What would an LIE with a strong Ni subtype look like? (ENTj-Ni identification)

[Scarlett]

There are a lot of common themes to me that are common to ENTJs, even as a child I always took charge, never liked being told what to do and was always very competitive. I liked playing with toy soldiers, was naturally attracted to chess and captained projects and sports teams. At the same time I was always fascinated with space, theoretical and abstract concepts. ENTJs are known to be out of touch with their feelings sometimes, and in parts this is very true and in part it is not with me. I was also very good at acting and speeches, I would always be the lead in all school plays.

THIS. I can relate to this. Especially for an ENTJ enneagram 8, there you go.
Thank you.

I know I can be very blunt, and rude especially those that cross me but at the same time I always went out of my way even as a child to give away my lunch money to the homeless or to feed stray cats and dogs.

Not this. I can see this is the part where 8w7 is different than 8w9.
8w7 is more in your face. I'm never blunt or rude, I graciously explain what could be wrong when you do this, but if you cross the line I just end you.

LIE-Ni tends to be less confident in being LIE while LIE-Te tends to be overconfident whereas not being either indicates ideally-balanced; and similar is true for all types. Behavioural differences within a type can be solely linked to perceptions of one's potential for success and is something that can vary over one's lifetime. In a sense, sub-type is an illusion, which is why trying to determine it can sometimes be like trying to pee cleanly through a rolling doughnut......
a.k.a. I/O

I'm actually confident in being an LIE. How can an LIE not have self confidence?
What I think is the way they act.
LIE-Te is in your face. The stereotype LIE.
LIE-Ni is more balanced.

Meged and Ovcharov have postulated that subtype preference for the creative function increases strength of the 3rd and 5th functions. Emphasizing The first function strengthens the 4th and 6th.
I think there is something to this idea.
So, LIE-Ni has more developped Fe and Fi and seems closer to a beta NF, whereas ILI-Te has better develloped Si and Se and thus seems closer to delta ST.

This is why I said LIE-Ni is more balanced, because they develop more Fi and Fe (compared to LIE-Te).
That explains why I'm still ok befriend my conflictor lol.
And if we can say LIE-Te seems closer to LSE, then LIE-NI is comparable to EIE.

Here are some very general differences.
Te subtype has one or several of those traits:
Stereotypically extroverted; more impulsive; more invested in science and/or technical (e.g engineering) subjects; more into sports.
Ni subtype has one or several of those traits:
”Ambiverted” (can be mistaken for an introvert); more focused on societal issues and the welfare of society; more interested in psychology and spirituality.

LIE-Ni can definitely be mistaken for an introvert (ILI) especially if they're Sp/Sx and 8w9.
But sometimes they look like an EIE, because they have good Se. (Hence the name look-a-like intertype in socionic)

Yeah, especially as Type 8.
Not ambitious? In my experience, Wrong. Never came across an un-ambitious LIE before. Not ruthless? Depends on how you define it, they can be "ruthless" in the sense they won't be afraid to "harm your feelings" if necessary.

Thank you. Ambitions and taking charge are what basically make us alive.

[Rebelondeck]

.......I'm actually confident in being an LIE. How can an LIE not have self confidence?
What I think is the way they act.
LIE-Te is in your face. The stereotype LIE.
LIE-Ni is more balanced......

Less and over was with reference to the average LIEs, those who don't have a subtype. LIE-Ni subtypes spend twice the amount of time acquiring information than they would spend actually rationalizing it (50-50 is the ideal). Being 5% extra on the Ni side doesn't make one a subtype. Having a Ti-subtype like I have indicates a data-acquisition handicap.

I've met more than a few LIEs who lacked self-confidence with aspects of their lives (two drank themselves to death) so they're out there.

a.k.a I/O

[Adam Strange]

Less and over was with reference to the average LIEs, those who don't have a subtype. LIE-Ni subtypes spend twice the amount of time acquiring information than they would spend actually rationalizing it (50-50 is the ideal). Being 5% extra on the Ni side doesn't make one a subtype. Having a Ti-subtype like I have indicates a data-acquisition handicap.

I've met more than a few LIEs who lacked self-confidence with aspects of their lives (two drank themselves to death) so they're out there.

a.k.a I/O

I nearly drank myself to death. It wasn’t from lack of confidence, though. I was very self-confident. It was from hating parts of myself and being unable to act to change my external situation. Unfortunately, drinking just makes these things worse while reducing your ability to see this as it happens.

LIE’s do not love themselves. They are best off when they are able to use their abilities constructively and when they feel obligations to a team.

Without those things, the energy and drive gets turned inward, and that is very much not good.

