Type and Forms of Aggression

[Amber]

By definition Se is considered to account for competitiveness, being territorial, having a very keen sense of the power dynamics and the ability to bend situations to control that. Of course people can be aggressive or hostile even if they´re not Se egos, but I wonder how functions and types could relate to aggression.
Which could be the most aggressive type (SLE? LSE? LIE?). Which are the most passive-aggressive types? Fi people, Se suggestive, Se polr? Can mere assertiveness be correlated to type or functions or it only has to do with other factors independent of Socionics?

[Iris]

By definition Se is considered to account for competitiveness, being territorial, having a very keen sense of the power dynamics and the ability to bend situations to control that. Of course people can be aggressive or hostile even if they´re not Se egos, but I wonder how functions and types could relate to aggression.
Which could be the most aggressive type (SLE? LSE? LIE?). Which are the most passive-aggressive types? Fi people, Se suggestive, Se polr? Can mere assertiveness be correlated to type or functions or it only has to do with other factors independent of Socionics?

I was just thinking about this subject today. If you could isolate a situation, and apply it equally across the types it would be telling, but only for that particular situation. I have seen ESIs react with burning, trembling aggression over a perceived hurt to one of their children, and seen my SLE friend wave off a similar offense toward her child and say oh well, that's life.

Passive aggressive is a term that I associate with an unhealthy response, so I am not sure it is type related.

I am not a confrontational person, but a disrepectful word will set me off more than almost anything else. My SEI sister-in-law has more Se in her pinky finger than I do in my entirity, but she barely notices or responds to disrespectful behavior.

[Amber]

I was just thinking about this subject today. If you could isolate a situation, and apply it equally across the types it would be telling, but only for that particular situation. I have seen ESIs react with burning, trembling aggression over a perceived hurt to one of their children, and seen my SLE friend wave off a similar offense toward her child and say oh well, that's life.

Passive aggressive is a term that I associate with an unhealthy response, so I am not sure it is type related.

I am not a confrontational person, but a disrepectful word will set me off more than almost anything else. My SEI sister-in-law has more Se in her pinky finger than I do in my entirity, but she barely notices or responds to disrespectful behavior.

ESI-Se in my experience are very openly defensive when it comes to their family, even when the child is quite grown-up. It doesn't matter very much that they might put the offspring in a strange position while threatening others because they're not treating it as they should. Probably a SLE would push the child to find their own means when dealing with others. I find Beta STs more inclined to use pressure spontaneously and explicitly mostly when someone stands in their way or interferes with their plans. From what I've noticed Te people are usually passive-aggressive when it comes to relationships only ("the silent treatment" is supposed to make you understand something has not passed by them smoothly). However it's something that fades away quickly, they don't hold grudges. In other kind of situations they can go bulldozing fairly well.

I was also wondering if someone may perceive their Conflictors/Super-egos as aggressive, but that would be a bit weird when the polr is Fi or Ni.

[Satan]

most aggresive type is estj.

[Iris]

ESI-Se in my experience are very openly defensive when it comes to their family, even when the child is quite grown-up. It doesn't matter very much that they might put the offspring in a strange position while threatening others because they're not treating it as they should. Probably a SLE would push the child to find their own means when dealing with others. I find Beta STs more inclined to use pressure spontaneously and explicitly mostly when someone stands in their way or interferes with their plans. From what I've noticed Te people are usually passive-aggressive when it comes to relationships only ("the silent treatment" is supposed to make you understand something has not passed by them smoothly). However it's something that fades away quickly, they don't hold grudges. In other kind of situations they can go bulldozing fairly well.

I was also wondering if someone may perceive their Conflictors/Super-egos as aggressive, but that would be a bit weird when the polr is Fi or Ni.

Interesting timing for this topic because I am BOILING MAD! I am consumed with WRATH. I feel VICTIMIZED by years of NEGLECT. Aaaaaaagh!

The outward manifestations of this RAGE are brief sentences spoken completely devoid of emotion. Nothing is being thrown, no cursing is taking place internally or externally. Yet I am radiating an electric current of anger that is not going unnoticed. If that tantrum guy from that other thread were in the room with me he would be stricken into silence by my what is coming out of my eyes. I am being careful not to allow my gaze to fall on any living creature because they would be vaporized by it. I am fairly sure that I am taking years off my life by allowing my emotion to fuel this fire in me. But I don't CARE!!!!! I feel confident that I will maintain this silent rage for the rest of the night and into the morning and then I am going to get the revenge that I know will change my life forever.

