IEEs and Ti PoLR (ENFp)

[Steve]

My dad is a Ne-ENTp

[Steve]

My brother literally comes downstairs, plays the piano for two minutes, and leaves; only to return 30 minutes later to play for 20 minutes, etc. To me that's like...what the fuck? Anyway, that's a brief anecdote.

I'm exactly like that lol - follow da flow.

[Sirena]

strrrng, didn't you mean to type "Ne-ENFp" for you dad, instead of Ne-ENTp?

ENTp's don't have Ti PoLR Steve, so what are you winking about?

[Steve]

strrrng, didn't you mean to type "Ne-ENFp" for you dad, instead of Ne-ENTp?

ENTp's don't have Ti PoLR Steve, so what are you winking about?

I was winking to make the same point you just did

[Creepy-]

Ah, the table-turn. Ok.

My dad is a Ne-ENTp [Ne-ENFp?]and brother is a Fi-ENFp. It tends to manifest in the same patterns for each of them, but my dad seems to be running from it, whilst my brother seems to fight it directly (maybe cause dad is a 7 and brother is cp6). That being said...

It's a sort of general aversion to any systematic formulation of reality. There is no intrinsic structure in their ideas, and they don't want any type of parameters implemented into their lives. Things are viewed as discrete logical processes, and they generally see the areas I'm interested in, which essentially favor a Ni+Ti mindset, as pointless, excusing themselves from them under pretenses of being "realistic," "using their gut" when it comes to people, and so on. I can't give too many reifications of it, but did you read that duckwatching argument a while back? I think that demonstrated classic ENFp antics (although mainly Si/Ne vs. Se/Ni). It's sort of like they're incapable to grasp any set of rules. Nor would they ever let said thing "interfere" with their lives. My brother literally comes downstairs, plays the piano for two minutes, and leaves; only to return 30 minutes later to play for 20 minutes, etc. To me that's like...what the fuck? Anyway, that's a brief anecdote.

And note that with CA's examples, I wasn't saying that they couldn't be a manifestation of Ti polr, only that they were too simplistic to be directly correlated with it—at least without some knowledge of her motivations and the mental process which fueled said thing. The disease is not the symptoms.

Haha, thanks. It wasn't a deliberate table-turn, exactly; I just notice sometimes that you jump in and criticize what someone has said without offering your own interpretation of the same thing... a lot of times your interpretation is valid/helpful and giving it saves time otherwise spent bickering with/confusing each other.

Anyway, interesting stuff.

[strrrng]

Haha, thanks. It wasn't a deliberate table-turn, exactly; I just notice sometimes that you jump in and criticize what someone has said without offering your own interpretation of the same thing... a lot of times your interpretation is valid/helpful and giving it saves time otherwise spent bickering with/confusing each other.

Anyway, interesting stuff.

Yeah. Thanks. I need to work on self-control. Like in Bad Boys II... woo-sahh

And yes, I edited the type, lol.

[marooned]

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.

I think this can make sense with Ti PoLR (as in it makes sense when I read it). It is a little vague (as is most everything in Socionics ) but I think what the point is that when asked to explain some sort of concept, or theoretical principle, or system of rules, or whatever, the IEE goes at it with their Ne creating some gigantic abstract picture of it, "unable" to just state what is relevant succinctly. So maybe it could have been covered in 3 sentences, but the IEE might go on at length about what they "see" instead. (???)

I think that could be to some degree characteristic of weak Ti in general or even of non-valued Ti... but I think in the case of Ti PoLR it would just be all the more pronounced as a complete blind spot (because trying to make it succinct and Ti-friendly isn't even a priority, never mind how it isn't being done).

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.

That makes sense to me as well... I'm guessing the "anecdotal experiences" would relate to Si and Te????

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.

This bit, however, I'm not even sure what this would relate to. To me it just sounds rather "inefficient" I guess.

