B"version if it fits observable reality better, whereas Ti would choose A if, internally, it is more consistent. Ti would see the Te-B point of view as "flip-flopping their so-called model to fit any silly and spurious observation that happens to be in their field of vision" while Te would see the Ti-A point of view as "being blind to reality for the sake of a sheer theoretical model that may not even be true".
Te PoLR would be visible as a preference for the Ti-A version, with an added unwillingness to consider Te observations that might lead to a questioning of the Ti-A version; while a Ti-dominant would consider the Te observations and then reject them
But how could a Se-dual-seeking ever reject reality? Let's say that the system of socionics relationship is an union of Te and Ti, meaning that they have been first observed, and then logically constructed in a simmetrical way. It follows that logical consistency and reality of the system have been unified: there is always correspondence between the adherence of the model to reality, and the consitency of the model. If data has to be ignored, then consistency isn't respected, because that would mean that some relations are not consistent with the model (and thus they have to be ignored).
It follows that even for an IxFp, the only way to reach complete consitency of the system of relations is to check whether their assessment is realistic, or not. If it isn't, it MUST be rejected since socionics is a closed system and it doesn't allow for possibilities of integration of further branches, so that you can say "Ok, I don't know where to place this stuff, so I can throw it away for the moment". Neither you can say "This doesn't fit, that doesn't fit, but overall type X fits better". If everything is correct then there is only one type that fits.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
FWIW:
Some of you may be willing to say something like
" Person A is reluctant to accept this new information without understanding it and without seeing how it fits into their own understanding. That's a sign of Te polr. Therefore they are probably Ifp."
I'm not willing to type someone based on that. I view not accepting new information until understanding it and/or seeing how it fits into one's own understanding as a sign of smartness and learning as a human, thus not type related.
I also see various ways such a concept could be misused. Such as "Person A refuses to accept what I'm saying (new information) without asking me a bunch of questions (so they can understand what I'm saying), therefore they probably have Te polr." It also seems to me to be something that someone who regularly refuses to explain what they mean would likely fall back on instead of answering the questions posed to them.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
I've already explained why I didn't write anything like that. In an actual conversation we would have discussed both of our views, but all of that was cut out because it's absolutely irrelevant to the example.
s
Well the kind of "reality" that the Se-dual-seeking IEI rejects is Te-based, not Se-based, which is very different. They tend to question precisely the "reality" of Te. They do not question the "reality" of Se.
As for the rest of your point, yes, I agree - in principle
Yes, and that's how it works in my professional field, that of reproducible experiments under carefully controlled conditions and precisely measured results.
The problem with being so -- rigid in Socionics, and why talk of a "scientific" approach is often taken too far, is that none of the data - none of the traits observed, of the relationships observed, the VI traits - none of that is really precisely reproducible, or accurate, or measurable. How can you, for instance, measure precisely whether the relationship between two people is more like supervision or benefit, for instance? This is true in every aspect of Socionics, and that is what leads some types to distrust Te, or Ti, (since Socionics is Te- and Ti-based) when evaluating the types and relationships.
By contrast, no type, of whichever PoLR, can distrust or reject mathematics, however complex and seemingly "out there". How could they? There is no ambiguity, and even the "ambiguity" in some fields of mathematics is precisely measured. Socionics is a very different story.
I agree if we speak about single instances, but I think that when we try to type somebody (not always, but in many cases) we have seen him/her interacting with a sufficient number of people.
It's difficult to see if a relation is benefit or supervision, supervision can also be like mirror in many instances, but then when you start to see the circle of friends of a person and type them, and a particular person he/she can't get along, and his/her boyfriend since years and how their relationship is...this all reinforces both the "real" and "systemic" part
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Yes, I totally agree with what you're saying. But it becomes a Te-based approach, that is, you collect Te dynamic data from the outside, under constant revision - "ah I had tentatively typed that girl as EII but now I can see she's ESI" - there's a lot of uncertainty about it all, which is what Te PoLR, Ti super-id types dislike, and that's the kind of Te "reality" that they dislike. That was my point.
