Differences between LIE-ENTj and LSE-ESTj

[Absurd]

Look at the Reinin traits. In particular, ask Absurd about them. LSEs tend to be taller.

What should (s)he ask me?

[Saberstorm]

Watch this video of Absurd. This is his youtube channel. That is how a LSE thinks and talks.

[EyeSeeCold]

What ways are there to distinguish the two in real life?

LIEs talk much and do little. hah

[Galen]

The only two LXEs who come to mind that are both on youtube and actually have interesting things to say are Alan Watts (LIE) and AronRa (LSE)




EDIT: Actually I wonder if AronRa himself isn't LIE. If he is, then use these two videos to demonstrate the intellectual prowess of gamma NT over delta ST, as evinced by the aforeposted videos.

[Beautiful sky]

LSE aren't good at mobilizing resources for immediate action (being tactical types); they need predictability and planning. I can't just suggest things to do with my bf just because I feel like it; he needs to know in advance just in case he factors in what he feels like doing and what he's planned in advance and if time is permissible in order to act in a way which I think is the best time to do a certain thing at the moment.

LIE are much more willing to do things at a drop of a hat because they are not planning or keeping the scope of the immediate future (today, tomorrow, etc) in mind; they are strategic types; they are keeping priorities and things with regard to what they have to get done that might not be in the immediate in their mind.

LSE are heartier, physically; they have fleshier faces, more inclined to be stalky men; LIE are much more frail looking, have very skinny bodies.

They are both inclined to collect massive amounts of information and make judgements (evaluate) that information, and both can be quite charming, ethical and funny.


LSE is the Administrator http://socioniko.net/en/1.3.rels/dual-4j.html
Administration requires delegating and details.

LIE are called Enterpriser because they are good at seeing need for innovation and filling it with product or service.
http://socioniko.net/en/1.3.rels/dual-3j.html

[Saberstorm]

I was worried that this thread would become a total farce and result in the OP leaving us. Thanks to Galen and Martisa for comming in to rescue the thread!

[Saberstorm]

Here is an LSE who happens to be the commander of NATO and formerly Obama's national security adivsor.

[Beautiful sky]

That is not an LSE

[Saberstorm]

What, he looks like a total LSE. What do you think he is? (by the way, your boyfriend is an ESI!!!)

[Beautiful sky]

What? He does not, his eyes are droopy and "relaxed" he's not at all an LSE

[Beautiful sky]

Oh, I forgot to mention...LSE are tense and their motion is directive.

[Saberstorm]

He is old. Born December 19, 1943. He fought in Vietnam. He is a retired general. LSEs, when (after 40 years of fighting wars) will have droopy eyelids!

This is an official Martisa classic!

[blackburry]

I think Marista's post was right on-- except for the weight comment--which is not type related at all.


If she says her boyfriend LSE, he's LSE... and from the way she describes him he sounds it.
I suggest dropping it or this thread will get annoying fast.

[Saberstorm]

I was baiting her with the ESI comment. I think she can tell.

[717495]

LSEs tend to do things in moderation. LIEs tend to go overboard and be "all-or-nothing"-- Think of the guy from "Dirty Jobs"-- He's like a few of the LSEs I know.

That's not what a serious type looks like, idky people think Mike Rowe is LSE aside from the oh-so-general stereotype of putting on professional face or the other great mantra of getting things done. He's emotionally "intrusive" and warm/peopley, even if you think it's even-tempered like a sane delta, it's not whatsoever devoid of strong ethics. Similar to the other lad Maritsa put in the Kutcher thread, Gere is his name.

Look at LSEs on Galen's and my post here http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...l=1#post854972. LxEs Fi valuing can always be noted by its feel of internalization, manifested as like drawing from their own personal bank. They don't have anywhere near such accommodating intentions.

[Saberstorm]

Most of what you will hear on this topic is overly-specific and subjective to circumstance BS, or some even quote ideas from the pop-portraits. The best way to learn the difference between the types is a) sticking to the information elements and b) overall vibe.

LSEs tend to look at unfolding events or trends in order to be ready for the future - they look to the horizon like the (judicious) skipper of a ship, setting a course wisely to avoid crisis. LIEs look to the future in long term way, they seek to command (decisively) the future as its maker. They seek to be trend setters.

LSEs are often wisecrackers if a subordinate but when in a position of authority they take on the appearance of a traditional "leader" – protecting the people. LIEs are often “know-it-alls” when a subordinate, but went in a position of authority they look more like a "powerful executives" – powerfully changing directions.

[Morcheeba]

Look at the Reinin traits. In particular, ask Absurd about them. LSEs tend to be taller.

