A Summarized review of Hidden Agendas

[glam]

I know 2 EII that are into conspiracy theories and take them more seriously. Not about alien stuff or mind control but more about our food, government and medical institutions. It might even be 3 EII if the third person I am thinking of is EII and not IEE but something makes me think they are IEE because of the more esoteric nature of his theories. I think conspiracy theories can be fascinating and highly appealing to Ne. I can't get into them myself and I try to be careful not to offend those I know take it serious. First hand experience tells me they can get quite angry and think me naive if I laugh it off. :/

i've had the same experience with many Deltas believing in these kinds of conspiracy theories. one close to me: my Delta brother-in-law married my SLI sister and unfortunately got her into believing a lot of these unfounded ideas, like FEMA concentration camps, Freemason conspiracies, Devil-worshipping cults in government (my sister and her husband are Christians), etc.

IMO many Deltas tend towards having a "don't tread on me", anti-government streak that can foster these kinds of sinister, unfounded beliefs about the government, and can lead to them isolating themselves to get away from the perceived threat to their lifestyle. Deltas are very good and finding a group of their "own" and sticking with that group, isolating themselves if necessary - they don't want to impose on others' lifestyles, and they don't want others to impose on them either. these lifestyles are often tied to certain moral reasonings and/or they're seen as a means of survival. as a result, i think Deltas often prefer living in like-minded, smaller communities. (a more extreme example: communes that are separated from the rest of society, centered around special dedicated lifestyles are often Delta, IMO.) a trend i've also noticed with Deltas overall is a deep mistrust of large institutions (government, corporations, etc.) in general. also you won't necessarily know that they think this stuff until you talk to them, because Deltas so often appear so starkly "normal" and non-controversial.

disclaimer: not saying all Deltas believe in these things, etc. so Deltas here please don't take offense. i just can't deny that i've seen this trend in Delta much more than any other. i think it's one manifestation of the "live and let live" brand of Aristocracy of this quadra, combined with Judiciousness, open to Ne possibilities (as Aylen said), and maybe devaluing of Ti.

[Muddy]

a trend i've also noticed with Deltas overall is a deep mistrust of large institutions (government, corporations, etc.) in general. also you won't necessarily know that they think this stuff until you talk to them, because Deltas so often appear so starkly "normal" and non-controversial.

I've noticed this as well. Deltas often give the impression that they are "pro-government" at first glance but when you get into deeper discussions with them you begin to realize most of them actually have a deep mistrust of the federal government. I've known LSEs that were into stockpiling guns and ammo because they believed that the government might turn on its own citizens one day. They favor local governance much more than national governance.

Betas in contrast seem very anti-government at first but when you talk to them more you begin to see that they have a glorified vision of how the country as a whole should be. They concern themselves more with the culture and essence of a nation rather then the immediate local issues.

[nondescript]

Do you want book suggestions? An ESI friend got me into the Alanna of Tortall series, it's YA fiction but really good.

What kind of fantasy, I repeat? High fantasy(Warhammer), low fantasy(Conan), medieval fantasy(LoTR), realistic fantasy(some parts of Warhammer and or LoTR), alternate timeline fantasy(reality with dragons or magic for example)?

[Myst]

Maybe. Tbh I don't like to use life examples because there's no guarantee that the person got her type right. But I do have a friend who I suspect to be ILE. He see himself as a helpful and considerate person, but the truth is that actually he don't perceive other people mood well. He's quite oblivious to the emotional atmosphere but at the same time he over estimate his "empathy".

Yeah such overestimation is a quality of the HA function

Indeed, here I just quoted the wikisocion definition. Imo I think that it has more to do with causality than time in a practical sense. But LSIs are Se-ego and therefore they will be more inclined to perceive the direct kinetic energy of the environment, rather than the development of processes. Also the Hidden Agenda effect will over estimate these abilities of course. But xSIs aren't bad at Ni per se, the worst problem remain Fe and Te for them. I guess that SxEs would be way more impulsive and unable to understand correctly the impact of their actions and willpower.

I never heard about this issue with deadlines for xSI's, it's certainly not there on wikisocion, where did you see it?

For what sort of actions did you see SxE's not understanding in terms of consequences/impact?

[Myst]

You don't have to apologize, but I really do think those could be ILIs, or a rare LSI-Te, if they even exist. It's hard to tell the difference between LSI and ILI.

LSI-Te? lol

Why do you think LSIs don't ever read anything?

I know ILIs as well who don't like reading much, getting too much new information, etc. Introversion in general there and maybe the devalued Ne on top of it.

[wacey]

i've had the same experience with many Deltas believing in these kinds of conspiracy theories. one close to me: my Delta brother-in-law married my SLI sister and unfortunately got her into believing a lot of these unfounded ideas, like FEMA concentration camps, Freemason conspiracies, Devil-worshipping cults in government (my sister and her husband are Christians), etc.

IMO many Deltas tend towards having a "don't tread on me", anti-government streak that can foster these kinds of sinister, unfounded beliefs about the government, and can lead to them isolating themselves to get away from the perceived threat to their lifestyle. Deltas are very good and finding a group of their "own" and sticking with that group, isolating themselves if necessary - they don't want to impose on others' lifestyles, and they don't want others to impose on them either. these lifestyles are often tied to certain moral reasonings and/or they're seen as a means of survival. as a result, i think Deltas often prefer living in like-minded, smaller communities. (a more extreme example: communes that are separated from the rest of society, centered around special dedicated lifestyles are often Delta, IMO.) a trend i've also noticed with Deltas overall is a deep mistrust of large institutions (government, corporations, etc.) in general. also you won't necessarily know that they think this stuff until you talk to them, because Deltas so often appear so starkly "normal" and non-controversial.

disclaimer: not saying all Deltas believe in these things, etc. so Deltas here please don't take offense. i just can't deny that i've seen this trend in Delta much more than any other. i think it's one manifestation of the "live and let live" brand of Aristocracy of this quadra, combined with Judiciousness, open to Ne possibilities (as Aylen said), and maybe devaluing of Ti.

I completely second this observations about deltas. This is exactly my thoughts on these 4 types loose groups. Its a strange mix of individualism (Si), uniqueness (Ne), practicality (Te), customs and ideals (Fi). They are very live and let live towards others, and also expect the same towards themselves.

[wacey]

I've noticed this as well. Deltas often give the impression that they are "pro-government" at first glance but when you get into deeper discussions with them you begin to realize most of them actually have a deep mistrust of the federal government. I've known LSEs that were into stockpiling guns and ammo because they believed that the government might turn on its own citizens one day. They favor local governance much more than national governance.

Betas in contrast seem very anti-government at first but when you talk to them more you begin to see that they have a glorified vision of how the country as a whole should be. They concern themselves more with the culture and essence of a nation rather then the immediate local issues.

Nice, thats frikin wicked I couldn't agree more with you. With betas, they seem to be are either for society and play a damn good part in it, or they are rebelling against said society in their own way. Either way, there is still a focus on society, part denial and part portrayal,

I just disagree with this part I know a couple LSE who hate the municipal government here and its bylaws.

[Kim]

Nice, thats frikin wicked I couldn't agree more with you. With betas, they seem to be are either for society and play a damn good part in it, or they are rebelling against said society in their own way. Either way, there is still a focus on society, part denial and part portrayal,

I just disagree with this part I know a couple LSE who hate the municipal government here and its bylaws.

I wonder what beta type I could be...

[Muddy]

So yeah in summary deltas seek to protect and maintain their bubble from outside forces, while betas try to make the world their bubble.

[wacey]

I wonder what beta type I could be...

You seem to be missing the point.

[Muddy]

I wonder what beta type I could be...

I'd like to add that IEE's and LSI's outward behaviors may seem a bit contrary to their quadra, but this helps the rest of their quadra stay more balanced and well rounded rather then conflicting with it. LSIs keep beta from becoming a loose destructive anarchic mess and IEEs keep deltas from becoming cavemen.

Anyway I feel the pressure to respect the OP and get back to the main topic.


Fe HA: Making constant facebook post about how they are bored and asking their friends to come over to their house to hang out when they know full well they are at work or asleep then bitching about how they don't have any "real" friends.

[wacey]

I'd like to add that IEE's and LSI's outward behaviors seem a bit contrary to their quadra, but this helps the rest of their quadra stay more balanced and well rounded rather then conflicting with it. LSIs keep beta from becoming a loose destructive anarchic mess and IEEs keep deltas from becoming cavemen.