Ah...okay. If it's confirmed by the IxFps here that it's actually like that, I must agree.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I think I understand... I've been reading through this thread and the first few pages I didn't really know what was going in but I think ex-pat has clarified it. If my post below makes sense then I understand.Yes, I totally agree with what you're saying. But it becomes a Te-based approach, that is, you collect Te dynamic data from the outside, under constant revision - "ah I had tentatively typed that girl as EII but now I can see she's ESI" - there's a lot of uncertainty about it all, which is what Te PoLR, Ti super-id types dislike, and that's the kind of Te "reality" that they dislike. That was my point.
I can see how an IEI could get into a logical "loop", so to speak, indeed I've been in many myself before. I think I've found a way to transcend this difficulty, however, in regards to socionics. The two friends I discuss socionics with on a regular basis are an ENTj and an INTp (both Te-types). In regards to me and the ENTj we've both debated whether someone was xxxx or xxxx before and stated our reasons. My views have always been more so description-oriented, whereas I sometimes have had difficulty figuring out where his come from. He would use the descriptions to a degree but the way he communicated his decisions to me has always seemed difficult to follow...
Since we began getting into Socionics we've both typed people incorrectly. I had typed him as INTj, at first, and when he revealed to me that he had typed himself as ENTj there was a small controversy for it forced me to re-conceptualize my Ti-based system of typing. My 20/20 hindsight now serves to inform me that at this point I was in one of these "logical" loops that have been talked about in this thread. I now see that he was right, I didn't understand him at first because a) his proof was Te (he was saying how ENTj fit his relations with others so much better etc. and b) his views did not coincide with the validity of my internal system.
Now fast-forward a bit, my ENTj friend didn't agree with me about an ISFj, he kept hinting that she could be an ESFj. When I asked why I realized that it was difficult to get anywhere because he had little experience with ESFjs or ISFjs and so wasn't looking for the Fe vs. Fi that makes these types distinctive. Thus he read the Filatova ESFj description and claimed he still thought the person was ESFj. So I translated the ISFj description and showed it to him. As he was reading it, just as he was reading the ESFj one, he was comparing the person to different sentences and traits to see if he agreed. In the end while he had agreed with a lot of the ESFj description, he agreed with so much more of the ISFj description (by using his Te) that he saw where I was coming from and agreed that she was ISFj.
Anyways fast-forward to now and we've been typing ppl for about a year. As I trust his abilities, and he trusts mine, I believe that this could be a way to transcend Te-Ti differences. In typing people my Te weakness no longer works against me because I've made the validity of my internal system dependent on my Te-friend's Te system... what I mean by this is that if my ENTj friend disagrees with me typing someone as ENFp, for example, then I will not set that person's type in stone in my internal system until either I convince him and he agrees with me or he convinces me and I agree with him. Anyways I must say that we work well as a team for now my internal manner(Ti) of typing must coincide with his external manner of typing(Te) in order for me to see it as valid.
I believe other posters were frustrated with joy, earlier in this thread, for they felt that she was approaching the situation from a Te point of view whilst refusing to acknowledge the Ti point of view by instead insinuating that the Ti approach is a weaker version of the Te approach (this wasn't said explicitly but this, I believe is the core of the misunderstanding). Expat, you were forced to explain yourself, over and over again, because you defended Joy with Te, again and again... which didn't make sense to the Ti posters to begin with
I'm mentioning all this not only because I'm trying to understand the situation but also because I've seen similar situations occur in the past - in terms of Joy + Expat (Te) vs. 5 confused posters (Ti). The problem is that there's never a winner nor any true kind of understanding because the posters on both sides just end up arguing over what is "convenient" for their mode of thinking. The only way for this to amount to anything is for someone to stop debating who's right or wrong, regardless of its truth, and start bridging this Te/Ti extremism. Anyways I'm going to stop typing because if this doesn't make sense now then it never will and I think I'm starting to fly off-off-topic
INFp-Ni
No, for nth time, people were not confused. We understood very well what she was trying to get at, but the way she presented her example, to me, lacked an awareness of how Te would have to be presented to a Te PoLR to reveal such PoLR. The Te in that example was only implied. Expats clarification did not work because it was arbitrary and I was trying to illustrate that I can fill in the gaps in another way and change it all. He interpreted it one of the several ways he could have, but why would it even have to be necessary to interpret it. Expat added the Te that was lacking and incidentally he read like she meant it. But why couldn't he understand that he filled in HIS Te instead of revealing hers? Because it was natural to him. But it remains a flawed example.