My next post will be entitled "Iris Loses It."

[Satan]

Interesting timing for this topic because I am BOILING MAD! I am consumed with WRATH. I feel VICTIMIZED by years of NEGLECT. Aaaaaaagh!

How cute.

[Iris]

How cute.

As my activity partner, I request that you be sympathetic and not laugh at me. However, I know that you will anyway. And I'm ok with that.

[Satan]

As my activity partner, I request that you be sympathetic and not laugh at me. However, I know that you will anyway. And I'm ok with that.

You talk a lot for someone who is angry.

[Iris]

You talk a lot for someone who is angry.

Ha! Commence silent treatment.

[silverchris9]

Hmmmm... well, I'd say every type has various ways of being confrontational and various ways of being angry, without necessarily having forms of "aggression"? I mean, "aggression" I'd imagine refers to a certain forwardness about how you express anger or how you confront someone whose behavior you wish to change or who you feel has wronged you, etc. Like, I don't think I'm ever "aggressive" except in being (occasionally) very clear about someone displeasing me, which is just a matter of speaking in more clipped sentences and saying things like, "Well, my understanding was that this was a simple matter, but since it isn't, why don't we speak to a supervisor. Perhaps they could make it clearer for us." So I guess for me aggression is an exaggerated form of dismissive politeness with a clear undercurrent of anger. But can you really call that aggression? When I think of an ESE or even EIE I think less aggression and more "pushy," which I suppose is a way of being aggressive. An aggressive LII might say something like, "You know what? No. No, that's not fair. If you're going to tell me that blah blah blah, then I expect blah blah blah, and I think that's a perfectly fair expectation, and if you can't do that then... maybe [insert consequence/break-up threat/whatever here]."

Also for me confrontational is very different than aggressive. Like, if I really need to make someone change their behavior, I'll just be as direct and emotionless as possible: "Your behavior is unacceptable. Please change it or consequence y." Like I had an actor freak out in a rehearsal once as a (actually very funny) April Fool's prank and I said something to the effect of, "ACTOR NAME, that's not helpful right now. We can talk after rehearsal." and if he hadn't backed down, the next thing was "Please leave my rehearsal until you're ready to be constructive. We'll talk after rehearsal." And then we'd try to reason together and find out what the cause of his bad behavior is when we're both calmer after the situation is over.

So anyway, some theories: aggression could be the application of the base function to the situation uncompromisingly (without allowing for other perspective, perhaps). So a Ti-leading type would apply logic (more in an "If/then" sense for an LII, more in a "These were the rules and you broke them, which means I have to do x" for the LSI). Maybe for an Fi-leading type, it might be more appealing to the relationship, like ESI: "How dare you behave like that. You have no right to speak that way to my child." or EII... "That was so unkind, I can't believe you said that. I expect better." For a Te-type maybe it's facts? "No, no, that's just not true. If you look at the evidence, there's no WAY you can possibly think it's reasonable, let alone fair, to do that." Obviously for Fe-leading it's emotional, like "Oh no! Listen, that's not gonna work for me, you're gonna have to do better..." lots of facial expressions and movement and all. Not sure how Ni or Si would relate, so those types might rely more on their creative functions. So yeah, those are some thoughts!

[Amber]

most aggresive type is estj.

why?

[Satan]

why?

ni polr.

[Amber]

Hmmmm... well, I'd say every type has various ways of being confrontational and various ways of being angry, without necessarily having forms of "aggression"? I mean, "aggression" I'd imagine refers to a certain forwardness about how you express anger or how you confront someone whose behavior you wish to change or who you feel has wronged you, etc. Like, I don't think I'm ever "aggressive" except in being (occasionally) very clear about someone displeasing me, which is just a matter of speaking in more clipped sentences and saying things like, "Well, my understanding was that this was a simple matter, but since it isn't, why don't we speak to a supervisor. Perhaps they could make it clearer for us." So I guess for me aggression is an exaggerated form of dismissive politeness with a clear undercurrent of anger. But can you really call that aggression? When I think of an ESE or even EIE I think less aggression and more "pushy," which I suppose is a way of being aggressive. An aggressive LII might say something like, "You know what? No. No, that's not fair. If you're going to tell me that blah blah blah, then I expect blah blah blah, and I think that's a perfectly fair expectation, and if you can't do that then... maybe [insert consequence/break-up threat/whatever here]."