A Russian socionics author has categorized LSI as a quadra "stabilizer" and IEE as a quadra "instigator".

[Muddy]

A Russian socionics author has categorized LSI as a quadra "stabilizer" and IEE as a quadra "instigator".

Are you talking about this?

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-Benefit-Rings


I actually have my own theory about how the temperaments relate to the quadras. It is similar to the article above but has a few differences. I might make a thread about it.

[wacey]

Are you talking about this?

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-Benefit-Rings


I actually have my own theory about how the temperaments relate to the quadras. It is similar to the article above but has a few differences. I might make a thread about it.

Sounds good.

[Chacha]

I never heard about this issue with deadlines for xSI's, it's certainly not there on wikisocion, where did you see it?

For what sort of actions did you see SxE's not understanding in terms of consequences/impact?

Here's the definition of Ni as a mobilizing function from wikisocion.

"The individual periodically needs an outside evaluation of how a situation is likely to develop in order to keep from worrying excessively. Without an outside reassurance that a task can be accomplished in time without hurry, or that there is no need to deal with an ongoing development and that for the moment it's best to wait and see, the individual is anxious and inclined to try to deal with such issues immediately and sometimes impulsively."

As you can see in the bolded part, they mention the fact that they have trouble gauge the time that they will need to finish a task, that's what I called "deadline". Therefore they deal with their tasks in a hurry, and need some reassurance about it.

About SxEs, as you know they only have 1 dimensionality in Ni, and it is the experience dimensionality. That means that they cannot perceive or affect the information if they don't experience it directly.

"Experience – is something individual and personal (corresponding to vital and metal blocks) that cannot be transferred to another person. This is the self-perception of a human being. Any moment information is processed the person obtains experience."

So in a sense they need to explore causality by themselves in order to perceive the flow of time, and to think about how they can manage it, because they are focused on how they can actually impact the immediate present.

If you ask for specific actions, then you can imagine a lot of examples that implies a dynamic in term of time. Forecasting how something will evolve, a trend for example or any piece of static information.

[bolong]

LSI-Te? lol

Why do you think LSIs don't ever read anything?

I know ILIs as well who don't like reading much, getting too much new information, etc. Introversion in general there and maybe the devalued Ne on top of it.

Obviously everyone READS, but there are bookworms and people who will never be bookworms.

I think sensing and Te-ignoring particularly disposes you as a non bookworm, but there are other things to consider. Like females as a general rule read more than males, and so on.

[Myst]

Here's the definition of Ni as a mobilizing function from wikisocion.

"The individual periodically needs an outside evaluation of how a situation is likely to develop in order to keep from worrying excessively. Without an outside reassurance that a task can be accomplished in time without hurry, or that there is no need to deal with an ongoing development and that for the moment it's best to wait and see, the individual is anxious and inclined to try to deal with such issues immediately and sometimes impulsively."

As you can see in the bolded part, they mention the fact that they have trouble gauge the time that they will need to finish a task, that's what I called "deadline". Therefore they deal with their tasks in a hurry, and need some reassurance about it.

Ah that actually fits my mom who's an ESI but it doesn't fit me in terms of tasks; she does get anxious about deadlines, I just instinctively know how much time I'll need, also I know how long tasks usually take depending on the requirements; probably the stronger Ti/Te plays into it. Otoh, I do relate to the parts about getting anxious to act and sometimes even impulsive when it's not a situation where I can estimate timing based on logical notions. Also, I get very angry if there is a problem with timing regardless of whether it's my fault or not, I'd rather it not be my fault though and I can see that as a Ni HA expression.

About SxEs, as you know they only have 1 dimensionality in Ni, and it is the experience dimensionality. (...)

If you ask for specific actions, then you can imagine a lot of examples that implies a dynamic in term of time. Forecasting how something will evolve, a trend for example or any piece of static information.

Yes I know about dimensionality, I'd just like to be able to more concretely imagine/see how this is for Ni DS. Is it like, SxE's are unable to stop and introspect for a few seconds to withdraw from the situation to see ahead a bit? (Beyond the concrete examples of situations they already know from experience.) I'm finding complete inability in this area hard to imagine. I usually don't stop and ponder like that either but I can do it at times no problem.

Obviously everyone READS, but there are bookworms and people who will never be bookworms.

I think sensing and Te-ignoring particularly disposes you as a non bookworm, but there are other things to consider. Like females as a general rule read more than males, and so on.

I see but I don't think reading has any correlation to Te whatsoever. Ti can do it too. I've just given you that ILI example about Te ego not reading much.

It's true I'm not a bookworm myself but I do read more than the average person and cannot exclude that another LSI would be an actual bookworm.

Of course those other factors will also play into it as you said, my point is that I don't think socionics variables are enough of a factor to declare anything about someone's type based on how much they read or even generalize about a type in terms of this trait.

[Chacha]

Yes I know about dimensionality, I'd just like to be able to more concretely imagine/see how this is for Ni DS. Is it like, SxE's are unable to stop and introspect for a few seconds to withdraw from the situation to see ahead a bit? (Beyond the concrete examples of situations they already know from experience.) I'm finding complete inability in this area hard to imagine. I usually don't stop and ponder like that either but I can do it at times no problem.

You must know that the complete inability is quite impossible, we are human and are able to try to cover up our weaknesses. But as you know the dimensionality of our function will create a certain level of comfort or discomfort with these information element, and thus we will have a tendency to use our preferred information.
For Se-dominants it will be easy to impact the external world, judge and perceive the kinetic energy around them and reach a certain goal. Ni-dominants are the total opposite, they are in a state of inertia, perceiving causality and how things develop overtime. Therefore they tend to have a meaningful vision, and have almost no way to reach this goal.

Se-dominants can have a hard time following a meaningful goal because they are oblivious of causality, and will rather focus on the immediate and pragmatic present. The intangible realm doesn't belong to them, Jung said that they were the more concrete and pragmatic types. They cannot perceive well what is out of the concrete reality, and relationships between unfolding processes.

[Myst]

You must know that the complete inability is quite impossible

Sure just you said "unable to understand correctly the impact of their actions and willpower"

Se-dominants can have a hard time following a meaningful goal because they are oblivious of causality, and will rather focus on the immediate and pragmatic present. The intangible realm doesn't belong to them, Jung said that they were the more concrete and pragmatic types. They cannot perceive well what is out of the concrete reality, and relationships between unfolding processes.

Yeah, well, I don't perceive it too well either but I don't feel like it causes any real issues for me most of the time. Do you find SxE's are unable to see trends without help?

[Chacha]

Sure just you said "unable to understand correctly the impact of their actions and willpower"

Yes, a standard Se-dom won't be able to perceive the Ni aspect of reality well, that's a fact. But you have a very static vision here, because I said that sociotypes could actually improve in their weakest part (and make efforts to use them even if it's not really comfortable). But initially Se-doms won't understand correctly this aspect. That would be a shame if they were the only one able to be strong at their DS function.

Yeah, well, I don't perceive it too well either but I don't feel like it causes any real issues for me most of the time. Do you find SxE's are unable to see trends without help?

That's what the theory said. If I think about my own experience, I've often felt like they lacked of vision and meaning toward the future and life in general. Their goals were shallow, unless they start thinking more in depth about their life goals. And also they are very focused on immediate actions, and don't have much anticipation skills. But I feel like I'm repeating the same thing here.

If I believe your actual typing then Fe would be your real issue. Sociotypes rarely have real issues with their Hidden Agenda. By the way we are getting a bit out of subject here.

[Velvet]

You don't have to apologize, but I really do think those could be ILIs, or a rare LSI-Te, if they even exist. It's hard to tell the difference between LSI and ILI.

I know 2 LSIs from my family who are reading all the time, borrowing tons of books in the local library.
One of them grew blind over age so now she is into audio books and is terribly frustrated about not being able to use her eyes AND fingers to read.
But they are women, so if I follow your logic, it's more common.

[Myst]

If I think about my own experience, I've often felt like they lacked of vision and meaning toward the future and life in general. Their goals were shallow, unless they start thinking more in depth about their life goals. And also they are very focused on immediate actions, and don't have much anticipation skills. But I feel like I'm repeating the same thing here.

If I believe your actual typing then Fe would be your real issue. Sociotypes rarely have real issues with their Hidden Agenda. By the way we are getting a bit out of subject here.

Thanks for sharing your experience. Yeah it's getting off topic.