I hope this comment is a joke!

[Radio]

Meh. I'm bored. I'll describe two of my friends, Te-ESTj and Ni-ENTj.

The Te-ESTj friend is very dry. The primary difference I find between Beta STs and Delta STs is that the former are cold, whereas the latter are dry. He's not very emotive, save for the occasional laugh, never addresses relationships directly or talks about his emotions. When we get together, he talks about every day mundane happenings, what he did that day, what he will do the next day, what his immediate plans are. We discuss movies and music and tv shows. He makes plans and then drops them immediately, because often he's unable to control all the parameters. For instance, if he made plans for us to go out for a drink, he would inform me a day before the event but there's about a 90% he won't make it, because something more important comes up. Our conversations rarely veer into the abstract, and this may be a component of general intelligence rather than any indication of type. He was great in school, though, somehow he managed to get better grades than everyone else even though he's not that smart in the bookish sense; he just knew how to juggle time in tests, how to write very neatly, how to manage a good impression in front of the teachers, and how to push himself to complete the necessary tasks (all of which I sucked at). He's slightly on the hedonistic side, self-conscious about the kind of clothes he wears, how he comes across to other people. He strictly wears branded clothing, smokes expensive cigarettes, and spends considerable amount of money to make himself appear well-to-do. He's not conceited, though; just very conscious of how he comes across as. He's a bit stiff, he doesn't react very quickly and it's almost as if he's calculating the best manner in which to react to things others say. If someone from his circle of friends makes fun of him, more often than not he just smiles politely and doesn't strike back.

The Ni-ENTj friend is very energetic and fun. He's the stereotypical "comedian". I typed him Fi-ESFp before but now I think Ni-ENTj fits a lot better. He loves to entertain crowds of people by acting out certain characters. One moment he'll be very serious and quiet and then if I say something a little ridiculous he'll immediately get into one of his characters and act it out. He's constantly jittery; shakes his hands and legs or paces around nervously, almost as if the energy is hard to contain inside himself (even when he's really serious). In one-on-one conversation however, he can be a completely different person; he is very attuned to the issues like politics and knows a great deal about things I don't care about. He reads about leaders and idolizes them and their philosophies. Sometimes though, he'll say something so far-out that it's difficult to know what he's basing his statement on, like he'll say, "this country only has 10 years to live. The current state of affairs is going downhill and the country will fall apart by [so-and-so year]" and then he'll go on to elaborate the consequences of this happening, the killings, riots and violence. And I'll ask, "why do you think so?" and he usually says something like "it's in the air, I can feel it". I take it to be some form of Ni that I can't make sense of but sometimes he's actually right. Sometimes he'll say something is wrong, "I can sense something is wrong", and it does turn out to be that way — I have no idea how he does this. He doesn't take very many risks, his actions are calculated, precise, and he makes sure to spend the least amount of effort to get a job done. He doesn't have fun like regular people, i.e. go out and eat/drink, except once in a while (if we inform him a week beforehand) because he takes time to prepare himself mentally. His clothing is often very casual, his shoes nearly tattered, like he couldn't care less about what he's wearing. He is the only person I know who entirely manifests the "live and let live" philosophy; he's quick to change the topic or shrug it off if one of our friends object to/criticize another person's life style. He doesn't like to interfere, doesn't like to be nosy, considers morals to be entirely subjective and is very conscious of personal boundaries and space.

Overall, there is a great deal of difference between the two types as well as my two friends. I like the ENTj friend better because he makes me laugh and is intellectually stimulating to talk to. Neither of these people are insensitive per se, nor are they purposely hurtful, and I can't find anyone on this forum to compare them with. My Fe-INFp friend has a very different reaction to the ENTj and I reckon if he got around to describing him, there would be a lot more negatives involved, but anyway.

[FDG]

Mmm these two types make a distinctly different first impression, even though their day-to-day life might be somehow similar.

Many LSEs, especially those more focussed on Te, will come across as being relatively well-integrated into their environment: casual discussions with random acquaintances, well-managed schedule, relatively calm and composed. Many LIE will come across as slightly detached and airy, but then suddenly extremely extraverted and engaging, then back to being detached and airy. Oftentimes they seem to do everything with no schedule (even though they're likely just not telling you), and they will often have some type of anti-social bent regarding clothing and social niceties. LSEs seem more tense in their demeanor, LIEs more nervous. LSEs have a more of a "traditional masculine/feminine" aura, LIE are more on the debonair/standoffish(sorry LIE girls that's usually my impression lol) side.

[Creepy-pokeball]

Only rare ESTjs do not piss me off and most ENTjs do not. It is quite simple, you see.