Also for me confrontational is very different than aggressive. Like, if I really need to make someone change their behavior, I'll just be as direct and emotionless as possible: "Your behavior is unacceptable. Please change it or consequence y." Like I had an actor freak out in a rehearsal once as a (actually very funny) April Fool's prank and I said something to the effect of, "ACTOR NAME, that's not helpful right now. We can talk after rehearsal." and if he hadn't backed down, the next thing was "Please leave my rehearsal until you're ready to be constructive. We'll talk after rehearsal." And then we'd try to reason together and find out what the cause of his bad behavior is when we're both calmer after the situation is over.

So anyway, some theories: aggression could be the application of the base function to the situation uncompromisingly (without allowing for other perspective, perhaps). So a Ti-leading type would apply logic (more in an "If/then" sense for an LII, more in a "These were the rules and you broke them, which means I have to do x" for the LSI). Maybe for an Fi-leading type, it might be more appealing to the relationship, like ESI: "How dare you behave like that. You have no right to speak that way to my child." or EII... "That was so unkind, I can't believe you said that. I expect better." For a Te-type maybe it's facts? "No, no, that's just not true. If you look at the evidence, there's no WAY you can possibly think it's reasonable, let alone fair, to do that." Obviously for Fe-leading it's emotional, like "Oh no! Listen, that's not gonna work for me, you're gonna have to do better..." lots of facial expressions and movement and all. Not sure how Ni or Si would relate, so those types might rely more on their creative functions. So yeah, those are some thoughts!

I agree with the association between aggression and applying the base uncompromisingly. Generally I think E_T would be the most actively aggressive, with LSI coming next on the list (I would say potentially the most sadistic), then ESE, SEE, ESI, EIE, SLI. I don't know about Ni, but Si can be stifling and demanding, although an irrational function (not only in their constant focus on comfort; much has to fit what their memory/mental frame tells them the world looks like based mostly on their personal experience, there's place for a lot of preconception and narrow-mindedness).

[Amber]

ni polr.

have you ever been defeated by a Se demonstrative

[Amber]

Interesting timing for this topic because I am BOILING MAD! I am consumed with WRATH. I feel VICTIMIZED by years of NEGLECT. Aaaaaaagh!

The outward manifestations of this RAGE are brief sentences spoken completely devoid of emotion. Nothing is being thrown, no cursing is taking place internally or externally. Yet I am radiating an electric current of anger that is not going unnoticed. If that tantrum guy from that other thread were in the room with me he would be stricken into silence by my what is coming out of my eyes. I am being careful not to allow my gaze to fall on any living creature because they would be vaporized by it. I am fairly sure that I am taking years off my life by allowing my emotion to fuel this fire in me. But I don't CARE!!!!! I feel confident that I will maintain this silent rage for the rest of the night and into the morning and then I am going to get the revenge that I know will change my life forever.

My next post will be entitled "Iris Loses It."

This is a bit strange, because so far you've always been super-calm, serious, and controlled and it's hard to have you switch to the "DRAMA" stereotype of EIE. I'm not saying "CHILL", it's better for you to live your anger no matter what. JUST DO IT.
I like Klaus Kinski, but he behaves like an Enneagram 8 Sexual and is in proud possession of a personality disorder. I think holding him as your EIE standard could be a bit dangerous.

[Iris]

This is a bit strange, because so far you've always been super-calm, serious, and controlled and it's hard to have you switch to the "DRAMA" stereotype of EIE. I'm not saying "CHILL", it's better for you to live your anger no matter what. JUST DO IT.
I like Klaus Kinski, but he behaves like an Enneagram 8 Sexual and is in proud possession of a personality disorder. I think holding him as your EIE standard could be a bit dangerous.

From another thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...70#post1028370

I have learned a lot about myself since that 2-year old typing thread. There is no question that I am a Beta. If there is any indecision it would be between IEI and EIE. I feel fairly confident at this point that I am not IEI.

I am very controlled because I was beaten with a belt as a child and teenager if I ever raised my voice or disagreed with my father.

[Kim]

Interesting timing for this topic because I am BOILING MAD! I am consumed with WRATH. I feel VICTIMIZED by years of NEGLECT. Aaaaaaagh!

The outward manifestations of this RAGE are brief sentences spoken completely devoid of emotion. Nothing is being thrown, no cursing is taking place internally or externally. Yet I am radiating an electric current of anger that is not going unnoticed. If that tantrum guy from that other thread were in the room with me he would be stricken into silence by my what is coming out of my eyes. I am being careful not to allow my gaze to fall on any living creature because they would be vaporized by it. I am fairly sure that I am taking years off my life by allowing my emotion to fuel this fire in me. But I don't CARE!!!!! I feel confident that I will maintain this silent rage for the rest of the night and into the morning and then I am going to get the revenge that I know will change my life forever.