It does remind me of an IEE I know though. One time we (the IEE, some other people and I) were at Baskin-Robbins and the LSI sort of created this "loud, obnoxious" situation which involved behaving in a way that drew a lot of attention, and eventually there was an argument, and then someone knocked their ice cream on the floor. Anyway, the IEE remarked somewhat jokingly that he only goes to Baskin-Robbins about once a year, and now thanks to this experience, it will be about another year before he decides to do so again.

I think I've avoided places out of "embarrassment" before, or knowing that there's someone there that I don't feel like dealing with and that there is an easier way in terms of expending less social energy. I don't know if I would bother trying to attribute this to functional use... I guess it could point to Fe and weak Se?

Anyway, without more, I don't think that example really is all that useful...

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.

This makes sense to me as well... I think it would be about devalued Ti as well as devalued Se. But that it produces "woundedness" when being grouped in the "wrong" category, or being forced into a category... that indicates it's a deeper issue... I think the PoLR can kind of hurt sometimes.

To me it sounds more like Ti seeking - the Ti 6th HA function, sort of like Expats pathetic hidden agenda he wrote about rather than Ti PoLR. Although i'll try to write more about your quoted post later.

I don't think that sounds like Ti seeking at all. I think Ti seeking types try to put things in a concise structured systematic <insert other logical buzzwords here> way, and value when others can help them do it better (at least with Ti HA). Also I think I remember Expat's pathetic Ti HA being about stubbornly clinging to certain views in a sort of Hitta-esque fashion (I don't necessarily think Hitta has a Ti HA, but I think Expat would). What Tereg was describing seems more like completely scattered Ti, quite the opposite from stubbornly clinging to some system of thinking or "truth" or whatever.

Why is that an example of Te seeking? It's possible that could have embarrassed any kid.

I thought it was an example of Te seeking because it was so important to him to have the "necessary knowledge"... At least when I have viewed myself as Te PoLR, I usually just don't care... I am afraid of making errors in what I don't know (because I may often have views on things without having bothered to consider all the facts or feeling it would be pointless to), and it may hurt if someone accuses me of being "stupid" for not knowing something as though that now makes my entire perception irrelevant (which I don't feel that it does at all). But I don't desperately try to cover up for this or look for as much information as I can so I don't feel ignorant... I simply can't be bothered. The thing about the PoLR is that we *don't care about it*. If the aspect of reality that it represents were to disappear off the face of the earth we wouldn't even notice it was gone for quite some time (exaggeration ).

Although it is important part of your life as you elude to I think (you still remember it and it left an impression from what you say), so to look at it socionically..what motivated you? It was the embarrassment of what others publically thought of you? Maybe that is more of a beta and/or an Fe thing.

I don't think the embarrassment of what others publicly think can really be very strongly correlated with any IM element... I think it's sort of not helpful. Maybe Fe and Se are more "image focused" but that doesn't mean that any type can't be worried about this for any number of reasons.

To make the distinction, and how it makes sense to me (and from socionics POV also): This to me is Te PoLR, you are getting caught out on your weakspot, not knowing things and such a PoLR worries you- "the fear of getting caught not knowing", as you say. Te HA would see this as an opportunity to learn and welcome it, somewhat enthusiastically..and with defo more likely with curiousity.

Again, I don't see why this would be Te PoLR > Te Super-id unless it's Tereg's PoLR and he's obsessively fixating on it??? But why would he be? I think it's more likely fixating on the super-id. I think it's certainly possible to be afraid of not being proficient enough with the super-id... and more so than the PoLR, because like I said, who cares about the PoLR... It's something to ignore until it bites you in the ass later.

[marooned]

The alternate route thing was meant to be an example of inconsistent behavioral patterns that don't make sense.

Oh. I still don't think it's the greatest example... I mean I don't think Ti-valuers try to be consistent all the time in this way. And I think that anyone can display a lot of inconsistent behavioral patterns, by virtue of being human (I think people are more inconsistent than not).

Though I can't believe you would go back to change shirts... lol.

This irritation you are speaking of, is caused by what psychologists call "cognitive dissonance". Of course it could be that your motivations are misunderstood by others, but is is also very much possible that it's you yourself who is wrong. And probably the latter applies: the harder you are trying to convince us of anything about yourself, the harder we will try to convince you you are wrong.