[Metreon Cascade]

I whole heartedly agree with every single word you said.

I would never ever eat sandwiches for school. I always found them soggy, they made me want to vomit. I also have high expectations with the oppressive sex.

I know for sure that I will die alone if I don't drop my standards.

[Airman]

I'll just give a short summary of how I think all the HAs manifest and why its a weak function.

Si: Si hidden agenda in my opinion is all about having high standards for the quality of things such as food, music, work conditions, physical attractiveness, art, or any form of entertainment. Its weak because these can be unrealistic expectations and these types are often unable to produce such quality themselves.

Fe: Manifest as seeking attention from other people and being wild and crazy. It is weak because these types often rely on things such pranks to lighten up the atmosphere which may backfire.

Ni: Manifest as trying to see where the world is headed and what the future has in store for them. It is weak because they can tend to fall for alex jones bullshit and can have paranoid or naive beliefs.

Se: Manifest as showing off their achievements, personal belongings, or their social status. It is weak because these types are often unable to handle jobs that demand real hard determination and they lack the backbone of Se doms.

Ti: Manifest as an attraction to scientific breakthroughs and trying to figure out how the world works. It is weak because much like Ni HA they often fall for psuedo-science and they crumble when tested with hard logic.

Ne: Manifest as a desire to keep up with what is trending and to get themselves and others to go do some fun activities. Its is weak because their ideas tend to be conventional and lacking imagination.

Fi: Manifest as being chartiable with their belongings and setting goals to help society. Its is weak because they suck at understanding how to appropriately interact with others.

Te: Manifest as trying to be the best performer in their work and always getting the best results. It is weak because they take a spray and prey approach and expend their time and energy inefficiently on dead end jobs rather then finding out the best way to do something.

When I read your summary of the Hidden Agendas I thought I didn't have to write any longer. Though I could slightly add or change some things you wrote here, they seem for me to be very close to the actual observable facts.
Ni and Ne HAs are not that correct though imo so I might write something about these ones at a later time.

[Airman]

@Airman,

[I].. Not to be proud, or anything. Just teasing. Actually, of the INFjs I know, this is sort of true. But they want more qualities than just handsome; also their devotion and commitment... which they are willing to faithfully wait for. Sometimes with those with whom its hopeless!

Yes and this is why they are completely out of touch with reality in a sense that they expect a perfect man as if they were themselves perfect. I've an ex-gf actually not a gf just a small affair we had, then we became friends, and she's been ALONE FOR YEARS waiting for the 'perfect man' to come and save her. I mean literally years. Now we live in the same city though it's huge and we live in extreme opposites of the city and we've met a couple of times but I stopped talking to her totally because she wants me as 'her friend' which I don't think is suitable since we had an affair when I was here for a short while in 2011-12. And she's so amazingly beautiful, and this often is a trait of INFjs which imo compensates for their lack of practicality and pragmatism. In a polite way I'm saying they lack intellectual demonstration, though they are far away from being 'dumb' or naive, they may seem so superficially.

[Myst]

When I read your summary of the Hidden Agendas I thought I didn't have to write any longer. Though I could slightly add or change some things you wrote here, they seem for me to be very close to the actual observable facts.
Ni and Ne HAs are not that correct though imo so I might write something about these ones at a later time.

Do correct the Ni and Ne HA then - I do know I don't relate to the Ni HA in terms of falling for alex jones bs

[uncivilized]

I definitely don't have an Si HA if it actually operates the way as described in this thread. I don't ever really put things into categories such as "that is ugly" or "that is beautiful." Everything is a mix of those qualities, a snake is both beautiful and ugly, I analyze the parts, the essence of it. Someone might say a man or woman is ugly, and s/he might be in some ways, but I'll see the parts that aren't, maybe the way their hair is, or their facial structure, or the shape of their eyes. I seem to see things as an assemblage of parts, feel I'm good at teasing out such details, everything is a mix of the repulsive and attractive to me.

[Airman]

I definitely don't have an Si HA if it actually operates the way as described in this thread. I don't ever really put things into categories such as "that is ugly" or "that is beautiful." Everything is a mix of those qualities, a snake is both beautiful and ugly, I analyze the parts, the essence of it. Someone might say a man or woman is ugly, and s/he might be in some ways, but I'll see the parts that aren't, maybe the way their hair is, or their facial structure, or the shape of their eyes. I seem to see things as an assemblage of parts, feel I'm good at teasing out such details, everything is a mix of the repulsive and attractive to me.

Actually this is a Judging function of the psyche, though it is associated with Si, it must be also associated with Ti to produce this strong sort of categorization of things into 'ugly or beautiful', 'comfortable or uncomfortable' etc. As in for example ISTj which has the automatic categorization of things into labels and categories and understands them this way, or in ISTp where there is Ti as the strongest function (Demonstrative). These two types tend to be the most aesthetes because in ISTj the leading element is Ti = categorization and the strongest element is Si which is its Demonstrative function. In ISTp as I have described the opposite happens, producing a very similar effect regarding this. Also important to notice that Si as Hidden Agenda has to do with HEALTH and COMFORT first rather than beauty, though of course Si is the aesthetic element per se, so beauty cannot escape its influence. When I mention the Demonstrative as the strongest function of the psyche this may seem new but it is a fact, and it was not originally suggested by me, but by the friend who introduced me to Socionics, and he said that in a conversation some four years ago. So I give him any credit for enlightening people about Demonstrative being the strongest function of psyche.
@Myst : I will, I just have an exam in less than 6 hours so I've been busy studying Political Science for the past 48 hours and I think I might get some two to three hours of rest before the exam, or better said I should.

[Beautiful sky]

I just like to keep people I love healthy

[Myst]

Actually this is a Judging function of the psyche, though it is associated with Si, it must be also associated with Ti to produce this strong sort of categorization of things into 'ugly or beautiful', 'comfortable or uncomfortable' etc. As in for example ISTj which has the automatic categorization of things into labels and categories and understands them this way, or in ISTp where there is Ti as the strongest function (Demonstrative). These two types tend to be the most aesthetes because in ISTj the leading element is Ti = categorization and the strongest element is Si which is its Demonstrative function. In ISTp as I have described the opposite happens, producing a very similar effect regarding this. Also important to notice that Si as Hidden Agenda has to do with HEALTH and COMFORT first rather than beauty, though of course Si is the aesthetic element per se, so beauty cannot escape its influence. When I mention the Demonstrative as the strongest function of the psyche this may seem new but it is a fact, and it was not originally suggested by me, but by the friend who introduced me to Socionics, and he said that in a conversation some four years ago. So I give him any credit for enlightening people about Demonstrative being the strongest function of psyche.

Uh, Ti is not just categorizing... there is a lot more to understanding than that. Demonstrative is a strong function but the strongest would be the Base still.

@Myst : I will, I just have an exam in less than 6 hours so I've been busy studying Political Science for the past 48 hours and I think I might get some two to three hours of rest before the exam, or better said I should.

OK cool thanks & good luck to that exam

[Airman]

Uh, Ti is not just categorizing... there is a lot more to understanding than that. Demonstrative is a strong function but the strongest would be the Base still.




OK cool thanks & good luck to that exam

I have to clarify that Demonstrative function is the strongest when it is being 'used' or accessed by someone. It is not THE MOST USED function or THE MOST PREFERRED function , this would be the Base. The Demonstrative is neverthelhess the strongest because, this is my hypothesis, one is not fully aware of HOW to use it moderately, and it is only used for periods of time, so it would amount that when one is using this function it is used in an often exaggerated manner (clear example to me Se demonstratives LSE, ESE), otherwise than in a more moderate manner as in Se base such as SLE, SEE. You can observe this for yourself and check if it is a fact or not. I am not telling absolute truths here. Just what my observation confirms. Thanks for the 'good luck on the exam', actually I was so lucky the Professor cancelled the exam and postponed it to next Friday morning, so I was better than lucky because I've got more time to review the entire thing.

[Myst]

I have to clarify that Demonstrative function is the strongest when it is being 'used' or accessed by someone. It is not THE MOST USED function or THE MOST PREFERRED function , this would be the Base. The Demonstrative is neverthelhess the strongest because, this is my hypothesis, one is not fully aware of HOW to use it moderately, and it is only used for periods of time, so it would amount that when one is using this function it is used in an often exaggerated manner (clear example to me Se demonstratives LSE, ESE), otherwise than in a more moderate manner as in Se base such as SLE, SEE. You can observe this for yourself and check if it is a fact or not. I am not telling absolute truths here. Just what my observation confirms. Thanks for the 'good luck on the exam', actually I was so lucky the Professor cancelled the exam and postponed it to next Friday morning, so I was better than lucky because I've got more time to review the entire thing.