There was no misunderstanding. There was a question that read: "how can you say that this is an expression of Te PoLR in an IxFp when your comments could reflect the same line of reasoning? And how can you try to illustrate a Te PoLR in a situation that does not contain obvious Te?"
That has nothing to do with people not understanding, but with people pointing out the flaws. The same goes for Ann's initial critique in this thread.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
Here's a good Te, Ti or whatever the fuck kind of question for you. Why do we need to know what kind of Te need be supplied to an IxFp in order to get that response
when all we are trying to do is come to the conclusion is Te can solicit that response at all? Maybe you're just hell bent of ripping on Joy.
(:
Actually, I think the issue is that many of the people here engage in conflict seeking behavior due to a lack of mental, social, and intellectual stimulation. Most of our members have well above average intelligence, which makes it somewhat difficult for them to find enough proper stimulation in their lives.
btw, the example was not intended to illustrate a Te PoLR hit
what's so improper about getting mental, social, and intellectual stimulation through engaging in internet conflicts? (or am I reading your subtext all wrong here?)
yeah
I'm not saying there's anything "improper" about spending time online arguing with people, if that's what they want to do... assuming it works. It seems like some people just cannot seem to get enough of it, meaning that it probably isn't working so well for them.
Joy, if i were you, I would delete or reword this post. Like, now.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
lol, you'll have to trust me on this. I deleted the rest of my reply because I didn't want to draw this out any longer.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
bionicgoat already quoted me
yeah and I'm not gunna unquote you
(unless you really want me to)
lol like ENTjs and ESFps?Joy, if i were you, I would delete or reword this post. Like, now.
6w5 sx
model Φ: -+0
sloan - rcuei
Nah, I don't care. If Baby would have suggested that before anyone else posted it's likely I would have taken it down until I could PM him and find out what's up... but at this point I'll just accept the risk that I'm going to piss people off. Again.
Ah fuck it.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
Honestly I wasn't confused by Expat or Kim's posts, only by Joy's.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Someone perhaps describing Te PoLR --
I imagined that to read a book profitably, it was necessary to be acquainted with every branch of knowledge it even mentioned; far from thinking that the author did not do this himself, but drew assistance from other books, as he might see occasion. Full of this silly idea, I was stopped every moment, obliged to run from one book to another, and sometimes, before I could reach the tenth page of what I was studying, found it necessary to turn over a whole library. I was so attached to this ridiculous method, that I lost a prodigious deal of time and had bewildered my head to such a degree, that I was hardly capable of doing, seeing or comprehending anything. I fortunately perceived, at length, that I was in the wrong road, which would entangle me in an inextricable labyrinth, and quitted it before I was irrevocably lost.
Stuffy Te
How does PoLR Te manifest?
She is wiseWhy I love LSEs:
beyond words
beautiful within
her soul
brighter than
the sun
lovelier than
love
dreams larger
than life
and does not
understand the
meaning of no.
Because everything
through her, and in her, is
"Yes, it will be done."
A couple years ago I was put in charge of decorating the college for Valentine's Day. I made some gorgeous, fancy decorations from construction paper, glue, scissors, and imagination. Then I covered a couple cabinets with them. But my favorite was the diagram of a human heart I put up. So romantic!
By caring more about the immediate pleasure and feelings of those around you, and not taking into consideration the long term consequences or stability or a situation. (For ISFps). Basically, ISFps are much more prone to spend their money after they get paid, especially on providing services for other people they care about. An ENTj would much rather invest his money and be more "business orientated".
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
I often think of polrs as what an HA is covering for. So I see a Te polr manifesting as using Ti HA to cover it.
I think a year ago or so I read McNew's type descriptions and common manifestations of the functions and I thought it was cool.
ISFps + INFps don't take well to those who provide them with endless amounts of 'information' - they prefer that the 'information' is refined to its vital basics, in order to give it meaning - they like all the superfluous stuff to be stripped away (superfluous as seen by a
Interesting analogies there, subterranean.
