Se and aggression

[silke]

^ lo and behold! the prophetic powerz of Ni

Whoa, you're not acting much better. The point is not to shut down discussion needlessly. It's a good thread with a legit question, not an excuse to diss lungs.

Whatever, I think you're both PMSing.

I wasn't trying to shut down the discussion. If I thought this was an uninteresting topic, I wouldn't have contributed. But since lungs insinuated that Radio and I were not addressing her inquiry, I reminded her that I am actually addressing one of the points in her OP. Though I am feeling sick today so my reply was probably a bit snappish.

[Scapegrace]

Probably because I don't suffer myself to read many of the shitty translations of the Dead Russian Scrolls I simply associate Se ego people with a kind of eagerness. I quite like it. However I think that keenness can be understood as aggression in arguments and competitive situations.

The end.

[Codie]

Aggression is more a manifestion of being "out of control" of your own emotions, I imagine that anger's not significantly type related other than the ways in which it is likely to negatively manifest. ie an INFx may be more passive-agressive or utilize the silent treatment to cope and a ESTx might get into a fight without thinking of the consequences. Either are not particularily cool headed ways to let the emotion out.

[ashlesha]

Aggression is more a manifestion of being "out of control" of your own emotions

yeah. this rang a bell in my head but i don't know why yet.

something to do with double involvement maybe, or weak ni and thinking that things need to be sorted away RIGHT NOW. i'm probably steering it in too personal of a direction but this is food for thought, for me.

[717495]

Se has never come across more aggressive to me. They just have a bigger, more objective sense of space that crosses personal boundaries and is less fine-tuned to me. It always seems more about the something and its full authenticity, rather than the perception or image of something that can be improved upon and changed by oneself. When Se gets in my business it seems like its quite effortlessly asking for and orienting towards simple information, that is really not that simple to me and has more underlying definition and sense of time and growth. Se and Si ask different questions about their sensory world. Oftentimes, Se wants an answer that will enhance the current experience, and maybe such a desire for impact can come across aggressive.

A lot of times I'm unsure why they're so interested in what's going on, but in my experience in the presence of SEEs, a lot of things happening in real time seem to have a vivid meaning and response tied to it, that through a qualitative filter I just don't have. I can understand it empathically through their Fi in a way I could never by myself. The best way to understand its simplicity is just comparing it to my sense of objectivity with intuition. If I had to guess, Se by itself is not really that meaningful, it's just a way to be right and enjoy yourself at the same time like everybody wants to do, whether with Ne, Se, Te or Fe.

Hard to say.. I don't think most of them intend to come off like that, but since they're so good at knowing what buttons to push to get what they want, people that are less good at it may find it uncomfortable.

I dislike Se being portrayed as an ability to push the right buttons to get what you want. That is grossly misdefined.

[willekeurig]

I dislike Se being portrayed as an ability to push the right buttons to get what you want. That is grossly misdefined.

That's pretty close to how the descriptions portray it. "The ability to know how much power, force, or influence is latent or required" "Se is about achieving an object of desire. It gives one the ability to influence, bend, and push situations and people in order to achieve such an object" etc. How would you word it better?

[willekeurig]

Except Se clearly isn’t conducive to getting anything one wants, so that definition doesn’t work. If an Se desired you, do you think there’d be no question they’d succeed?

Defining functions/types in this way basically means portraying them in terms of superhero attributes… which is just plain boring and 1-dimensional.

Yeah many things about many descriptions are obviously lacking. I don't think anyone's suggesting all Se types can always get what they want, or that Se polrs, in contrast, could never/hardly ever. But compared to people with weaker Se I think they certainly are better at, well, applying force and influencing people/situations. How would you define Se?

[woofwoofl]

Re: the topic at hand, studies, that have been done in MBTI at least, show that there is no relationship between Se and aggressive attitudes so it's likely that this correlation that socionics makes doesn't work.

It's the type of aggressiveness, and what heats it up or cools it down that I've been paying most attention to, not some raw quantity of aggressiveness.

I got a guy at ILE and I thought that by aggression or some physical swagger or something that he'd possibly be SLE. Nope; those formulations of "the ___ guy", comparing me to people based on something completely unrelated to physical attributes (my response: "are you blind?), wildly overestimating and underestimating my physical capacity, stamina, etc. (the SLEs I know are a bit better at picking their battles, which unfortunately means I can get run straight through on a bad day), and then he walks like TheAmazingAtheist and smiles like the Smash Mouth guy haha...