Sure it depends on how you define "strong". I don't agree though about the reasoning here, my observations differ; but this is off topic here.

[Not A Communist Shill]

I have found in the past that reading PoLR descriptions can be highly illustrative of what may be going on when someone uses their HA. (Another way of looking at the HA being that behaviour that displays out of a fear or a dislike of manifestations of their PoLR function, or maybe merely a reflection of the order of their priorities.

Si:

 

EIIs are typically negligent of their surroundings and have difficulty keeping track of objects or constantly monitoring things and people around them.
They can be passive and self-absorbed, often preferring to wait for things to happen rather than make them happen. As such, they tend to have quite a number of lost opportunities. To a certain extent, EIIs can be oblivious to hints from someone who is romantically interested in them. Therefore, this gives the other party the wrong impression that they are not interested in them.
Outsiders often think the EII is oblivious to reality because they will often neglect basic needs. Although it is by no means necessary, this may also manifest itself as a general rejection or aversion to violence or force as a means or way of life.

 

The LII hates being ordered what to do, and chafes especially under orders that don't make sense to him. In such cases the LII is likely to criticize the authority — but if he does he is not subtle about it, and usually ends up being marked as a "rebel" and feeling even more frustrated than he did to begin with. An LII works best alone, so that he doesn't have to subordinate (to) others — or constantly negotiate his priorities, which strains his patience and diverts his time and attention away from reworking his understanding; if he is forced to waste time defending what he already knows, he gives up the freedom to deepen his understanding further. He does not tolerate pushiness combined with close-mindedness.
The LII does not like being simply told "get real" or "get off your duff", which he views as crude, intrusive, and insulting. He prefers to be left alone - or better, included in an atmosphere of open discussion that is receptive to his thoughts and thereby inspire him to develop them more.
If the LII has a problem that cannot be solved intellectually, but requires direct personal confrontation, he may resort to total avoidance rather than approaching the person directly, which he tends to think will produce only frustration and contempt. The LII thinks that, in an ideal world, everyone would just listen to reason instead of insisting on having their own way.

Fe:

 

SLEs have trouble evaluating the internal emotional state of others unless it is accompanied by a visible emotional expression. When unable to do so, they become uneasy. When an individual expresses negative emotions, SLEs feel that they are unable to offer the support needed; they get uncomfortable and confused, and as a result, will not respond appropriately to the situation or will react in a way which is unhelpful to the individual. SLEs themselves constantly seem emotionally guarded, and so very rarely will anyone actually have the chance to "comfort" the SLE in the everyday use of the word. The best way to do so is to let the emotion run its course.
SLEs often tread carefully when it comes to interpersonal relationships because they recognize their inherent weakness in this function. They feel the need to not only be respected, but also to be held dear by others, precisely because they feel inept when it comes to relationships. Often their behavior will have the opposite effect of what they were hoping for; if they are trying to protect someone, that someone may view their "protection" as pure jealousy, and thus will attempt to break away. The SLE will respond with further limitations in order to counter what they believe is irrational rebelliousness, perhaps causing a breakdown of said relationship. Despite this, SLEs can without extra effort manage to maintain a superficial - purely physical or formal - relationship. Their IEI duals, however, have an understanding of SLEs; they know how to react with in accordance with the SLE's mood, and thereby tactfully avoid incurring any misunderstanding.
To ease their doubts about their relationships with others, SLEs are sincere when it comes to establishing new bonds with others; they feel it is important to inform others of their true nature so that they will not be taken by surprise when the SLE acts in a certain way. Likewise, the SLE will often prefer to take the initiative in establishing new friendships and relationships. This is partly due to the fact that SLEs fear psychological distance; taking a more upfront and aggressive approach would allow him to more accurately observe those around him, while removing the possibility of one's gradual avoidance of the SLE.
SLEs are under the impression that they might gain respect or admiration from others, but can never be truly loved by anyone. Sometimes, SLEs can become paranoid about their relationships with others; they often mistrust declarations of affection, and so can appear insecure.

 

Unstable in maintaining psychological distance. May have trouble making clear attraction. Can hide their personal sentiments when pushed and avoids the public examination of their desires. ILE's tend to be unaware of how others view them relationship wise, unstable in levels of trust. View relationships skeptically unless legitimized. This can result in a mistrust of others and a general wariness regarding others' opinions of them, potentially causing irrational behaviors based on misconceptions in this area. They appreciate people who can reassure them of the status of a relationship.
Emotional responses to trauma will often manifest themselves several years later, triggered by things that seem to have little to do with the event responsible for the reaction e.g. abandonment issues surface after visiting a nursing home.
An ILE may view many accepted moral standards with scorn if they do not make logical sense to him and may be frustrated if convenient loopholes in a system are said to be 'out of bounds' morally. Indeed, the ILE may come to the conclusion that if he has not done anything legally wrong, then he could not possibly have done something morally wrong. Such thinking may bemuse more ethical types. In more extreme circumstances, the ILE will see morality as just another system to be taken apart and studied, shocking types who value moral traditions when he uses logic and his clever insight to dissolve moral imperatives. e.g. "You may view human sacrifice as something inherently wrong but that's just a result of your upbringing. If you were raised an Aztec you would have seen it as a remarkable thing, believing it to be responsible for keeping your crops watered and the sun moving across the sky."

Ni:

 

The ESI is highly skeptical about ideas and opportunities that may appear not to lead anywhere specifically, and seeks concrete assurance that actual material benefits will be achieved. The ESI prefers the kind of ideation that seems to lead somewhere (offer solutions) rather than the sort that is most likely to bring upheaval and unwanted changes. So they don't want to hear about all the possible problems in a situation, they'd rather hear only the very likely problems if there are any, and the benefits.
The ESI dislikes evaluations of people's potential to engage in activities or develop skills in which they haven't had experience yet; above all he is uncomfortable with such discussions by other people regarding himself. This makes the ESI concerned about the impression he makes on other people in those areas. He is inclined to be either over-skeptical of his own potential or going to the other extreme and overestimate his possibilities in specific areas on occasion.
ESIs are often amused by, and attracted to, demonstrations of the intense use of by others if at least tangentially connected to ideas that might have some practical use (); but they are repelled by it if used in such a way as to excessively contextualize ethics to the point of irrelevancy.

 

LSIs do not tolerate ambiguity, and so dislike abstract ideals that are not directly based on their experience. They almost invariably focus on the worst-case scenario whenever they are forced to be in an ambiguous situation. If the situation is in the future, they will expend much effort to be 100% prepared. They also tend to be very suspicious of others' intentions, being highly aware that every person is ultimately motivated by self-interest.
They set clearly achievable goals, which they often reach. Failure to meet these goals causes the LSI to express anger and lose control of his emotions in the form of a seemingly childish tantrum.
The LSI has a clearly defined set of rules that he must adhere to. Only through learning can the LSI change, and grow to understand how something could work differently than the way he imagines it in the moment.

Se:

 

The EIE is more likely to measure the comfortableness of conversation than other more physiological signs. Still, they are quite attuned to the the physical sensations others are experiencing and use the information to raise and lower the emotional conditions that those individuals are experiencing. In any case however, EIEs are prone to making errors in daily routine. This can include having little or no idea of where they put an object, allowing neglected responsibilities to pile up, or failing to remember important tasks given to them; excessive procrastination is common in EIEs. The EIE has little respect for people who seem to be too concerned with their health and comfort and who avoid straining themselves. The EIE feels that people who focus too much on caring for themselves will have no time to achieve anything worthwhile.
The EIE will feel empty and restless if he is in a situation where he is expected to just chill out and have a good time; he would feel that this undermines his devotion to realizing his abstract visions. He can only enjoy visceral contact with reality if it is accompanied by an active will to initiate such contact, to intentionally engage it. EIEs frequently reflect on experiences with others, both positive and negative, and are always bracing themselves for future problems (which mostly involve other people). This extensive planning of future engagements cause EIEs to often feel restless as they want to implement their goals quickly. In situations where they are forced to remain patient and idle, EIEs can dwell in their stress and neglect real problems.