My next post will be entitled "Iris Loses It."

[Satan]

This is a bit strange, because so far you've always been super-calm, serious, and controlled and it's hard to have you switch to the "DRAMA" stereotype of EIE. I'm not saying "CHILL", it's better for you to live your anger no matter what. JUST DO IT.
I like Klaus Kinski, but he behaves like an Enneagram 8 Sexual and is in proud possession of a personality disorder. I think holding him as your EIE standard could be a bit dangerous.

Shit, I don't even like you. And yet I agree with what you say: It's better to live your anger.

That doesn't mean misdirecting it though. Channel it well.

[Amber]

Shit, I don't even like you. And yet I agree with what you say: It's better to live your anger.

That doesn't mean misdirecting it though. Channel it well.

I'm not a fan of you, either, why would I be?

You're cute when you try to "manage" people's anger ...are you really SLE or a Fe type?

[Satan]

I'm not a fan of you, either, why would I be?

You're cute when you try to "manage" people's anger ...are you really SLE or a Fe type?

i'm not anything, i'm just me. i think the main problem with people and anger is usually not that they're angry, but that they misdirect anger and don't channel it well.

[Amber]

i'm not anything, i'm just me. i think the main problem with people and anger is usually not that they're angry, but that they misdirect anger and don't channel it well.

I don't thoroughly dislike you, don't worry!

[Ainfigur]

People say I'm aggressive.

[trifling nincompoop]

(brace yourselves for smartassism) the dictionary definition of aggression is very bad because it has negative undertones and extremes like violent hostile and such when in fact its merely the opposite of passive (accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance.) aggression really means just giving an active response or resistance to things that happen. and aggressive people do this for instance aggression can be bullying but at the same time it can be stopping a bully, it can be hurting someone or saving someone. in a way tho you are in opposition to an event so you are hostile to it (maybe we just interpret the definition of aggression "very bad" or hostile, violent)

im not quite sure what you mean by what types of aggression.
and if by forms of aggression you means what are some manifestations of aggression the most basic answer for this i would say, based on social norms, is negative and positive forms, and i say this only because for some reason people forget that aggression does have positive forms and we owe everything to people who use these form of aggression, MLK, Gandhi, ect

[Olly From Wally World]

I wonder. I'm leaning more towards there being aspects independent of Socionics to account for. I somewhat see theories such as enneagram, socionics, etc, as ways to interpret reality but not the answer to everything.

Was the assertive aspects of Se even originally mentioned by Jung? Even if it wasn't, I can see how Se can manifest as assertiveness. It makes sense that those who are well-grounded in reality and attracted to that which is tangible will probably be more likely to be more assertive or at least more confident in going after what they want and the confrontation that could result in that since they value and are aware of their environment as well as what's at their disposal. It makes sense that they are more likely to get aggressive since they have more territorial awareness and shit. As @silverchris9 said, I also think each type can be confrontational in their own way but maybe it isn't helpful saying that, haha.


I'd say SLEs are typically the most aggressive because of Se and Fi POLR. SEE have more diplomacy to their assertive nature. I dunno what would account for passive-aggressiveness.

[alklonth]

I'd say SLEs are typically the most aggressive because of Se and Fi POLR. SEE have more diplomacy to their assertive nature. I dunno what would account for passive-aggressiveness.

Not sure. Se1 can be bad no matter what. Even if Fi2 then they are able to hit even more precisely in your weak points.

[Olly From Wally World]

Not sure. Se1 can be bad no matter what. Even if Fi2 then they are able to hit even more precisely in your weak points.

Hmmm but wouldn't you say that Fi POLR leads many SLEs to seeming ruthless to others? SEE has more interpersonal skills. I was viewing aggressiveness as more of a means of pursuing one's aims forcefully. SEE's ethics would soften its ruthlessness or maybe be used as a means to manipulate people into getting what they want (ergo, "the politician"). What you say makes sense though.

[Satan]

Hmmm but wouldn't you say that Fi POLR leads many SLEs to seeming ruthless to others? SEE has more interpersonal skills. I was viewing aggressiveness as more of a means of pursuing one's aims forcefully. SEE's ethics would soften its ruthlessness or maybe be used as a means to manipulate people into getting what they want (ergo, "the politician"). What you say makes sense though.

seeming ruthless isn't "aggressive" it's "having aggressive intent"

adn fi is about causing pain and hurt to others, personally.