Take it from me: if something doesn't work, try something else instead.

Meh. I don't think that cognitive dissonance means that he's mis-typed.

-------------

Anyway, I don't know why... but I sort of got this impression reading through this thread that it doesn't even matter what Tereg says at this point... anything he says will be picked apart and scrutinized, shuffled into the IXFp box. I think that the more individual things are nit-picked and micro-analyzed, the more nothing will add up to being anything.

[consentingadult]

Meh. I don't think that cognitive dissonance means that he's mis-typed.

Indeed, it's the other way around: his mis-typing is at the basis is the cognitive dissonance, and he's been working fucking hard at dissolving that dissonance by trying to convince some of us he is IEE. It's wasted energy and only serves to further estrange himself.

[consentingadult]

IMO, I can see consentingadult's examples being related to Ti-PoLR, if not direct manifestations of it.

Strrrng, how would you describe Ti-PoLR in IEE's?

Thank you, it feels good that I'm not alone in y thoughts. Also towards Cyclops,of course.

[consentingadult]

I just read this:


No offense, but I don't see how that is similar to this:


If that had been Te-HA, it seems like you might have faked knowing more on the spot. To me your reaction/humiliation sounds more like the effects of a Te-PoLR hit, which you did a lot of work/research in order to prevent from ever happening again.

An important distinction here, as I see it, is that you reacted by doing research/work out of embarassment [as if reacting to a Te-PoLR hit] and not genuine enthusiasm [which would be more likely to indicate Te-seeking/possible Te-HA].

Yes.The Te in an IEE is largely a subconsciously driven, uncontrollable thing for an IEE: they can't help it but have to act it out. Tereg's control over Te is way to strong to be a subconscious function. His usage of Te is overly controlled (very much like I m overly controlled in handling my Ti) and therefore more likely to be PoLR than HA.

ETA: what is it that Tereg acts out in an uncontrollable fashion? I think it's Ti.

[munenori2]

Indeed, it's the other way around: his mis-typing is at the basis is the cognitive dissonance, and he's been working fucking hard at dissolving that dissonance by trying to convince some of us he is IEE. It's wasted energy and only serves to further estrange himself.

The propertied class and the class of the proletariat present the same human self-estrangement. But the former class feels at ease and strengthened in this self-estrangement, it recognizes estrangement as its own power and has in it the semblance of a human existence. The class of the proletariat feels annihilated in estrangement; it sees in it its own powerlessness and the reality of an inhuman existence. It is, to use an expression of Hegel, in its abasement the indignation at that abasement, an indignation to which it is necessarily driven by the contradiction between its human nature and its condition of life, which is the outright, resolute and comprehensive negation of that nature. Within this antithesis the private property-owner is therefore the conservative side, the proletarian the destructive side. From the former arises the action of preserving the antithesis, from the latter the action of annihilating it.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Hi Loki, my reasons for it being Te PoLR and Ti seeking were elaborated on when Tereg didn't understand. I'm not sure if you saw that post. Basically he is describing Te as a source of fear and dread. His motivation came from embarrassment and not wanting to be caught out. I also highlighted various parts of a quote where he looked to explain some more to demonstrate this. As I mentioned this fear etc is a reaction to a PoLR not a seeking function. Similar to how I feel having to be round or expected to use lots of Fe but not Fi. The nature of HA is we feel comfortable around it and even more confident being expected to use it next to our PoLR.

If your comment on teregs type was directed at me, I'm not looking to say he is IXFp regardless. That's not how I work. It's probably a Beta thing, not a Delta thing, but in any event not a Cyclops thing.

Sorry if I missed anything out you wrote. It was a lengthy post and full of interesting info..i'm just sort of in middle of things to respond to it all but I did read it all. You are rivaling tereg in post length :-)

[consentingadult]

The disease is not the symptoms.

That's what I said too. Symptoms can have multiple causes and we have to look at what caused it. Like you have explained yourself, it's about systematic structures (not just structures, but systematic, Ti based ones), which Ti-PoLR types can't handle confidently.