 

LIEs have the view that aspects are of less importance than others for achieving their goals. They put a low priority on the physical, short-distance, here-and-now in relation to longer-distance and longer-term considerations. A typical manifestation is a lack of concern for small aesthetic details, since a greater focus is given on the opinion that, in the longer term, taking care of them is a never-ending exercise. This is also manifested in a relative lack of awareness of the immediate surroundings, as in noticing where objects may be if they don't have to deal with them particularly, and of their own physical sensations.
LIEs can accept that, for professional or social goals, they may have to take great care of aesthetic details in their immediate environment; but that will always be seen as a concession to others or to convention; they will never evaluate others in that regard and will tend to look down on those who are spontaneously very concerned about such matters.
This also leads to an inclination for postponing daily personal chores, which tend to accumulate and haunt the LIE later.

Ti:

 

IEIs have limited endurance in awareness concerning methods to achieve their purposes without wasting any energy or producing unwanted side effects. This creates a feeling of frustration and inadequacy. They do not value the importance of this area, and it can lead to painful consequences.
Taking care of intensely detailed work that is required to reach their goals, like managing finance or being pragmatic in business ventures, will exhaust their sense of concentration and they will find it frustrating as they continually encounter mistakes and things they had forgotten about or inadvertently ignored.
IEIs dislike having the details of the process--rote facts and statistics--thrown at them, giving more weight to an intuitive understanding of how the events within the process culminate inevitably in a certain result. They will distrust and dislike bossy people, and will avoid people who will assign them routine work like chores. They will even avoid their friends and family when they expect that they will be assigned such work, and do not enjoy fulfilling daily chores.
They dislike rote routine and do not give much attention to what others may view as the practical aspects of life. They may seem oblivious to objective reality, lost in their "dreams." This causes them to periodically lose track of their belongings, making them feel rather inadequate. IEIs will be overly stressed or even counter-productive in an atmosphere where speedy organization and efficiency are forced apon them.

 

SEIs can be skeptical of beliefs, arguments, and actions that are based on external sources of information or oppose the SEI's values system. Therefore, an SEI could come off as stubborn or rigidly set in their ways. They put more trust in the expertise of someone who seems to have hands-on experience, even if limited, than of someone who demonstrates having read many books on the same subject.
They can tend to tune out lengthy text-book explanations and information that requires especially concise explanations or language that they might have a relatively vague understanding or impression of. The reason for this is because the SEI always feels that "there is much more" to dry facts and statistics.
People who are bossy and critical are disliked by the SEI because SEIs usually believe in taking action only when it is prudent for them. They are also prone to avoiding people who demand perfection because that can lead to feelings of inadequacy for the job at hand.

Ne:

 

ESEs prefer to focus on immediate tasks, taking things as they come, rather than try to evaluate whether or not the task at hand will be very important in the longer run. A common consequence of this is an inclination to get stuck with last-minute tasks that keep the ESE distracted from later appointments or tasks, leading to being late for those.
They generally have a poor sense of how long things will take, and what the best amount of time to spend on things is. Therefore it is difficult for ESEs to stay on schedule without extensive (even total) pre-planning. ESEs very often have very precise agendas to plan their professional and personal lives, and yet be somewhat late when actually going about them.
ESEs are more confortable narrating events or stories, or making a point, on a sequential basis - "this happened, and then this, and then that" - since they are not confident that others will connect the dots as to how one event leads to the other, since the ESEs do not feel confident when doing that themselves.
They perceive time in an undifferentiated manner: the past, present, and future are all perceived as being in or near the present. When talking about the future (especially one's longer-term plans), ESEs treat it as if it were accessible today and often they are not aware of all the developments that must happen first, and how long those can take.

 

In order to be happy and productive, LSEs need a stable environment without sudden, unexpected changes. It takes them a while to get into a "groove" and find their rhythm, and any uncertainty about the future tends to fill them with a dread that makes it hard to be productive at all.
LSEs tend to express a simplistic vision of the future where their hard work pays off in the long run, or where everything in society goes hopelessly awry. They are not easily able to incorporate many different forecasts into their view of the future, relying instead on the trend of visible changes around them.
LSEs generally avoid talking about things that might or might not happen that don't depend on them, though they may think about these things to themselves. Discussions about what might or might not happen that are not based on provable facts distress them. Speculation not steeped in reality is a waste of time.
LSEs They prefer to believe that change depends on our actions and choices rather than on external events over which we have no control.
LSEs tend to have an unchanging habit of either being chronically late or chronically early. They rarely know or think about how long things will take, and their estimates are often way off. They are often surprised by the amount of time that has passed between events, and wonder where the time has gone. LSEs tend to want everything done as well as possible and to the highest possible quality, often failing to consider the amount of time necessary to do the job in such a way.
When making plans for the future, LSEs typically do not leave room for unforeseen obstacles. These obstacles frustrate the LSE because they destroy the established rhythm of operations and require switching gears. In talking about their goals for the future, LSEs often leave out intermediate steps, leading others to consider them naive. In LSEs' opinion, the important thing is to express a clear goal; the step-by-step process of getting there is less important.
LSEs get irritated by people who take forever to do things, or who slow down the overall pace of work for no good reason. If someone appears to be doing nothing, the LSE will assume that nothing beneficial is taking place.

Fi:

 

SLIs feel insecure and tense in situations with loud emotional displays — whether positive or negative — as well as in any situations expecting vocal displays of feelings and passions. Therefore, SLIs try to ignore anything relating to their vulnerable function. However, it becomes most prominent when they cannot properly organise the sensations, actions, and movements of their physical world. When this happens, they will feel hopelessness and extreme loss.
SLIs prefer to have lots of time to get to know people so that they can let out their hidden passions in a safe and friendly environment where no one will judge them. These passions are tender and must be treated with respect. If they are told they are not passionate enough or are too passionate, they will take offence and hide their emotions from that person in the future. They find it offensive when people assume things about their emotional state based on their expressions, because they find such inferences are too often wrong. Instead of explaining to the person how they are actually feeling, they will get annoyed and push the person away. If an SLI feels comfortable with a person, he can go on and on about his feelings, explaining them in-depth - not anything related to his present state but instead opinions about people he knows and, more often than not, what he finds irritating about them (which is perhaps related to ).
SLIs see no reason to get worked up about things. They tend to condemn people who do not control their emotional displays and "fly off the handle." They believe that people should think first about the effect their words and emotions will have on other people rather than just spilling out negative or potentially hurtful feelings as they feel like it. If someone has chewed them out in an emotional way just once, they tend to hold this incident against the person for years. To them such behavior is unnecessarily demeaning and malicious.
SLIs extremely dislike socialising (particularly amongst large groups) because they are incapable of creating and sustaining a wide range of emotions for people. They are also quite unable to deal with the painful and complicated job of organising the unpredictable emotions that they can receive from so many people at any one given time. Consequently, SLIs are often reclusive and socially unengaged despite being rather comfortable around a few people they have learned and when having one-on-one conversations on subjects in which they are knowledgeable.

 

ILIs analyze situations and make decisions in a very logical and scientific manner. Their reliance on objectivity and accumulation of factual knowledge leaves very little room for decisions based on emotional considerations. ILIs deeply dislike being asked or coerced to express their emotions. They are most comfortable expressing negative sentiments which indicate their disdain for required emotional participation, such as wry, sardonic pessimism. Some ILIs have very poor control over their emotions, and may lash out angrily if provoked.
When discussing important matters, ILIs often betray a harsh, critical perspective on viewpoints and ideas that they find particularly stupid or insensible. ILIs do not attach emotions to factual information, and so do not consider such criticism to be offensive. If confronted with somebody whose intelligence, persona, or ideas they do not respect, they may react in a hostile fashion, which can be perceived as arrogant or insensitive; not all ILIs, obviously, will react this way.
ILIs' reactions to the sphere of emotions can vary greatly, but they are particularly apparent in the sphere of social relations. ILIs are typically not social creatures. Some do not understand the importance of social connections and choose to ignore the area of emotional involvement with others altogether, instead delving into virtual reality, mystical introspection, or private study. Others trudge through the social landscape without truly understanding the art of socialization, ignoring politeness and not caring about offending others. ILIs may view people who constantly try to make others happy as foolishly involving themselves in a completely pointless exercise.
ILIs tend to be nervous about interacting with other people due to lack of confidence in their social abilities, and often feel that they are not socially respected. They find it difficult to gauge a person's mood without an obvious expression or gesture. Only with a small number of people whom the ILI trusts deeply does the ILI let down his emotional guard. To these people, the ILI can be surprisingly sincere and kind. Nonetheless, the ILI will be little more than an acquaintance to the mass of people that the ILI does not completely trust.