[Beautiful sky]

Yes, Ashton; every evening my BF goes over his next day's plan with me.

[Creepy-pokeball]

That sounds like death in slow motion.

[Beautiful sky]

"I'm still thinking, should I take this to the post office tomorrow or to Fex Ex. FedX has better packaging material and I would probably have to get there before 10 am; after that I'm going to see the movie. I am going to try to get in touch with the producer on tuesday; after that, on my to do list, is working on my next book."

I'm not talking much as you can probably tell. I'm just trying to process all this stuff to do. He likes organizing his days.

"Oh honey, and I found out about the movie at Aero, I'm not going because it's too long a drive and I have to work the next morning and the movie is going to run too late."

[DirectorAbbie]

LIEs are more likely to eat tofu.

[The Ineffable]

LIEs talk much and do little. hah

In a way, yes. Both look to the future and make promises - in the sense of accomplishing things for everyone involved - but LIE's are rather intangible and often endeavours that were never done before. I mean if you ask the guy how precisely he will accomplish the goal, the LIE would not be able to tell, will just distract your attention, blabber something not really concrete (like the ILE and the other NTs, actually), say big words, because their kind of tasks are not something very clear, but rather some sort of a final purpose and guiding principle, based a lot on estimations, gut feeling, analogous examples. The LSE will draw your attention towards the necessary details, while the LIE away from them.

LIEs, as Ni-Creatives (Si-PoLR) think big all the time and often in their pursuits you can forsee great risks and the possibility of failure. If you don't trust your fate or try your luck, you woun't be able to keep up with them. They are the "we'll se about that when the time comes" type of people, good improvisers, while LSEs, on the contrary (Si-Creative = Ni-PoLR), are skeptical about the means of accomplishing something unless all the important details are clarified, and will nitpick on this. LIEs will give away the bird in their hand for the one in the bush (assuming it is worth it), LSEs on the contrary, that would be the last thing they would do. LSEs tend to be traditional or old-school, LIEs tend to be innovators and pioneers.

I can tell wit confidence - from my experience and my typings, of course - that Si Creatives (LSE, ESE), if it's up to them, will not let you go for a field that was never tried before (for example a career in teaching sharks how to dance), no matter how convinced you are that it will work. But Ni-Creatives, on the other hand, are all ears, you actually might want to hide your ideas from them as they may go for it themselves - and for more - before you can say "dance" .

[empineer]

LSE is very careful when it comes to sharing any private information, especially in workspace. LIE will be somewhat easygoing if they don't dislike your intentions for being curious. LIE will show a lot of emotions or compliment-like sentences relating to even something as unimportant as the way you look today, just to keep the atmosphere cool. LSE is more serious looking and will not easily show emotions or compliment at the first encounter when they see you. They are not that cool

[Hope]

The decisions LIEs take doesn't make sense often. They sometimes set unrealistic goals and expectations (that doesn't match with the observable reality, specially have problem in looking at Si reality).

LSEs are extremely good at managing money, the best administrators I know. LIEs can manage money but they like to spend a lot. LSEs are more stingy.

LIEs are more dreamy and ambitious, they constantly need to set new goals. LSEs can be more conformist with their achievements (if they like what they do or have what they need).

LIEs tend to have a jovial, cheerful or even immature nature until they are old (4DNe and 3DNi). LSEs are much more realistic, mature and are more careful since young.

LIEs are more stubborn and defensive than LSEs and appeal to their emotions and feelings (as motivations or excuses).

LIEs can feel discouraged often, LSEs are much more firm and less dependent of emotions or feelings.

LSEs have stronger physical appearance. LIEs tend to look and be more delicate (physically talking).

[Bertrand]

I agree with all that, but I always sort of thought of LIE as pathologically optimistic and certainly less discouragable than LSE. Although I will say LIE is quicker to shoot ideas down and venture alternatives, but its not pessisism per se. Whereas LSE might doggedly see a plan through, but existentially break down at some point. Whereas LIE will pick up and drop projects left and right, but never really lose faith in themselves

So in there here and now LSE comes off more as more stoic because they're more likely to try and work something out rather than cut and run if it looks grim, but would likewise risk depression and discouragement if it doesn't turn around. Whereas LIE is all over the place but never gets truly discouraged about whatevers happening

[idontgiveaf]

I like LIe more than LSE at work.

[lavos]

LSE's think they know everything.

LIE's actually know everything.

[Number 9 large]

LSE's think they know everything.

LIE's actually know everything.

you just contradicted yourself

[lavos]

you just contradicted yourself

?

[Number 9 large]

?

you say LSEs think they know everything and that LIEs know everything. But that's what you think, and since you type yourself LIE, you must be LSE.