The SLEs just kinda naturally make sense to me more, but I still feel like they got this tendency to try to cudgel the world into some kinda mentally created dividers that the world will have no part of, and they're far more eager to break shit as a means of resolving something, and the SEEs I know are a lot less like that. As for me it strikes me as short-sighted and a total dick move. The IEEs I know are aggressive in this unique way that I can't quite place, and I like it fine, but then I worry if a bunch of fucking judgements are made about me that are like wtf and shit haha... come to think of it, the ILE guy does this with the warmth replaced with this odd rigidity and forumulations, which turns it from cute to gross...

Extraverted Rationals oftentimes talk a lot about a bunch of shit I don't care about and it gives me a headache. LIEs big time excluded! Haha, and yeah, the aggression I spot in the EJs, if it's that, is just of a completely different flavor; I don't even know if it's aggression as much as it is activity that feels aggressive to be on the receiving end of, or close to it...

And yeah if I'm sparse on the details, it's my life and other peoples' and I don't want to blow it all around in the open because they never made the decision and I don't know what the fuck to do and I'm sick of dealing with people's stupid shit.

[Absurd]

Like Charles Bukowski:

“I was sentimental about many things: a woman’s shoes under the bed; one hairpin left behind on the dresser; the way they said, “I’m going to pee..”’ hair ribbons; walking down the boulevard with them at 1:30 in the afternoon, just two people walking together; the long nights of drinking and smoking; talking; the arguments; thinking of suicide; eating together and feeling good; the jokes; the laughter out of nowhere; feeling miracles in the air; being in a parked car together; comparing past loves at 3am; being told you snore; hearing her snore; mothers, daughters, sons, cats, dogs; sometimes death and sometimes divorce; but always carrying on, always seeing it through; reading a newspaper alone in a sandwich joint and feeling nausea because she’s now married to a dentist with an I.Q. of 95; racetracks, parks, park picnics; even jails; her dull friends; your dull friends; your drinking, her dancing; your flirting, her flirting; her pills, your fucking on the side and her doing the same; sleeping together”

Quite interesting, doesn't it make anyone Se ego?

[mu4]

Bukowski basically represented boorish male aggression and antisocial behavior... I don't know if that's helping the thread.

[717495]

Quite interesting, doesn't it make anyone Se ego?

No, definitely not me. Ego function is about having a dominant viewpoint. Notice how the Bukowski quote is comfortably broad and inclusive in his sensory experiences. There is no qualitative filter about them, just quoting it as it was. The only hints of quality-based perception are in his undescribed sentiments about them.

[mu4]

Funny, because that’s basically not my impression of him at all.

This is kinda what I meant about non-Se valuers reading Se all wrong and misconstruing.

Eh, I meant this is the image he presented in his writing and to others.. I mean he's called "laureate of American lowlife".

[Absurd]

No, definitely not me. Ego function is about having a dominant viewpoint. Notice how the Bukowski quote is very broad and inclusive. There is no qualitative filter about his sensory world, just speaking as it is. The only hints of quality-based perception are in his undescribed emotions about them.

Oh I see, no offence to any SEEs around but had a somewhat hard time reading through that gibberish of a quote, not formatted well, and it sounds like, hmm, I don't know, some random guy sitting in a bar at a table with some girl and blabbing about parks, sleeping, joking and walking, so I thought everyone is Se ego.

Very interesting. Does all of his poetry deal with that?

[ashlesha]

Bukowski basically represented boorish male aggression and antisocial behavior... I don't know if that's helping the thread.

that's not the point. the point is that his writing is the fruit of an se mindset and it's right there in what Ashton quoted.

[mu4]

that's not the point. the point is that his writing is the fruit of an se mindset and it's right there in what Ashton quoted.

Not a OR statement. This is a AND statement.

[Absurd]

Oh well, not my cup of tea, although after reading it again, I still think everyone is Se ego, unless you, @polikujm, do not eat, read newspapers, walk, go to park picnics, smoke and drink.

I can be always wrong though.

[Leader]

Se...will, right of will, power,confidence,action( taking action/ being surrounded by action),influence,impact,presence,desire, sensation,experience. As for se ego being aggressive, depends on point of view. Aggression stereotypically receives a negative connotation. We Se usually live in the moment, day by day. We" aggressively" pursue our goals, as in we know exactly what we want, but the method of action we use is mediated by our creative function. When Herzy said it was a state of mind it means we are constantly looking to influence the material world around us, always on the move for new exciting and novel sensations, not only for the experience but to gain and create something out of this experience. SEE se/fi is different in that they want to "appear" powerful, and by being more naturally people oriented they achieve their goals through popularity (popularity more so with people who are already powerful) which results in the appearance of being influential, which inturn translates to power ( although not true volitional se like Estp who are more independent and focused/better with things and skills, personal power). Se can be, but doesn't have to be literal aggression. We just know what we want, but through our creative is how we achieve that goal. We can either be forceful or smooth and diplomatic, that is part of se. Understanding how much force of will we need to put out to achieve what we want.