Te:

 

The SEE hates when other people infer or remind him that he's not doing what he "should be doing." This is in complete opposite to his preference of following his whims and doing what he wants when he wants it, with as little structure as possible.
They have trouble focusing on systematic decision making, sometimes leading to occasional large mistakes (e.g. an unnecessary, expensive purchase) that was not thought through. Such mistakes lead to shame, guilt, and disappointment within the SEE, although he does not broadcast these sentiments to many. SEE doesn't like having to weight out pros and cons or make the "right" or "proper" decision.
In regards to unsubstantiated, theoretical knowledge, the SEE can either accept the unproven parts in good faith, or he'll completely reject it as foolish, unnecessary, and unimportant.
The SEE can be afraid to make discussion about fields heavy in systematic knowledge, doubting his ability to convey such thoughts in a clear, composed, and valued manner.

 

IEEs tend to have a difficult time describing a concept or system in a manner in which the essential facts are all that is needed to understand or describe it. The IEE's focus in describing a concept or system is in how they themselves came to understand and see what they are describing. If an IEE is asked to describe or explain something, their natural tendency is to describe the pieces of the concept, system or idea that are related to the subject as a foundation before explaining the actual concept itself. The IEE will often describe details or aspects of a system that are unnecessary to the understanding of the system's properties, but the IEE views these details as essential functions of a sequential system (as opposed to describing the concept or system and only the concept or system as an independent entity). In other words, even if a detail is deemed outside of the IEE as extraneous, the IEE that is describing it will see it as a vital and significant part of a chain in order to paint the full, "proper" picture of the system the IEE wants to describe. An IEE will tend to start off explanations with a tremendous amount of detail, energy and patience and will move towards a more general explanation as they tire out (if they tire out). If something in the IEE's chain is broken or questioned, the description (in the IEE's mind) halts or falls apart.
When an IEE understands a logical concept or system, they are much better at describing anecdotal experiences with the concept or system that help to illustrate the concept or system. They would prefer to do this rather than describing the concept or system as described in the previous paragraph -- describe the essential facts of a concept or system.
IEEs will demonstrate inconsistent behavioral patterns to the objective, outside world. But to the IEE, these behavioral patterns are as a result of a relativist view of how they make their decisions. For example, an IEE might be steadfastly against going to a particular branch of a bank to deposit a check that is easily accessible and only 2 miles away, but is perfectly content going to a different branch of the same bank that is 25 miles away and requires a roundabout route to get there. To the outside world this would not make sense; why not just go to the branch that is easier to access that can handle the same function? But to the IEE, this does not matter. Something at the closer branch bothers the IEE enough to justify going to the further one. Maybe a particular person works there that the IEE wants to avoid, maybe one time the IEE did something embarrassing while at the closer branch and they are embarrassed to show their face again. Regardless of the reason, the IEE will justify circumstances to dictate the decisions they make in their behavioral patterns.
The IEE is keenly aware of societal structures and affiliations that they belong to. These structures can be small entities such as "family" and large entities such as "political affiliation". As such, an IEE will naturally speculate about how these societal structures they belong to would interact if they mingled (+). With a propensity to be involved in a diverse number of interests, IEEs find themselves in a position where they would deem that members of certain societal structures would clash if they met. This will, at times, cause IEEs to hide their affiliations to parties that they feel might cause scrutiny or criticism of their affiliations. They would rather not be judged by others based on their affiliations. Also, if an IEE is cast into an "incorrect" category, this can cause deep wounds in the IEE especially if the IEE believes that the person doing the casting will not change their position about the IEE's affiliation, and as a result of that, believes it to be a negatively connoted statement of their own character.

[poops magoops]

I have found in the past that reading PoLR descriptions can be highly illustrative of what may be going on when someone uses their HA. (Another way of looking at the HA being that behaviour that displays out of a fear or a dislike of manifestations of their PoLR function, or maybe merely a reflection of the order of their priorities.

Si:

 

EIIs are typically negligent of their surroundings and have difficulty keeping track of objects or constantly monitoring things and people around them.
They can be passive and self-absorbed, often preferring to wait for things to happen rather than make them happen. As such, they tend to have quite a number of lost opportunities. To a certain extent, EIIs can be oblivious to hints from someone who is romantically interested in them. Therefore, this gives the other party the wrong impression that they are not interested in them.
Outsiders often think the EII is oblivious to reality because they will often neglect basic needs. Although it is by no means necessary, this may also manifest itself as a general rejection or aversion to violence or force as a means or way of life.

 

The LII often applies in an academic field such as mathematics, one which allows for abstract speculation to be realized in concrete conclusions. The LII does not much care for implementation or hands-on work, requiring some degree of independence from material demands in order to develop his own ideas. If the LII feels made to do a task he perceives as boring, he will try to find an original way to do it, if simply for the sake of developing an interesting idea. The LII can think on his feet, and is able to consider multiple viewpoints, although if he feels that he has fully analyzed an idea in the past, he may dismiss it out of hand with .
The LII is always in tune with the "big picture", looking at things from the most general perspective possible. Given this frame of reference, he sees many ways ordinary life could be changed to meet his vision of how things should be. Thus the LII is often seen by other more practically-minded types as naively idealistic.
The LII does not come up with ideas simply for their own sake, but tries to relate everything back to "the main point". He quickly becomes impatient or disinterested with discussion that is simply meant to generate ideas, instead of realizing them.

Fe:

 

SLEs have trouble evaluating the internal emotional state of others unless it is accompanied by a visible emotional expression. When unable to do so, they become uneasy. When an individual expresses negative emotions, SLEs feel that they are unable to offer the support needed; they get uncomfortable and confused, and as a result, will not respond appropriately to the situation or will react in a way which is unhelpful to the individual. SLEs themselves constantly seem emotionally guarded, and so very rarely will anyone actually have the chance to "comfort" the SLE in the everyday use of the word. The best way to do so is to let the emotion run its course.
SLEs often tread carefully when it comes to interpersonal relationships because they recognize their inherent weakness in this function. They feel the need to not only be respected, but also to be held dear by others, precisely because they feel inept when it comes to relationships. Often their behavior will have the opposite effect of what they were hoping for; if they are trying to protect someone, that someone may view their "protection" as pure jealousy, and thus will attempt to break away. The SLE will respond with further limitations in order to counter what they believe is irrational rebelliousness, perhaps causing a breakdown of said relationship. Despite this, SLEs can without extra effort manage to maintain a superficial - purely physical or formal - relationship. Their IEI duals, however, have an understanding of SLEs; they know how to react with in accordance with the SLE's mood, and thereby tactfully avoid incurring any misunderstanding.
To ease their doubts about their relationships with others, SLEs are sincere when it comes to establishing new bonds with others; they feel it is important to inform others of their true nature so that they will not be taken by surprise when the SLE acts in a certain way. Likewise, the SLE will often prefer to take the initiative in establishing new friendships and relationships. This is partly due to the fact that SLEs fear psychological distance; taking a more upfront and aggressive approach would allow him to more accurately observe those around him, while removing the possibility of one's gradual avoidance of the SLE.
SLEs are under the impression that they might gain respect or admiration from others, but can never be truly loved by anyone. Sometimes, SLEs can become paranoid about their relationships with others; they often mistrust declarations of affection, and so can appear insecure.

 

Unstable in maintaining psychological distance. May have trouble making clear attraction. Can hide their personal sentiments when pushed and avoids the public examination of their desires. ILE's tend to be unaware of how others view them relationship wise, unstable in levels of trust. View relationships skeptically unless legitimized. This can result in a mistrust of others and a general wariness regarding others' opinions of them, potentially causing irrational behaviors based on misconceptions in this area. They appreciate people who can reassure them of the status of a relationship.
Emotional responses to trauma will often manifest themselves several years later, triggered by things that seem to have little to do with the event responsible for the reaction e.g. abandonment issues surface after visiting a nursing home.
An ILE may view many accepted moral standards with scorn if they do not make logical sense to him and may be frustrated if convenient loopholes in a system are said to be 'out of bounds' morally. Indeed, the ILE may come to the conclusion that if he has not done anything legally wrong, then he could not possibly have done something morally wrong. Such thinking may bemuse more ethical types. In more extreme circumstances, the ILE will see morality as just another system to be taken apart and studied, shocking types who value moral traditions when he uses logic and his clever insight to dissolve moral imperatives. e.g. "You may view human sacrifice as something inherently wrong but that's just a result of your upbringing. If you were raised an Aztec you would have seen it as a remarkable thing, believing it to be responsible for keeping your crops watered and the sun moving across the sky."