If you are IEE, you probably suck at Si to some degree, meaning you might have no natural 'knowledge' of how to cook a good dinner 'from the wrist'. Still, IEEs love good dinners, but the only way for them to accomplish that, if to either go get it from someone who can create them good food, or make it themselves, but they lack the Si and Te for that. So if they need to make it themselves, they are inclined to follow the instructions to the letter (out of sheer anxiety for failure).


The example of being stopped by a cop after running a red light: there is a blindness in IEEs towards following rules, it's not that they would perposely break rules and substitute them with better rules like ILEs would do. So an IEE breaks the rule not being aware of it. Then along comes a cop who says: 'you re a bad, bad boy!' But the IEE feels he's done nothing wrong nd is flabbergasted that he's reprimanded for something he 'hasn't done' (an ILE would experience such feelings if someone would tell him he's behaved unethically in the social sphere) and starts becoming defensive, typically by engaging his Se-role function.

Hope this sheds some more light on it.

[consentingadult]

The propertied class and the class of the proletariat present the same human self-estrangement. But the former class feels at ease and strengthened in this self-estrangement, it recognizes estrangement as its own power and has in it the semblance of a human existence. The class of the proletariat feels annihilated in estrangement; it sees in it its own powerlessness and the reality of an inhuman existence. It is, to use an expression of Hegel, in its abasement the indignation at that abasement, an indignation to which it is necessarily driven by the contradiction between its human nature and its condition of life, which is the outright, resolute and comprehensive negation of that nature. Within this antithesis the private property-owner is therefore the conservative side, the proletarian the destructive side. From the former arises the action of preserving the antithesis, from the latter the action of annihilating it.

This is a good example of Ti-reasoning, of which I'm not afraid to say it is beyond my capabilities for understanding.

[munenori2]

There's really too much of myself I can see in tereg to say he's outside of my quadra.

[consentingadult]

There's really too much of myself I can see in tereg to say he's outside of my quadra.

What is your quadra?

[consentingadult]

Incorporate this into consentingadult's red traffic light example. Following this line of logic, wouldn't it make sense that someone with stronger Ti also take a "direct route" through the red light given that there was no other traffic? Strong Ti makes up its own rules too.

I just answered this in a recent post, but for clarity, I'll do it again: an ILE would run the red light consciously, substituting the official rule with one of his own, and confidently defending it (without drama, largely using Ne and Ti but no Se, perhaps even jokingly) against a police officer. An IEE does not purposely break the rule (that would be unethical and thus the cause of self-consciousness), but has a blind spot for them if they do not have an innate understanding of why it is necessary to follow the rule (e.g. I never run red lights in my car, because I know that's far more dangerous). Like an ILE, the IEE will defend himself, but not by using Ne and Ti and staying quite calm, but by using Ne and Se and being all stressed up about it. Above all, IEEs want to be perceived as good guys, and there is no easier way to anger an IEE by telling them they have acted badly. Hence the dramatic, argumentative Se repsonse to a Ti-PoLR hit.

[Nevero]

Ti-PoLR:

1. complete rejection of rules: cop stops me for running a red light with my bicycle. I get offensively argumentative, claiming I have done nothing wrong, even though I admit I ran through a red light (there was no other traffic).

does this mean that Ti-PoLR for ENFps can be expressed as aggressiveness and contentiousness? @Geminatronix you had a similar type of question in another thread

[Beautiful sky]

Ignoring the rules. Not sticking to the rules, sometimes using your own sense of what would be right in a situation to justify an action that goes against what rules others set.

I'll give an example (to relate a theory to real human behavior):


So an SLI with demonstrative Ti will say "I don't want you taking the baby out at night."

An SEE will take the baby out at night saying "I took her out because it would be good for her. I don't see why I shouldn't take her out."

An SLI will not like this inconsistant behavior since previously SEE had no problem in not taking the baby out at night but mostly she was following the rule to appease her husband, but lately she doesn't like the control and wants to be relinquished from it and by asserting independence from the rules she leans back to her Se. Taking charge of the actions as she wants to feel control of.