Also, some people may confuse se with aggression because we se (we are of sanguine temperament), when sometimes trilled and too into the moment, can get quite rowdy and energetic, which might turn off others. Or another example, if nothing is going on to feed our ego, we might take matters into our own hands to get things started.

[Leader]

Another thing...the only time I can really see "se" being solely aggressive is when its used by somebody who isn't naturally good with it. Like for example, when entj or enfj try to use it, it might come off as too much because they don't know how to use it properly. Like an enfj dressing too provocative or trendy, orboasting and trying to hard to seem tough when its clear its mostly all talk.

[Gilly]

bluhhhhhh

Sounds more like gut triad.

...you think 9s are like this?

...

[Creepy-pikachu]

This is really not that difficult. It is not an emotion -- its a perceptual state: immediate, sensate. Im not sure what is not clear about that.

[Creepy-pikachu]

Aggression is misleading, but assertiveness is worse. It has nothing to do with people on its own, as it is an objectttttt function, similar Te -- people as objects, yet not dynamic. Hence, force of will. It has everything to do with the person themself, even to the point that they perceive themself as an object, hence some will force their own will on themself, too.

[Beautiful sky]

Aggression is misleading, but assertiveness is worse. It has nothing to do with people on its own, as it is an objectttttt function, similar Te -- people as objects, yet not dynamic. Hence, force of will. It has everything to do with the person themself, even to the point that they perceive themself as an object, hence some will force their own will on themself, too.

Yes, and when the Se base perceives people as objects, losing subjectivity or suppressing it, they tend to want people as objects and treat them as such.

Yeah immediate sense; something comes into view, the object senses it, is either drawn to it or repelled by it.

Color is a very immediate sense; so Se types especially women are very drawn to color and can use and manipulate these things as objects; like applying makeup or picking out certain clothes, or even food (that's sensory stuff too).

My SEE friend always tells me "I love to eat, I wish I could do more of it." While I think it's a chore sometimes.

Se is not aggression; people become aggressive or less so externally manipulative or assertive for various environmental reasons and reasons outside of Socionics, but the more "developed" the base function is, the more the person leans that way; for example, the more "developed" Se base SEE may be way more externally active with regards to world of objects than a more "developed" Fi SEE who tends to dwell on their emotions and interact less with the external environment. Doesn't mean the person's not SEE in both cases or a "subtype" it just means they are more or less oriented a certain way.

[Beautiful sky]

An Ij-Ne is more likely to show stubborness in repeating the same perceptive states -- much like looking at a crystal from many angles, and shining light through the new angle, the same patterns of questions/answers will emerge on the same subject. That is how Ne manifests, especially when focused under the pressure of Ti or Fi dominants.

We are talking about the magic number 12 right?

[Beautiful sky]

Because I don't tell lungs what she wants to hear, so then she throws hissy fits and passively-aggressively talks shit behind my back.

That is the highlight of FiSe.

[silke]

That is the highlight of FiSe.

Consider yourself an ESI then since this is your usual modus operandi.

It's the type of aggressiveness, and what heats it up or cools it down that I've been paying most attention to, not some raw quantity of aggressiveness.

I agree that socionics type may influence the 'flavors' to aggression that each type displays. What I am disagreeing with is assigning it to a single socionics information element considering that real life observations dispel any such correlates.

... the aggression I spot in the EJs, if it's that, is just of a completely different flavor; I don't even know if it's aggression as much as it is activity that feels aggressive to be on the receiving end of, or close to it...

I compare EJ aggression to that of train that can run you over if you don't get off the tracks, which is relatively easy to do. I've had much more trouble with EP types since they just kind of hone in on you and then proceed to pummel you with their Ji.

[Beautiful sky]

Consider yourself an ESI then since this is your usual modus operandi.

Really? I hardly notice myself doing that. I'm usually so unable to regulate the external environment that sometimes I don't read what is posted, but I don't demand that others say what I want to hear. Nor, have I ever asked them to. I've asked for apologies but that is because I'm hurt.

[Creepy-male]

Se and aggression

- I don't think aggression is fundamental to a type with Se in the ego block, I think it is only an occasional consequence of some more fundamental character traits.