Ni:

 

The ESI is highly skeptical about ideas and opportunities that may appear not to lead anywhere specifically, and seeks concrete assurance that actual material benefits will be achieved. The ESI prefers the kind of ideation that seems to lead somewhere (offer solutions) rather than the sort that is most likely to bring upheaval and unwanted changes. So they don't want to hear about all the possible problems in a situation, they'd rather hear only the very likely problems if there are any, and the benefits.
The ESI dislikes evaluations of people's potential to engage in activities or develop skills in which they haven't had experience yet; above all he is uncomfortable with such discussions by other people regarding himself. This makes the ESI concerned about the impression he makes on other people in those areas. He is inclined to be either over-skeptical of his own potential or going to the other extreme and overestimate his possibilities in specific areas on occasion.
ESIs are often amused by, and attracted to, demonstrations of the intense use of by others if at least tangentially connected to ideas that might have some practical use (); but they are repelled by it if used in such a way as to excessively contextualize ethics to the point of irrelevancy.

 

LSIs do not tolerate ambiguity, and so dislike abstract ideals that are not directly based on their experience. They almost invariably focus on the worst-case scenario whenever they are forced to be in an ambiguous situation. If the situation is in the future, they will expend much effort to be 100% prepared. They also tend to be very suspicious of others' intentions, being highly aware that every person is ultimately motivated by self-interest.
They set clearly achievable goals, which they often reach. Failure to meet these goals causes the LSI to express anger and lose control of his emotions in the form of a seemingly childish tantrum.
The LSI has a clearly defined set of rules that he must adhere to. Only through learning can the LSI change, and grow to understand how something could work differently than the way he imagines it in the moment.

Se:

 

The EIE is more likely to measure the comfortableness of conversation than other more physiological signs. Still, they are quite attuned to the the physical sensations others are experiencing and use the information to raise and lower the emotional conditions that those individuals are experiencing. In any case however, EIEs are prone to making errors in daily routine. This can include having little or no idea of where they put an object, allowing neglected responsibilities to pile up, or failing to remember important tasks given to them; excessive procrastination is common in EIEs. The EIE has little respect for people who seem to be too concerned with their health and comfort and who avoid straining themselves. The EIE feels that people who focus too much on caring for themselves will have no time to achieve anything worthwhile.
The EIE will feel empty and restless if he is in a situation where he is expected to just chill out and have a good time; he would feel that this undermines his devotion to realizing his abstract visions. He can only enjoy visceral contact with reality if it is accompanied by an active will to initiate such contact, to intentionally engage it. EIEs frequently reflect on experiences with others, both positive and negative, and are always bracing themselves for future problems (which mostly involve other people). This extensive planning of future engagements cause EIEs to often feel restless as they want to implement their goals quickly. In situations where they are forced to remain patient and idle, EIEs can dwell in their stress and neglect real problems.

 

LIEs have the view that aspects are of less importance than others for achieving their goals. They put a low priority on the physical, short-distance, here-and-now in relation to longer-distance and longer-term considerations. A typical manifestation is a lack of concern for small aesthetic details, since a greater focus is given on the opinion that, in the longer term, taking care of them is a never-ending exercise. This is also manifested in a relative lack of awareness of the immediate surroundings, as in noticing where objects may be if they don't have to deal with them particularly, and of their own physical sensations.
LIEs can accept that, for professional or social goals, they may have to take great care of aesthetic details in their immediate environment; but that will always be seen as a concession to others or to convention; they will never evaluate others in that regard and will tend to look down on those who are spontaneously very concerned about such matters.
This also leads to an inclination for postponing daily personal chores, which tend to accumulate and haunt the LIE later.

Ti:

 

IEIs have limited endurance in awareness concerning methods to achieve their purposes without wasting any energy or producing unwanted side effects. This creates a feeling of frustration and inadequacy. They do not value the importance of this area, and it can lead to painful consequences.
Taking care of intensely detailed work that is required to reach their goals, like managing finance or being pragmatic in business ventures, will exhaust their sense of concentration and they will find it frustrating as they continually encounter mistakes and things they had forgotten about or inadvertently ignored.
IEIs dislike having the details of the process--rote facts and statistics--thrown at them, giving more weight to an intuitive understanding of how the events within the process culminate inevitably in a certain result. They will distrust and dislike bossy people, and will avoid people who will assign them routine work like chores. They will even avoid their friends and family when they expect that they will be assigned such work, and do not enjoy fulfilling daily chores.
They dislike rote routine and do not give much attention to what others may view as the practical aspects of life. They may seem oblivious to objective reality, lost in their "dreams." This causes them to periodically lose track of their belongings, making them feel rather inadequate. IEIs will be overly stressed or even counter-productive in an atmosphere where speedy organization and efficiency are forced apon them.

 

SEIs can be skeptical of beliefs, arguments, and actions that are based on external sources of information or oppose the SEI's values system. Therefore, an SEI could come off as stubborn or rigidly set in their ways. They put more trust in the expertise of someone who seems to have hands-on experience, even if limited, than of someone who demonstrates having read many books on the same subject.
They can tend to tune out lengthy text-book explanations and information that requires especially concise explanations or language that they might have a relatively vague understanding or impression of. The reason for this is because the SEI always feels that "there is much more" to dry facts and statistics.
People who are bossy and critical are disliked by the SEI because SEIs usually believe in taking action only when it is prudent for them. They are also prone to avoiding people who demand perfection because that can lead to feelings of inadequacy for the job at hand.

Ne:

 

ESEs prefer to focus on immediate tasks, taking things as they come, rather than try to evaluate whether or not the task at hand will be very important in the longer run. A common consequence of this is an inclination to get stuck with last-minute tasks that keep the ESE distracted from later appointments or tasks, leading to being late for those.
They generally have a poor sense of how long things will take, and what the best amount of time to spend on things is. Therefore it is difficult for ESEs to stay on schedule without extensive (even total) pre-planning. ESEs very often have very precise agendas to plan their professional and personal lives, and yet be somewhat late when actually going about them.
ESEs are more confortable narrating events or stories, or making a point, on a sequential basis - "this happened, and then this, and then that" - since they are not confident that others will connect the dots as to how one event leads to the other, since the ESEs do not feel confident when doing that themselves.
They perceive time in an undifferentiated manner: the past, present, and future are all perceived as being in or near the present. When talking about the future (especially one's longer-term plans), ESEs treat it as if it were accessible today and often they are not aware of all the developments that must happen first, and how long those can take.

 

In order to be happy and productive, LSEs need a stable environment without sudden, unexpected changes. It takes them a while to get into a "groove" and find their rhythm, and any uncertainty about the future tends to fill them with a dread that makes it hard to be productive at all.
LSEs tend to express a simplistic vision of the future where their hard work pays off in the long run, or where everything in society goes hopelessly awry. They are not easily able to incorporate many different forecasts into their view of the future, relying instead on the trend of visible changes around them.
LSEs generally avoid talking about things that might or might not happen that don't depend on them, though they may think about these things to themselves. Discussions about what might or might not happen that are not based on provable facts distress them. Speculation not steeped in reality is a waste of time.
LSEs They prefer to believe that change depends on our actions and choices rather than on external events over which we have no control.
LSEs tend to have an unchanging habit of either being chronically late or chronically early. They rarely know or think about how long things will take, and their estimates are often way off. They are often surprised by the amount of time that has passed between events, and wonder where the time has gone. LSEs tend to want everything done as well as possible and to the highest possible quality, often failing to consider the amount of time necessary to do the job in such a way.
When making plans for the future, LSEs typically do not leave room for unforeseen obstacles. These obstacles frustrate the LSE because they destroy the established rhythm of operations and require switching gears. In talking about their goals for the future, LSEs often leave out intermediate steps, leading others to consider them naive. In LSEs' opinion, the important thing is to express a clear goal; the step-by-step process of getting there is less important.
LSEs get irritated by people who take forever to do things, or who slow down the overall pace of work for no good reason. If someone appears to be doing nothing, the LSE will assume that nothing beneficial is taking place.