[consentingadult]

does this mean that Ti-PoLR for ENFps can be expressed as aggressiveness and contentiousness? @Geminatronix you had a similar type of question in another thread

Not so much: what happens in some situations, is that the PoLR of the IEE is triggered. In this particular example, the IEE is 'accused' of doing something wrong. The IEE, with Fi as their Creative Function and Te for Mobilizing, reasons that although formally rules have been violated, no moral transgressions have been commited, neither were there any practical consequences, not even potentially (Ne-base). In such cases the 'accusation' is rebuffed by resorting to Se-Role, which does explain the aggression. Ti is more the sensitive spot, or as it is sometimes called: the Painful Point.

[SyrupDeGem]

does this mean that Ti-PoLR for ENFps can be expressed as aggressiveness and contentiousness? @Geminatronix you had a similar type of question in another thread

Yes, interesting link there. I think IEE probably have Ti rebellion where as they have outbursts of Se aggression. The IEE may not see the importance of rules and structure and instead hold on to an ideal of 'everybody should just love each other and try to get along, why can't people just care enough and we can get rid of these ridiculous restrictions' Even though the IEE will understand that it's not so simple they really wish it were and somehow shirk the responsibility of dealing with the details of how this society without rules/rules replaced with understanding and caring would work. IEE can be quite contradictory, though they may come up with multiple ideas of how to make the world better, rarely do they have a well thought out plan of how it's implemented.

[Nevero]

Originally Posted by consentingadultTi-PoLR:

1. complete rejection of rules: cop stops me for running a red light with my bicycle. I get offensively argumentative, claiming I have done nothing wrong, even though I admit I ran through a red light (there was no other traffic).

Not so much: what happens in some situations, is that the PoLR of the IEE is triggered. In this particular example, the IEE is 'accused' of doing something wrong. The IEE, with Fi as their Creative Function and Te for Mobilizing, reasons that although formally rules have been violated, no moral transgressions have been commited, neither were there any practical consequences, not even potentially (Ne-base). In such cases the 'accusation' is rebuffed by resorting to Se-Role, which does explain the aggression. Ti is more the sensitive spot, or as it is sometimes called: the Painful Point.

this means that the confrontational stance in your anecdote was motivated by strong sense of Fi and blindness to Ti, in other words Creative and PoLR elements rather than Se. that would make any type capable of aggressive confrontation and outbursts.

what's is perplexing about socionics is how it attributes aggression to Se while this forum is littered with discussion threads and stories of all sorts of types getting into conflicts and arguments. you personal anecdote, for example, was illustrative of how aggression and contentious attitude isn't spurred by valuing Se, but was a result of you being "rubbed the wrong way" over the Polr/Creative elements.

...In such cases the 'accusation' is rebuffed by resorting to Se-Role, which does explain the aggression. Ti is more the sensitive spot, or as it is sometimes called: the Painful Point.

how does Se role make a person turn "offensively argumentative"? Se is an irrational perceiving element that deals with physical/spatial perception. what's is the association that you see between "irrational spatial perception" and being offensive and argumentative?

[suedehead]

Yes, interesting link there. I think IEE probably have Ti rebellion where as they have outbursts of Se aggression. The IEE may not see the importance of rules and structure and instead hold on to an ideal of 'everybody should just love each other and try to get along, why can't people just care enough and we can get rid of these ridiculous restrictions' Even though the IEE will understand that it's not so simple they really wish it were and somehow shirk the responsibility of dealing with the details of how this society without rules/rules replaced with understanding and caring would work. IEE can be quite contradictory, though they may come up with multiple ideas of how to make the world better, rarely do they have a well thought out plan of how it's implemented.

What you've described sounds nice, in theory, but ehh. Too much of it is overdone. I don't mind the 'impersonal', yet efficient approach that goes along with that sort of thing. You get what you put into it.

