PoLR versus ignoring, relating to Jung's original type descriptions

[remiges]

I was reading through Jung's original description of the psychological types and wondered what he would think of the Socionics model... and particularly, as the title suggests, point of least resistance and ignoring.

The way he organized his writing made me wonder if the opposition was not in the other side of the coin, so to speak, as in Fe versus Ti, but rather, the attitude (E/I), ie, Fe versus Fi.

The reason I ask, is because I cannot really comprehend "pure" Fe, as he predicted for those who orient to subjective feeling (Fi), inasmuch as I immediately think of it is faking. However, this would imply, then, that I am consciously aware of Fi, if not, I have no basis in which to compare to Fe and judge it as faking, and made me wonder if this is more Fe-ignoring.

It agrees with objective values. If one has always known feeling as a subjective fact, the nature of extraverted feeling will not immediately be understood, since it has freed itself as fully as possible from the subjective factor, and has, instead, become wholly subordinated to the influence of the object.

A feeling-judgment such as this is in no way a simulation or a lie -- it is merely an act of accommodation.

Such feelings are governed by the standard of the objective determinants. As such they are genuine, and represent the total visible feeling-function.

I understand this objectively, that such a thing could exist, and yet I cannot really imagine how one could orient to Fe without Fi because of how limited my own mind is.

So I am interested - when you read through this paper, do you have a psychological function and attitude that you cannot even perceive of without connecting to another, and does it align with your self-typed ignoring or PoLR?

BTW, thanks @Aramas and @Reyne.

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm

[Nunki]

The Introverted Sensation type is the one that I had the most trouble comprehending when I read through that paper, largely because Jung did not describe it with any great clarity. Almost everything he says about the type is a description of how it devalues external objects, which is only one half of the picture, or of superficial behaviors associated with the type. He doesn't really get into the deeper mentality of the Introverted Sensation type or explain what, precisely, introverted sensation considered by itself actually is.

I don't have a clear type in Socionics, but between Ignoring and PoLR, Si is far more likely to be my PoLR.

[Lord Pixel]

I was reading through Jung's original description of the psychological types and wondered what he would think of the Socionics model... and particularly, as the title suggests, point of least resistance and ignoring.

The way he organized his writing made me wonder if the opposition was not in the other side of the coin, so to speak, as in Fe versus Ti, but rather, the attitude (E/I), ie, Fe versus Fi.

The reason I ask, is because I cannot really comprehend "pure" Fe, as he predicted for those who orient to subjective feeling (Fi), inasmuch as I immediately think of it is faking. However, this would imply, then, that I am consciously aware of Fi, if not, I have no basis in which to compare to Fe and judge it as faking, and made me wonder if this is more Fe-ignoring.





I understand this objectively, that such a thing could exist, and yet I cannot really imagine how one could orient to Fe without Fi because of how limited my own mind is.

So I am interested - when you read through this paper, do you have a psychological function and attitude that you cannot even perceive of without connecting to another, and does it align with your self-typed ignoring or PoLR?

BTW, thanks @Aramas and @Reyne.

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm

I think you're speaking about it more in the PoLR. You can understand your ignoring on a decent level, but it's not the way you prefer to be. Some people know how to use choptsticks but much rather eat with a fork since chopsticks are a hassle. That's the ignoring, I know how to do that but I don't like to do it because it's a hassle. The PoLR is, I have no idea how people use chopsticks so easily, this lack of proper understanding and sort of 1 dimensional view, as you say you can't see Fe anything else as faking, is more PoLR than it is ignoring.

I understand Fe, I can feel and notice Fe, but it's not my jam. And also, Fe is almost always considered after my own personal and subjective feelings on anything. It's not prioritized.

For instance, when shopping for groceries I understand the cashier has to smile, ask me if I found everything ok, say the words "how are you?" without actually asking the question, because it's social rule to be polite and have "good" customer service, but my default is to not really register that because I'm mostly focused on them ringing up my food so I can leave lol, and alot of that can get in the way of my goal, but I get all of it and why they have to do it.

[Aramas]

I was reading through Jung's original description of the psychological types and wondered what he would think of the Socionics model... and particularly, as the title suggests, point of least resistance and ignoring.

The way he organized his writing made me wonder if the opposition was not in the other side of the coin, so to speak, as in Fe versus Ti, but rather, the attitude (E/I), ie, Fe versus Fi.