Fi:

 

SLIs feel insecure and tense in situations with loud emotional displays — whether positive or negative — as well as in any situations expecting vocal displays of feelings and passions. Therefore, SLIs try to ignore anything relating to their vulnerable function. However, it becomes most prominent when they cannot properly organise the sensations, actions, and movements of their physical world. When this happens, they will feel hopelessness and extreme loss.
SLIs prefer to have lots of time to get to know people so that they can let out their hidden passions in a safe and friendly environment where no one will judge them. These passions are tender and must be treated with respect. If they are told they are not passionate enough or are too passionate, they will take offence and hide their emotions from that person in the future. They find it offensive when people assume things about their emotional state based on their expressions, because they find such inferences are too often wrong. Instead of explaining to the person how they are actually feeling, they will get annoyed and push the person away. If an SLI feels comfortable with a person, he can go on and on about his feelings, explaining them in-depth - not anything related to his present state but instead opinions about people he knows and, more often than not, what he finds irritating about them (which is perhaps related to ).
SLIs see no reason to get worked up about things. They tend to condemn people who do not control their emotional displays and "fly off the handle." They believe that people should think first about the effect their words and emotions will have on other people rather than just spilling out negative or potentially hurtful feelings as they feel like it. If someone has chewed them out in an emotional way just once, they tend to hold this incident against the person for years. To them such behavior is unnecessarily demeaning and malicious.
SLIs extremely dislike socialising (particularly amongst large groups) because they are incapable of creating and sustaining a wide range of emotions for people. They are also quite unable to deal with the painful and complicated job of organising the unpredictable emotions that they can receive from so many people at any one given time. Consequently, SLIs are often reclusive and socially unengaged despite being rather comfortable around a few people they have learned and when having one-on-one conversations on subjects in which they are knowledgeable.

 

ILIs analyze situations and make decisions in a very logical and scientific manner. Their reliance on objectivity and accumulation of factual knowledge leaves very little room for decisions based on emotional considerations. ILIs deeply dislike being asked or coerced to express their emotions. They are most comfortable expressing negative sentiments which indicate their disdain for required emotional participation, such as wry, sardonic pessimism. Some ILIs have very poor control over their emotions, and may lash out angrily if provoked.
When discussing important matters, ILIs often betray a harsh, critical perspective on viewpoints and ideas that they find particularly stupid or insensible. ILIs do not attach emotions to factual information, and so do not consider such criticism to be offensive. If confronted with somebody whose intelligence, persona, or ideas they do not respect, they may react in a hostile fashion, which can be perceived as arrogant or insensitive; not all ILIs, obviously, will react this way.
ILIs' reactions to the sphere of emotions can vary greatly, but they are particularly apparent in the sphere of social relations. ILIs are typically not social creatures. Some do not understand the importance of social connections and choose to ignore the area of emotional involvement with others altogether, instead delving into virtual reality, mystical introspection, or private study. Others trudge through the social landscape without truly understanding the art of socialization, ignoring politeness and not caring about offending others. ILIs may view people who constantly try to make others happy as foolishly involving themselves in a completely pointless exercise.
ILIs tend to be nervous about interacting with other people due to lack of confidence in their social abilities, and often feel that they are not socially respected. They find it difficult to gauge a person's mood without an obvious expression or gesture. Only with a small number of people whom the ILI trusts deeply does the ILI let down his emotional guard. To these people, the ILI can be surprisingly sincere and kind. Nonetheless, the ILI will be little more than an acquaintance to the mass of people that the ILI does not completely trust.

Te:

 

The SEE hates when other people infer or remind him that he's not doing what he "should be doing." This is in complete opposite to his preference of following his whims and doing what he wants when he wants it, with as little structure as possible.
They have trouble focusing on systematic decision making, sometimes leading to occasional large mistakes (e.g. an unnecessary, expensive purchase) that was not thought through. Such mistakes lead to shame, guilt, and disappointment within the SEE, although he does not broadcast these sentiments to many. SEE doesn't like having to weight out pros and cons or make the "right" or "proper" decision.
In regards to unsubstantiated, theoretical knowledge, the SEE can either accept the unproven parts in good faith, or he'll completely reject it as foolish, unnecessary, and unimportant.
The SEE can be afraid to make discussion about fields heavy in systematic knowledge, doubting his ability to convey such thoughts in a clear, composed, and valued manner.

 

IEEs tend to have a difficult time describing a concept or system in a manner in which the essential facts are all that is needed to understand or describe it. The IEE's focus in describing a concept or system is in how they themselves came to understand and see what they are describing. If an IEE is asked to describe or explain something, their natural tendency is to describe the pieces of the concept, system or idea that are related to the subject as a foundation before explaining the actual concept itself. The IEE will often describe details or aspects of a system that are unnecessary to the understanding of the system's properties, but the IEE views these details as essential functions of a sequential system (as opposed to describing the concept or system and only the concept or system as an independent entity). In other words, even if a detail is deemed outside of the IEE as extraneous, the IEE that is describing it will see it as a vital and significant part of a chain in order to paint the full, "proper" picture of the system the IEE wants to describe. An IEE will tend to start off explanations with a tremendous amount of detail, energy and patience and will move towards a more general explanation as they tire out (if they tire out). If something in the IEE's chain is broken or questioned, the description (in the IEE's mind) halts or falls apart.
When an IEE understands a logical concept or system, they are much better at describing anecdotal experiences with the concept or system that help to illustrate the concept or system. They would prefer to do this rather than describing the concept or system as described in the previous paragraph -- describe the essential facts of a concept or system.
IEEs will demonstrate inconsistent behavioral patterns to the objective, outside world. But to the IEE, these behavioral patterns are as a result of a relativist view of how they make their decisions. For example, an IEE might be steadfastly against going to a particular branch of a bank to deposit a check that is easily accessible and only 2 miles away, but is perfectly content going to a different branch of the same bank that is 25 miles away and requires a roundabout route to get there. To the outside world this would not make sense; why not just go to the branch that is easier to access that can handle the same function? But to the IEE, this does not matter. Something at the closer branch bothers the IEE enough to justify going to the further one. Maybe a particular person works there that the IEE wants to avoid, maybe one time the IEE did something embarrassing while at the closer branch and they are embarrassed to show their face again. Regardless of the reason, the IEE will justify circumstances to dictate the decisions they make in their behavioral patterns.
The IEE is keenly aware of societal structures and affiliations that they belong to. These structures can be small entities such as "family" and large entities such as "political affiliation". As such, an IEE will naturally speculate about how these societal structures they belong to would interact if they mingled (+). With a propensity to be involved in a diverse number of interests, IEEs find themselves in a position where they would deem that members of certain societal structures would clash if they met. This will, at times, cause IEEs to hide their affiliations to parties that they feel might cause scrutiny or criticism of their affiliations. They would rather not be judged by others based on their affiliations. Also, if an IEE is cast into an "incorrect" category, this can cause deep wounds in the IEE especially if the IEE believes that the person doing the casting will not change their position about the IEE's affiliation, and as a result of that, believes it to be a negatively connoted statement of their own character.

Did you write these? It is really spot on.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Did you write these? It is really spot on.

ah no, I didn't. There're from the main type profiles on wikisocion.org

[Myst]

I have found in the past that reading PoLR descriptions can be highly illustrative of what may be going on when someone uses their HA. (Another way of looking at the HA being that behaviour that displays out of a fear or a dislike of manifestations of their PoLR function, or maybe merely a reflection of the order of their priorities.

The LII one is the wrong one (Ne creative description is quoted instead of Se PoLR)

I see these descriptions as mostly just showing a real bad use of the IE in question and/or an overlay of the creative function on top of that.

[Not A Communist Shill]

The LII one is the wrong one (Ne creative description is quoted instead of Se PoLR)

Thanks.

I see these descriptions as mostly just showing a real bad use of the IE in question and/or an overlay of the creative function on top of that.

It's not perfect (and in some cases, they don't really work) because they weren't written with my usage in mind, but I think they touch on a "photographic negative"-type description for the HA...a second part, a flip-side. I found it interesting for taking an oblique look, perhaps looking more on passive usage/manifestations of the HA.

[Myst]

It's not perfect (and in some cases, they don't really work) because they weren't written with my usage in mind, but I think they touch on a "photographic negative"-type description for the HA...a second part, a flip-side. I found it interesting for taking an oblique look, perhaps looking more on passive usage/manifestations of the HA.

Yeah, I get the idea. I do in general view the opposite attitude (of introversion or extraversion) as quite relevant when interpreting what it means to focus on a specific IE.