[lavos]

you say LSEs think they know everything and that LIEs know everything. But that's what you think, and since you type yourself LIE, you must be LSE.

I do not think it, I know it

Also, I was semi-facetious with that statement

[wasp]

UDP mentioned coaching styles earlier and, in my experience, LSEs are more "brick-wall" and LIEs are more upside-down waterfall.

LSE
• prefer to coach younger players
• half-father, half-coach
• more grounded and serious
• loud and aggressive during games
(i.e. yell out direct commands from the bench, esp. in the midst of chaos)
• calm and attentive during practices
• patient with teaching skills/drills
• inclusive team atmosphere
(i.e. more likely to mingle with parents/players outside the game; team bbqs)
• conscious of your comfort zone
(i.e. if you don't want to play a new position, they'll eventually back off)
• under/over-estimate potential
(i.e. well-established teams > fixer-uppers w/ indeterminate potential)
• team progression is consistent, but stagnant
• extremely conscious of "fair play"
(i.e. if you punch a player during a game, they'll bench you)

LIE
• prefer to coach older, more experienced players
• 100% coach
• more bold and energetic
• calm during games
(i.e. less yelling; thrives in chaos, likes devising new courses of action)
• detached and unyielding during practices
• zero interest in teaching rudimentary skills/drills
• competitive team atmosphere
• pushes you to the limit and then some
(i.e. they'll put you in a position you've never played before, if they think you've got potential)
• confident in gauging potential
(i.e. fixer-uppers with indeterminate potential > well-established teams)
• team progression is always treading upwards, even if chaotic
• "fair play" is irrelevant insofar that it's acceptable so long as you don't get carded
(i.e. if you punch a player during a game, they'll stifle their laughter)

I imagine it works similarly in the business world and elsewhere, save for a few details. I wrote a lot more but I think it got way too complex. one tiny detail I noticed was that the LIE coach was more willing to piss off a player before a game if he knew that they performed better when they were mad.

[Desert Financial]

I have a first hand view of this as my dad is an LSE and my mom is an LIE. Juxtaposed, you can more easily tell the differences.

One of the most pronounced dissimilarities between my folks involves the Positivist/Negativist dichotomy. My mom tends to have an optimistic view of how the world works. For example, she leans toward the assumption that the legal system will work as intended. Furthermore, she thinks that most undertakings will pan out well if you simply persist. It's almost as if despite the fact that she knows how animalistic, instinctual, and self-serving people can be, she also seems to think that justice will be served in the end and that her goals will be met. If she has an expectation of you, she'll practically reward you before you do anything because she assumes you'll follow through. On the other hand, my dad has a more dreary outlook on the world. For instance, he thinks that certain groups of people are generally confined to have a certain lot in life (Aristocratic). To my dad, it's like most affairs will inevitably lead to corrosion, disappointment, or disaster. Think Murphy's Law. Since he notices what's absent first, he's inclined to move the goalposts on you if you try to meet his expectations.

Another difference between my folks manifests in the form of romance styles (Victim/Caring). My mom has a blend of pseudo-aggressor and victim qualities. For example, she has a strong tendency to argue about almost anything and pushes the boundaries of the relationship this way. She has quite a bit of aggression coupled with an air of authority - like she has won a position of royalty through the relationship. Despite this, she has some classic victim traits you'll see in other ego types. Kind of clumsy and prone to accidents or health problems, she signals to my dad for help. In contrast, my dad acts as a caring teacher for my mom, which dovetails fairly well with my mom's classic "victim" attributes. For instance, he primarily performs acts of service as a breadwinner to cover my mom's basic needs. As a "teacher", he explains the pragmatic side of life, especially concerning finances. He most often delineates why you can't do something. As a side note, my mom mostly runs under the assumption that you can, while my dad mostly runs under the assumption that you can't (Positivistic vs. Negativistic).

For a more generalized, thorough explanation of the differences between LSE and LIE, look here: http://www.sociotype.com/tools/type-comparison/LIE-LSE

[calm]

Yes that is very insightful (as is the rest of FDG's post).

ENTjs and ESTjs are both Fi dual-seeking; only the ENTj is a Ni Victim and the ESTj is a Si Caregiver. That means that the ESTj finds it easier to be "manly" when approaching someone, with the ENTj being more hesitant. Both, however, are afraid of seeing a Fi bond.

What do you mean?

[Beautiful sky]

.

[Adam Strange]

What do you mean?

Expat left the building in 2009. You might be able to reach him through the World Socionics Society.

[Aramas]

LSE has chill. LIE has no chill unless meditating.