The reason I ask, is because I cannot really comprehend "pure" Fe, as he predicted for those who orient to subjective feeling (Fi), inasmuch as I immediately think of it is faking. However, this would imply, then, that I am consciously aware of Fi, if not, I have no basis in which to compare to Fe and judge it as faking, and made me wonder if this is more Fe-ignoring.





I understand this objectively, that such a thing could exist, and yet I cannot really imagine how one could orient to Fe without Fi because of how limited my own mind is.

So I am interested - when you read through this paper, do you have a psychological function and attitude that you cannot even perceive of without connecting to another, and does it align with your self-typed ignoring or PoLR?

BTW, thanks @Aramas and @Reyne.

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm

jung.gif

The attitude is not the opposite side of the coin, because rationality and irrationality are the separate domains. If you read Jung's exposition of Ne, he clearly states that sensation is the repressed aspect and not Ni. He also clearly states the problem of Ne as a dominant attitude is stuff like hypochondria, aka Si concerns. Yeah Fi ignores Fe and vice versa, but the two are not inverses of each other. Thinking and feeling are opposites and sensing and intuition are opposites.

Polr is not something Jung discussed as far as I know, because he never described the creative function, and the polr depends on that, not the dominant function.

[remiges]

The Introverted Sensation type is the one that I had the most trouble comprehending when I read through that paper, largely because Jung did not describe it with any great clarity. Almost everything he says about the type is a description of how it devalues external objects, which is only one half of the picture, or of superficial behaviors associated with the type. He doesn't really get into the deeper mentality of the Introverted Sensation type or explain what, precisely, introverted sensation considered by itself actually is.

I agree he doesn't do a great job describing this mentality, compared to the others... as we are all limited by our own minds, I wonder if this meant he had some issues processing Si himself. Or, it was the end of this chapter and he got lazy. That works too.

For instance, when shopping for groceries I understand the cashier has to smile, ask me if I found everything ok, say the words "how are you?" without actually asking the question, because it's social rule to be polite and have "good" customer service, but my default is to not really register that because I'm mostly focused on them ringing up my food so I can leave lol, and alot of that can get in the way of my goal, but I get all of it and why they have to do it.

Thanks for the reply. I used to wait tables in high school and... yeah, I recognized the need to go along with social niceties as part of a customer service job, and would do so; had to convince myself I was an actress in a sense ("fake"). I guess it is fine as long as it's just there, something I *have* to do in some context, but to actually orient to it naturally, outside of that, it is tough to imagine. Just... how?

The attitude is not the opposite side of the coin, because rationality and irrationality are the separate domains. If you read Jung's exposition of Ne, he clearly states that sensation is the repressed aspect and not Ni. He also clearly states the problem of Ne as a dominant attitude is stuff like hypochondria, aka Si concerns. Yeah Fi ignores Fe and vice versa, but the two are not inverses of each other. Thinking and feeling are opposites and sensing and intuition are opposites.

Polr is not something Jung discussed as far as I know, because he never described the creative function, and the polr depends on that, not the dominant function.

No, as far as I know, he did not mention it. I am trying to extrapolate somewhat and connect these two constructs... I may have used some sloppy terms there, admittedly.

[Lord Pixel]

Thanks for the reply. I used to wait tables in high school and... yeah, I recognized the need to go along with social niceties as part of a customer service job, and would do so; had to convince myself I was an actress in a sense ("fake"). I guess it is fine as long as it's just there, something I *have* to do in some context, but to actually orient to it naturally, outside of that, it is tough to imagine. Just... how?

The best way I can explain it is the overall vibe of an atmosphere/environment. Men's locker room has a bro vibe, there are rules within the bro vibe, don't talk about your feelings, talk about sports/cars/girls. The vibe of a funeral, there are rules there, don't curse, don't laugh too loud, don't draw too much attention to yourself, don't wear white. This is all a part of Fe. And I think it's picked up by simply observing the environment, what is expected, rewarded, and punished, and you adjust yourself between those lines.

I guess the difference is you have to convince yourself that you were fake or an actress. While non Fe PoLR would just see it as accommodating people, and Fi ignoring would see it as a necessary bother if they had to do it for too long. There are times where I have used Fe and felt like I sort of violated my psyche for a second, like it was commiting a sin or something, acting in a way I totally never do and in a way that I am not. But there are times where I see Fe is an easy solution to the problem I am facing and I can use a bit of it to get out of the situation, those times do feel fake but also feel like I had no easier choice.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I always thought the difference was pretty obvious, the ignoring function you are good with it but receiving it yourself bores you to tears. There's no psychological stimulation. It's like having sex with yourself, or how some anti-gay people think homosexuality is. It's like two positive or two negative charges. It's zero energy.... but kinda worse than that, it decays over time if somebody is giving you too much of it (even if at first it starts out OK) Being bored can make one feel safe though, so its not all bad- I guess I mean this is how illusionary relationships are like a defunct sort of duality right?