[Galen]

Here's my one and only experience with Se that sticks out in my head as being particularly indicative of the IE

 

(I ONLY WRITE RELEVANT THINGS IN ANECDOTAL STORY FORM ANYMORE)

About a year ago my Ne-ILE friend invited me to see a Picasso exhibition with his Se-SLE and Ni-IEI mom and dad respectively. We established between each other pretty early on that we simply didn't "get it;" I don't recall the names of any specific works, but it all sorta bled together and nothing struck me or my friend as engaging. His mom though was having a blast. On more than one occasion she came up to me and started with "look at the lines and contours and shadows cast by that sculpture" or something similar. She seems to be very captivated by certain physical forms she found throughout the exhibit; wasn't trying to intellectualize anything, she was just pointing out to others the specific, concrete, tangible thing she was experiencing. She then took us all up to the roof of the museum to show us the "amazing contours and undulations" that were designed into the architecture. Again, neither I nor my friend "got it," but she was practically captivated by it. She may just be more of an art connoisseur than the two of us, I couldn't say.

Similar to the Bukowski quote Ashton posted earlier, she seemed to be highly focused on concrete things or events she sees that possess some sort of experiential impact on her. I see her as drawing or accentuating boundary lines between objects in physical space and drawing upon those things as her primary resource of gaining information, or using them as source material for triggering further thoughts or reactions within herself. So she'll often speak in terms of "there's a thing," "that mountain is very big," "this dog has a hat on it," etc., and my friend will continuously be at a loss for how to respond. In contrast, this friend and I have both talked about how we tend to mentally blur the boundaries between objects in space and find it more natural to take in entire fields of view at a time instead of mentally delineating every object from every other object; whenever I've tried doing so I either end up with a headache or become very tense.

[Creepy-pikachu]

Quite a bit apparently, if Se is being associated with “will power”.

Of all the misconstruals promulgated by Socionics, this one is by far among the stupidest.

I said force of will

[Absurd]

Force of will is the same as will power.

[Beautiful sky]

Extraverted logic......external dynamics of objects: focus on activity of objects (location, time, speed, etc.), what we refer to as objective parameters, leading to patterns that we call algorithms and methods. Objective parameters are like variables in an equation that form an active system occupied with variables whose values are real people and objects.

Extraverted sensing......external statics of objects: (share, texture, impact, force, etc.), what we refer to as properties of an object or objective traits, leading to action toward objects via mobilization or arrangement, manipulation of force to achieve desired results.

Se is less introspective than because it focuses more on taking immediate action before thinking first due to it's orientation to apprehend external statics of objects, it's as though there is a compulsion to enact the external dynamics of objects once their statics are apprehended. Se apprehends external dynamics of objects, already seeing how force is shared between objects as a system and seeking to implement statics of objects through proper analysis and organization into a system.

This makes Te the more introspective function and Se the more active, spontaneous function. Te is still concerned with action, but planned action, action coordinated with the system, hence the notion of proper action, the proper way to do things, and concern with how things are arranged...all of which can be seen to derive from principle, the implementation of principles.

I'm planning to delve into the functions more thoroughly, but this is just a start, meant to demonstrate why I see Te as more introspective and detailed and Se as more spontaneous and active.

.

Introspective: given to examining own sensory and perceptual experiences.

[Creepy-pikachu]

Force of will is the same as will power.

No, it is not, especially in this context.

[Beautiful sky]

Quite a bit apparently, if Se is being associated with “will power”.

Of all the misconstruals promulgated by Socionics, this one is by far among the stupidest.

he's saying manipulation of will not will power.

Will is not FORCE it's
"Intend, desire, or wish (something) to happen: "he was doing what the saint willed"."

Example:

I was at the purse shop and I saw this purse, I don't have a purse like this and I wanted it.

[Beautiful sky]

Example of will:

Ashton and perky boob you guys are assholes take the dirty talk to pm

First part is strict "label" according to ethics

Second part is Se.

[Absurd]

No, it is not, especially in this context.

It's exactly the same, take it from somebody who self-typed SLI and now self-types double delta people, you just replaced "power" with "force", leaving "will" intact. Again, it's still volition, it's still the same thing, it's your subjective semantic play on words that leads you to believe it isn't.

[Beautiful sky]

What does that even mean?

As in self desired ethics; if someone does something it's bad, but if they do it it's ok, or if they do it at another time, once they realize something, it's fine, self satisfying ethics.

The opposite is universal ethics, as in my case; "people should treat each other with kindness."

[Beautiful sky]

not mine ashton; I'm not ESI.

[Absurd]

Tear him apart, Maritsa...

[Beautiful sky]

I never say that EII are not without faults; if you would like, I can open a thread and list all of them;

[Beautiful sky]

Go for it.

Ok, pls give me some time to amass as many things as I can.