[Nevero]

Yes, interesting link there. I think IEE probably have Ti rebellion where as they have outbursts of Se aggression. The IEE may not see the importance of rules and structure and instead hold on to an ideal of 'everybody should just love each other and try to get along, why can't people just care enough and we can get rid of these ridiculous restrictions' Even though the IEE will understand that it's not so simple they really wish it were and somehow shirk the responsibility of dealing with the details of how this society without rules/rules replaced with understanding and caring would work. IEE can be quite contradictory, though they may come up with multiple ideas of how to make the world better, rarely do they have a well thought out plan of how it's implemented.

same question for you as for consentingadult: what connection to you see between an irrational, perceiving, sensing element Se that deals with "physical/spatial perception" and getting into arguments or having aggressive outbursts?

[SyrupDeGem]

same question for you as for consentingadult: what connection to you see between an irrational, perceiving, sensing element Se that deals with "physical/spatial perception" and getting into arguments or having aggressive outbursts?

Ok well I think when the ENFp see's a situation ... as an example; in which a child or animal for example is at risk they can become aggressive/assertive for short bursts. I did make a thread about this (aggressive IEE's) which was referred to before and in which I asked for opinions on.

I also think the IEE in a position of cornered cat can attack, be that verbally or physically, though I do think this is rare.

The reason I use Se as the function to describe this assertion/aggression is because it is the most direct and assertive function for the IEE...

"IEEs have the capability and ability to be direct and firm with others in such activities as giving direct commands or making categorical statements about things perceived. However, the period of time when this occurs in an IEE is generally short-lived"

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=IEE

Yes I make the jump there but it is not so large a jump as to be difficult to imagine. Most people have it in them to be direct/assertive/aggressive at least fro short periods of time. assigning it to the IEE's role function is quite a natural connection.


Also, i just saw this thread (not finished reading through it yet) and seems food for thought... esp in light of Joblo's observations

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/showthread.php/30343-ENFps-who-appear-like-ESTps

[consentingadult]

how does Se role make a person turn "offensively argumentative"? Se is an irrational perceiving element that deals with physical/spatial perception. what's is the association that you see between "irrational spatial perception" and being offensive and argumentative?

It is not just spatial perception, it also involves a command over the physical world, an active, hands-on approach. Compare this to Ne: at the core of Ne is the understanding of the essences of non-material phenomena, which results in the understanding of possibilities emerging from these essences. Se works likewise: like Ne, it first forms a perceptual understanding, what follows is an understanding of what can or cannot be accomplished with such understanding. In the case of Se: perceiving/understanding physical/spatial world, next understand/act upon the physical/spatial world.

The reason Se-role can make a person look offensively argumentative, is because unlike Se-base, it cannot be properly dosed, it is applied to the extent of overkill.

[Suz]

. I've edited the garbled Stratyevskaya translation in order to find out more. For general edification or bemusement, here it is:

Wow this is so me.

[JWC3]

Ti PoLR manifest primarily as a sort of rejecting the imposed structure of others. It's less about being bad at logic and more about not seeing the point in regimenting your lifestyle. Even if SEEs or IEEs are disciplined or goal oriented it's often a lot more fluid than some other types can be in similar pursuits. These types prefer to follow their own individual sentimentality than abide by any rule for behavior.

This is especially true in instances where the SEE/IEE can't understand the practical connection or impact such a rule would have.

[SyrupDeGem]

It is not just spatial perception, it also involves a command over the physical world, an active, hands-on approach. Compare this to Ne: at the core of Ne is the understanding of the essences of non-material phenomena, which results in the understanding of possibilities emerging from these essences. Se works likewise: like Ne, it first forms a perceptual understanding, what follows is an understanding of what can or cannot be accomplished with such understanding. In the case of Se: perceiving/understanding physical/spatial world, next understand/act upon the physical/spatial world.

The reason Se-role can make a person look offensively argumentative, is because unlike Se-base, it cannot be properly dosed, it is applied to the extent of overkill.

Ah yes, nicely said.