PoLR on the other hand is more of an immediately bad thing. Somebody uses it, hits a sore spot, you feel how you don't like it more clearly and right away. It's not like a slow death/creep kinda thing. The wound is more noticeable and bigger and glowing all red and obvious-like. You're also not good at the function yourself- so its more foreign and harder to defend against. In that way it's worse. Better in the sense, I think it's a bit more clear when its bothering you - so it can be further protected against socially. (ideally anyway, as you know- you are gonna piss off your Dual/Semi-Dual from time to time as well. =()

[kingslayer]

I always thought the difference was pretty obvious, the ignoring function you are good with it but receiving it yourself bores you to tears. There's no psychological stimulation. It's like having sex with yourself, or how some anti-gay people think homosexuality is. It's like two positive or two negative charges. It's zero energy.... but kinda worse than that, it decays over time if somebody is giving you too much of it (even if at first it starts out OK) Being bored can make one feel safe though, so its not all bad- I guess I mean this is how illusionary relationships are like a defunct sort of duality right?

PoLR on the other hand is more of an immediately bad thing. Somebody uses it, hits a sore spot, you feel how you don't like it more clearly and right away. It's not like a slow death/creep kinda thing. The wound is more noticeable and bigger and glowing all red and obvious-like. You're also not good at the function yourself- so its more foreign and harder to defend against. In that way it's worse. Better in the sense, I think it's a bit more clear when its bothering you - so it can be further protected against socially. (ideally anyway, as you know- you are gonna piss off your Dual/Semi-Dual from time to time as well. =()

Hmm.. Interesting write up. can you offer specific examples of some Polr hits?

[Lord Pixel]

Te PoLR hit might be something like someone calling you useless or something right?

[consentingadult]

Perhaps these articles help?

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...fi-and-fe.html

https://mavericksocionics.blogspot.c...ork-floor.html

[remiges]

Perhaps these articles help?

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.co...fi-and-fe.html

https://mavericksocionics.blogspot.c...ork-floor.html

Sorry it took a while to answer. I was thinking about how I wanted to answer this.

I was trying to rationalize why I felt this was not helping me much (I appreciate it really, I don’t want to seem offensive) and I think ultimately it is due to there just not being enough of a spread of types at my work.

However, am I right in assuming this site is yours? I came across the Delta vs Gamma Fi article you had up, and I became consciously aware of how I withdraw when I do not like something in the way you described. I’ve actually seen it in how I internally respond to people even on this forum and I am currently looking into an EII typing.

At work, I had this interaction today that I wondered if I was subconsciously looking for an LSE.

Me: (talking to someone to get some help) Hey, I just got this notification I had to do this form I’ve never seen before. The thing is, I am very worried (trying to use Fi to connect?)

The answer I hoped for (Se, Te, and Si seeking? Looking for experience with regard to a Te problem?) was something along the lines of “Oh, yeah, I’ve seen that form before. It isn’t a big deal, we can go through it together.” (Back to real life: instead I got a judgmental “Why? Stop being such a worrywart.” Wondering if this was an LSI or some shit, whatever. And in response, I began looking for other options to solve my problem, like perhaps an Ne creative would, and ultimately found an approximation of what I wanted in a coworker I tentatively type LIE).

Thoughts? My only reservation is... well, this thread. I would have to have one hell of an Fe ignoring, which I suppose is possible.

[Lord Pixel]

The answer I hoped for (Se, Te, and Si seeking? Looking for experience with regard to a Te problem?) was something along the lines of “Oh, yeah, I’ve seen that form before. It isn’t a big deal, we can go through it together.”

Damn, based on that you might actually be EII. I have said that to myself almost verbatim many times after learning about this stuff. The seeking the Si experience with Te. part.

[remiges]

Damn, based on that you might actually be EII. I have said that to myself almost verbatim many times after learning about this stuff. The seeking the Si experience with Te. part.

Yeah. Sort of hit me. Maybe the reason it is difficult to see myself in so many EII profiles is because of that w8. Who knows.