This occurs to me on a daily basis.To try and remember all the unattached Extraverted Thinking facts would probably make their heads swim and make them fill sick etc.
So would you say that an area of growth for an ISFp would be consideration of long term consequences? Would this result in hampered Fe growth due to inhibition?By caring more about the immediate pleasure and feelings of those around you, and not taking into consideration the long term consequences or stability of a situation. (For ISFps). Basically, ISFps are much more prone to spend their money after they get paid, especially on providing services for other people they care about. An ENTj would much rather invest his money and be more "business orientated".
She is wiseWhy I love LSEs:
beyond words
beautiful within
her soul
brighter than
the sun
lovelier than
love
dreams larger
than life
and does not
understand the
meaning of no.
Because everything
through her, and in her, is
A couple years ago I was put in charge of decorating the college for Valentine's Day. I made some gorgeous, fancy decorations from construction paper, glue, scissors, and imagination. Then I covered a couple cabinets with them. But my favorite was the diagram of a human heart I put up. So romantic!
First sentence: Absolutely, yes.
Second sentence: What do you mean? Hampered Fe growth?
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
If i used Te, Fe will be sacrificed, no?
So I was wondering, if I continue using Te instead of Fe in the long run, will Fe become rusty? In this case won't I be a very weak individual? My Te is not a strength, in fact it takes a longer time to utilize, and my Fe, which takes a shorter time to utilize, will not be developed enough if I keep using Te, thus lacking content.
(I speak as if I'm an ISFp. Currently I can't decide if I'm ESFp or ISFp. I'm open to your suggestions.)
She is wiseWhy I love LSEs:
beyond words
beautiful within
her soul
brighter than
the sun
lovelier than
love
dreams larger
than life
and does not
understand the
meaning of no.
Because everything
through her, and in her, is
A couple years ago I was put in charge of decorating the college for Valentine's Day. I made some gorgeous, fancy decorations from construction paper, glue, scissors, and imagination. Then I covered a couple cabinets with them. But my favorite was the diagram of a human heart I put up. So romantic!
ISFps use knowledge about aesthetic things gathered over a long period of time (e.g their whole lives) - they know how they would like their environment to be in order that they are comfortable. They also know how to cater for other people's aesthetic needs too - although they gather this experience over a long period of time, the external efforts of a ISFp appear to be very short-term, of the moment etc. - the many moods and faces of ISFps
I think ISFps see ENTjs as planning for the long-term and the abstract - with 20 year investments in bank accounts and things - they get on a lot better with ENTps because they operate on the short-term level - they are obviously very abstract in their behaviour, but it is more on a person-to-person level than some god type figure who is watching over absolutely everything and everyone for all eternity - ENTjs seem emotionless and stoic to ISFps - no short-term spontaneity.
Are you energetic or more mellow?
IP temperment is much different from EP temperment
Are you more secure with matters of peace and pleasure (ISFp)
Or matters of confidence and practical assertiveness (ESFp)?
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Discussion of Te PoLR in ISFps and INFps
In examining functions and function placement, on occassion I come across a statement that appears self-evident as a general 'truth' about the world, yet it is often passed off as a feature of that function and its placement. I cannot recall every example, but the most recent is the
From http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...raverted_Logic:
Experience has taught me that experience trumps all. You cannot know war until you spend a day dodging bullets. You cannot know skydiving until your life depends upon a thin sheet of nylon. You cannot give much of a crap about stinky, annoying little kids until you have your own.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.
True or false?
Again, it's an issue of personal experience. It seems daily that I get information second-hand that is, in fact, completely wrong. If you can ever 'know' something, it's probably only going to be via personal experience (however, that does not mean we cannot operate as if X were true).IEIs will base their opinions and views on their own personal insights and be, again, skeptical of "second-hand" factual information that contradicts it.
Again, facts and figures are always changing, and bias is ever-present. What can act as an authority when virtually everything is open to subjective interpretation? Why should I not be skeptical of an authorative claim when it ignores the error of the source material upon which it is based?"Don't trust everything you read" is a typical sneer of this function, especially when applied to sources of information otherwise seen as neutral and reliable, such as encyclopedias and handbooks.
I don't think this can be passed off on a
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