[Nevero]

It is not just spatial perception, it also involves a command over the physical world, an active, hands-on approach.

perception as bare awareness doesn't generate "command" and "active, hand-on approach". it's part of what you need to exercise such command but there's something else missing that i was hoping you'd see for yourself and be able to explain.

suppose you're a Se-base type sitting at a table on a patio of some cafe. you'd be aware of everything around you to the smallest article and detail: the bikes, the cars, the dog tied to the pole and people at the other tables. this is spatial perception Se. but where does the motivation to do anything with these objects come from? perception of objects isn't enough to make you get up and exercise command over them.

Compare this to Ne: at the core of Ne is the understanding of the essences of non-material phenomena, which results in the understanding of possibilities emerging from these essences. Se works likewise: like Ne, it first forms a perceptual understanding, what follows is an understanding of what can or cannot be accomplished with such understanding. In the case of Se: perceiving/understanding physical/spatial world, next understand/act upon the physical/spatial world.

if Ne works similar to Se, wouldn't Ne in parallel to Se be associated with aggression pertaining to non-material phenomena and perceptual understanding? in other words, notional-speculative-ideological type of aggression.

The reason Se-role can make a person look offensively argumentative, is because unlike Se-base, it cannot be properly dosed, it is applied to the extent of overkill.

this would mean that IEEs, ILEs, EIIs, and LIIs get offensively argumentative and pressing to a greater extent than Se types.

this is what's confounding about some of the discussions i've read on this forum. when someone overtly aggressively defends their stance they are typed as SEE, ESI or beta ST because they show "aggression". but them investing so much effort into discussing, developing, and defending their opinions could just as well be Ne "notional" aggression.

[Phantom]

If I'm correct in my conjecture that I am indeed an ENFp, I think my Ti-PoLR is manifested in my inability to explain systems and concepts coherently without resorting to metaphors, examples and anecdotes, occasionally also using concrete objects. I feel the need to present my explanation in written, although that might just be Te. I also despise having my intelligence insulted.

EDIT - Maybe the above is just Te.

Hmm... I can also see the point about opposing regimented lifestyles being imposed on you. I definitely relate to that. I'm too individualistic for my own good. I do tend to question rules and break them just to make a statement or expose their irrationality (in my mind).

[unknown nerd]

http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/IEE-ENFp/

Te:

The IEE is keen on accumulating factual knowledge on subjects of personal interest and those that help him be more efficient and productive, but he's often unsure of his ability to find and select the correct information and is therefore attracted to people whom he sees as competent in that area and reassure him. He prizes efficiency, and berates himself secretly for his own inefficiency. He takes care to explain the justifications behind his actions. He loves accumulating and sharing trivia to make himself seem educated. IEEs believe firmly that knowledge should be shared freely. Asking an IEE to keep a secret is a burden on him. He can also be a little too trusting of information sources, because spreading falsehood is seen as a foreign and repulsive idea. IEEs love scientific and mathematic concepts, but practical application will soon bore them.

Ti:

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 (Ne+Fi). 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.

About my Te:
I have scored 95th percentile on national mathematics test. I took lots of practice, however. I'm also a science major. I'm not very interested in engineering merely theoretical. Fits well with IEE Te profile.

Ti:
One of my problems has been and still is practical efficiency. Lots of T-types point out my insanely scatterbrained functioning. I was working with SEI and sometimes T type came to check how our project was going... I usually say I have been thinking about this but I'm too lazy to implement it. Even ESEs comment how I should proceed. I just like to do stuff in a very roundabout way. I'm capable of searching the shortest path on paper. Lots of times Ti path just conflicts Fi so I'm not going there. I'm pretty big at pointing out inconsistencies (usually meaningless).

[consentingadult]

http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/types/IEE-ENFp/

About my Te:
I have scored 95th percentile on national mathematics test. I took lots of practice, however. I'm also a science major. I'm not very interested in engineering merely theoretical. Fits well with IEE Te profile.