[remiges]

I came across a poorly translated (presumably) article that Model G considers the ignoring almost a secondary PoLR. Would like to look into this for fun, however, can’t find good English references. Anyone got any decent sources?

[The Reality Denialist]

There is a book for each type per function
https://www.amazon.com/Psychological...9971978&sr=8-1

In essence it is one of the weakest uncontrollable point in you while it has the understanding and informational overload.

In Gulenko's book Ignoring is your PoLR and PoLR is your vulnerable (Model A has no vulnerable).

[Still Alive]

ignoring = I know, but I don't have the energy to act on it
vulnerable = I don't know and I don't have any energy to focus on it

ignoring can be a reason for depression. gulenko gives EIE as example, who has Fi as ignoring function in model A. he wants that everyone lives in harmony and he preaches ideals and behavioral standards, but he is unable to maintain harmonious relationships. EIE constantly quarrels or argues, and violates what he preaches to others.

[The Reality Denialist]

Ni: I just can sit around listen to philosopher and destroy their arguments and so on but at the end of the day it is merely a nihilistic practice. It is fun to pown those guys.

Fi: I have not had problems of having no friends or being liked or loved. I'm myself. As a result I do not understand why others need it. I just entertain myself or others. That is enough. I do not know who likes whom and so on.

[Still Alive]

Ni: I just can sit around listen to philosopher and destroy their arguments and so on but at the end of the day it is merely a nihilistic practice. It is fun to pown those guys.

I also have a lot of difficulties being punctual

Te: I'm able to judge the efficiency of my enviroment but I'm unable to engage in lucrative business activities on my own.
Se: I'm capable of perceiving power dynamics in my enviroment but I lack the willpower to tackle concrete problems that must be done.
Si: I care a lot about comfort and pleasure but it's difficult for me to stay in a harmonious, relaxed state. I'm a restless individual and I'm prone to weird sexual fetishes (many porn actors have a low focus on Si) or having many sexual partners.
Fe: I'm able to perceive the emotional atmosphere around me, but I'm unable to improve the moods of others. it's hard for me to raise a person's spirit if they are in a bad mood. I'm also unable to generate excitement.

[The Reality Denialist]

I also have a lot of difficulties being punctual

I think time waster is better. Inspiration driven when there is no timeline. Last minute finish after freaking good start but it can change of I'm doing it with someone.

But I have worked with Wozniak like ILE before. I ended up being time machine for both. That being said I give super intuitive first impressions. People can not really tell if they see me of as ILE or ILI and then I say: no I'm not the guy to design kernel for your operating system.

[remiges]

Thanks Heretic 007 and soundofconfusion. I'll probably get it soon. lol

And... I am oblivious and completely missed the "Gulenko's book" thread in this section. Wow. Go me.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Te PoLR hit might be something like someone calling you useless or something right?

Not sure. If somebody called me useless I would probably laugh. I think its more like 'You are worthless because you don't have a good enough job or talk in a pretentious enough way." That's kind of what te polr feels like? I'm not saying all Te valuers make me feel that way lol , the entire point of polr is you are telling yourself that more than anything and it's an insecurity in yourself to get over. I think all polrs are like that. However having an external polr can often be 'more obvious' to other people in society, because it's more 'there' (because it's external!) - and makes them treat you in a different way as opposed to having an internal polr. Well Se and Te and Fe polr are very noticeable. Ti, Ni and Si PolR isn't that noticeable. Both Ne and Fi might be the exception to this rule I think. Ne is external but it's kind of scattered and out there and just people being really social. I'm not sure the layperson even notices Ne that much. Not so much in American society where the exchange of external ideas is highly encouraged due to capitalism. And people notice Fi polr a lot even though it's internal because everybody knows when somebody pissed them off or invaded a boundary lol.

[Rebelondeck]

Fe is not different from Fi except for their processing configurations, the former operates in a closed-loop while the latter open-loop. F is independent of e and i - so attempts to split F into two distinct sets of outcomes based on i and e will most certainly produce difficulties in interpretation. F is an independent variable in itself so Fe cannot be made totally independent of Fi; their distinctions are solely due to configuration, not rationalization in and of itself....

a.k.a. I/O

EDIT: It's like taking two rides in the same taxi (let's name the cab F). F travels route-i one day and route-e the next. The passenger observes that F behaved very differently each time so comes to the conclusion that there must have been two taxis Fi and Fe so starts describing them differently to others and saying how one was better than the other at certain things....