[Rebelondeck]

.....I was very self-confident. It was from hating parts of myself and being unable to act to change my external situation.....

I perhaps erroneously assumed that any feeling of impotence is, in a sense, a lack of confidence. Most Ejs seem to go for it just to make a point, even when they know they're going to lose; it's sad when they'll no longer try.

a.k.a. I/O

[Adam Strange]

I perhaps erroneously assumed that any feeling of impotence is, in a sense, a lack of confidence. Most Ejs seem to go for it just to make a point, even when they know they're going to lose; it's sad when they'll no longer try.

a.k.a. I/O

No, sometimes you know that your chances of success are very slim, but if you project confidence, you can increase the chances of success. I don't think I ever do things just to make a point. I do them to get some result, and I always try to calculate the odds of success. If the odds are zero, or if the costs clearly outweigh any potential benefits, then I'll switch my efforts to something else. I'm not fundamentally trying to impress, I'm trying to do. Impressing someone is only in the service of getting something done.

Also, a lot of my confidence comes from being stupid about the odds against me. Like, "I can drink 24/7 and still hit home runs in my life." And I can be very confident that it will turn out fine. But, that's just stupid.

[Rebelondeck]

......I don't think I ever do things just to make a point....Impressing someone is only in the service of getting something done..Also, a lot of my confidence comes from being stupid about the odds against me.....

I would think that Ni-subtypes would be the more image conscious but they all seem to be to an extent. Yes, I agree that LIEs tend to be very deliberate, and calculating of odds and effect. I realize that my experience is anecdotal; however, those that I've met (even those with obvious, overriding, personal problems) seem to want everyone to leave with the impression that they were a force to be reckoned with. I've witnessed several who deliberately went after (in a corporate sense) people who made them look bad; I was targeted by one because I refused a position he offered me and he may have made promises. Life for the LIEs, with whom I've had dealings, seems to revolve around total control of the overall program; maybe this changes with age. To an observer, the only admission to any lack of confidence was them not trying or steering clear and this could likely have been a result of them calculating the odds.

a.k.a. I/O

[Adam Strange]

I would think that Ni-subtypes would be the more image conscious but they all seem to be to an extent. Yes, I agree that LIEs tend to be very deliberate, and calculating of odds and effect. I realize that my experience is anecdotal; however, those that I've met (even those with obvious, overriding, personal problems) seem to want everyone to leave with the impression that they were a force to be reckoned with. I've witnessed several who deliberately went after (in a corporate sense) people who made them look bad; I was targeted by one because I refused a position he offered me and he may have made promises. Life for the LIEs, with whom I've had dealings, seems to revolve around total control of the overall program; maybe this changes with age. To an observer, the only admission to any lack of confidence was them not trying or steering clear and this could likely have been a result of them calculating the odds.

a.k.a. I/O

@Rebelondeck, I think you’re right about “total control of the whole program”, but not all the time. Only when we care about the program.

Most of the time, if the program is your program or is not interesting, LIE’s just don’t care about it at all. I mean, it’s your problem, you deal with it.

But if it’s my program, then I get to set the goals and the schedule and who does what.

I wasn’t always like this. When I started my beloved first company, I shared (gave away) control and just assumed that what I wanted was what everyone wanted and they’d all work and sacrifice as much as I would. I was pretty stupid. Eight years and about half a $M out of my after-tax income later and my partners had control of my company and didn’t share my vision and took it in the wrong direction and bankrupted it. The fallout from that cost me more thousands.

Most people are not going to share your vision and are not willing to sacrifice or sweat blood and work as hard as you are to make that vision a reality. Fine. They get paid for their services, they don’t get ownership. If they get paid to spend time working for me, they need to do what I need to have done. If they deviate, it should be in the direction of bringing more talent to the job, not less.

I’m not god. I don’t know how to do everything. I get around that by having a good sense of how good other people are at their jobs, and I like to work with very competent people. The more competent and experienced and social (in the sense of fitting into the team without needing a lot of attention or interventions), the better. I can’t stress this enough. They do the actual work, and great people are worth a lot. But they just don’t usually assume the obligations that you have to assume to keep the whole process going. That’s fine. Not everyone is so screwed up that they make their work their life.

Everybody wants to rule the world. Very few people are willing to work hard for it.

OK, now that my rant is over, let me say that from what I’ve observed, LIE-Te’s are better at starting a company from nothing, and LIE-Ni’s are better at running a business that already exists. You need tremendous drive to start a company, and you need very good people skills to run it. I’ve never seen anyone who has both.

Initially, the company grows by sheer force of will (and customers). Later, it grows by acquisitions. The two processes are very different and require very different skills and mind-sets.