Ti:
One of my problems has been and still is practical efficiency. Lots of T-types point out my insanely scatterbrained functioning. I was working with SEI and sometimes T type came to check how our project was going... I usually say I have been thinking about this but I'm too lazy to implement it. Even ESEs comment how I should proceed. I just like to do stuff in a very roundabout way. I'm capable of searching the shortest path on paper. Lots of times Ti path just conflicts Fi so I'm not going there. I'm pretty big at pointing out inconsistencies (usually meaningless).

You have Ti and Te switched. typos perhaps?

[consentingadult]

EDIT - Maybe the above is just Te.

No, it is not. It is Ti-PoLR. You got it right the first time. And yet it is! When an IEE explains something (with real life metaphors, examples and anecdotes), they do it in a way that they feel is the most effective, efficient way (Te) of getting the message across to someone else (because that's what an IEE truly wants). As a side effect, they violate the principles of Ti. One of the most important aspects of Ti is the understanding of an abstract principle, and to be able to put it into words (or formulas) without resorting to metaphors, examples and anecdotes.

That being said, I truly do not understand why anyone would have a problem with metaphors, examples and anecdotes. (and the fact that I do not understand it, is what makes it Ti-PoLR, as a side effect of me believing I'm successfully using my Mobilizing function).

[suedehead]

I feel like anecdotes are just that, anecdotes, and shouldn't always be used as a substitute for accurate understanding, especially since you could potentially be misleading people. I try to take my observations about things that I know are almost always much more complicated with a grain of salt.

[ashlesha]

antecdotes can be an interesting way of illustrating a point or saying something with a certain kind of emotional impact, but they can't be used as proof of anything or assumed to be representative of all other similar situations.

[consentingadult]

I feel like anecdotes are just that, anecdotes, and shouldn't always be used as a substitute for accurate understanding, especially since you could potentially be misleading people. I try to take my observations about things that I know are almost always much more complicated with a grain of salt.

antecdotes can be an interesting way of illustrating a point or saying something with a certain kind of emotional impact, but they can't be used as proof of anything or assumed to be representative of all other similar situations.

Scientifically speaking, you can indeed not use anecdotes to prove something. Such a thing would not be positivistic, again, in the scientific sense. However, such an approach fails to recognize the way in which IEEs come to understand things, which is anti-positivistic in nature. Methods such as Verstehen, although not positivistic or Ti in nature, can be "valid" ways of knowing anyway. The problem why this in cases of IEEs communicating knowledge is causing problems, is because IEEs assume (incorrectly) that their audience is able to connect the dots, a proces that basically involves using Ne.

Let me elaborate: if an IEE perceives something using Ne, they more or less immediate perceive what is essence about the thing being perceived. From this essence they draw a sort of inductive conclusions. Such conclusions, being probabilistic in nature, allow for a certain level uncertainty, something IEEs (as well as their ILE cousins) are able to accept themselves, but forget to communicate, because they incorrectly assume that other people function according to the same methods of knowledge as they themselves do (all types do this BTW). To Ti-valuing listeners, with their focus on certainty and need for True/False conclusions (more in line with deductive styles of reasoning), this lead to them thinking IEEs making invalid conclusions. Leaving out the Ne aspect of their insights is what is causing misunderstandings.

So it's not so much IEEs making logical errors, the error they make is that they forget to communicate they function on the basis of antipositivistic methods . Of course, sometime IEEs do make the mistake of drawing anti-positivist conclusions on subjects that do not lend themselves for anti-positivist methods, which appears even more silly, but Ti-types also make similar mistakes. As do all types!

[consentingadult]

I have written a blog post relevant to this discussion:

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...t-you-are.html

[kraut]

Engineering is a lot about methods of solving problems, but also about categorising/understanding problems in the sense of what standard situations they represent/fall into. The former is Te (dynamic / flow of the solutions to problems) and the latter I think is more of a Ti (static / categories). The first is quite strong with ENFps (level 2 out of 4), and as for Ti, I think Ni help here, because Ni is about invisioning an invisible flow (to the eyes). And indeed, electronics is alot about that. And with types it is a standard that 7th helps 4th to function, sort of like a helping hand to a weak on its own function. It's either a bad and wrong and false analysis or proof of why it's all good for you, if you indeed are ENFp.