[Nevero]

By definition Se is considered to account for competitiveness, being territorial, having a very keen sense of the power dynamics and the ability to bend situations to control that. Of course people can be aggressive or hostile even if they´re not Se egos, but I wonder how functions and types could relate to aggression.

Which could be the most aggressive type (SLE? LSE? LIE?). Which are the most passive-aggressive types? Fi people, Se suggestive, Se polr? Can mere assertiveness be correlated to type or functions or it only has to do with other factors independent of Socionics?

it's a complicated question. @consentingadult has brought up before that types with weak Se don't dose it appropriately and apply it to extent of "overkill" http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...PoLR?p=1013640 this would make it easy to mistake weak Se for Se dominance. it made me think of Quentin Tarantino and how some type him as ILE with the violence in his movies as an example of frenzied overactive role Se aggression that consentingadult was talking about.

it also brought to mind this thread http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...STps-and-ESFps that some types put on a show or appearance of being tough and confrontational, but in actuality distorting their self to mold into an idealized image.

[Olly From Wally World]

seeming ruthless isn't "aggressive" it's "having aggressive intent"

adn fi is about causing pain and hurt to others, personally.

I guess what I meant was that SLEs being a logical type and having Fi POLR would make them generally less in tune to the feelings of others when pursuing their goals so they'll typically come off as more aggressive than an SEE.

I'm sincerely curious though, how does Ni POLR make LSEs the most aggressive?

[consentingadult]

it made me think of Quentin Tarantino and how some type him as ILE with the violence in his movies as an example of frenzied overactive role Se aggression that consentingadult was talking about.

I personally believe Tarantine is IEI and the violence in his movies is more of an expression of admiration for and glorification of violence and force (Se) and thus results from Suggestive-Se, not Role-Se. Usually, IEEs and ILEs afterwards often have bad feelings about having lost control when they reverted to Se (unless they are somewhat psycho, e.g. DJ Arendee). I don't see any inclination of that in Tarantino's movies.

BTW, going against the current, I personally hate Tarantino's movies, exactly because of this glorification of violence.

[Amber]

Tarantino VIs LIE, but I wouldn't find Se role outrageous. He doesn't seem Se ego. The violence in his movies has a very artificial or constructed, even exaggerated quality - it's like he loves rather the entertainment that may come from "scaring" people with buckets or splashes of blood in slow motion than actual combat tactics. It's too much "for the show".

"Violence is one of the most fun things to watch."
“What if a kid goes to school after seeing Kill Bill and starts slicing up other kids? You know, I’ll take that chance! Violent films don’t turn children into violent people. They may turn them into violent filmmakers but that’s another matter altogether.”
“I feel like a conductor and the audience's feelings are my instruments. I will be like, 'Laugh, laugh, now be horrified'. When someone does that to me I've had a good time at the movies,"

[darya]

I've always thought Tarantino is ILE.

[Ananke]

I've always thought Tarantino is ILE.

Tarantino = LIE. The actors he seems to like are mostly gamma and delta, e.g. Brad Pitt = IEE, Uma Thurman = ESI,

[blackburry]

I'm aggressive. I suppress/tame it because I'm happier when I feel laidback. but aggression certainly comes out when I feel threatened/backstabbed/ and/or cornered.

[golden]

Aggression:

1. I'm living, doing my stuff, thinking my thoughts, minding my own business.

2. You tell me I'm wrong or bad for doing my stuff or thinking my thoughts. You want me to stop doing or thinking these things.

3. I request that you leave me alone, mind your own business.

4. You say I'm being aggressive toward you.

5. Nowwwww I'm getting pissed off. I express displeasure.

6. You say my anger proves how bad and wrong I am, which means you were justified for #2.

7. You tell everyone how awful and aggressive I am.

In a just world ...

8. I fucking murder you. See how fucking aggressive I am, motherfucker?

[IBTL]

Tarantino VIs LIE, but I wouldn't find Se role outrageous. He doesn't seem Se ego. The violence in his movies has a very artificial or constructed, even exaggerated quality - it's like he loves rather the entertainment that may come from "scaring" people with buckets or splashes of blood in slow motion than actual combat tactics. It's too much "for the show".

"Violence is one of the most fun things to watch."
“What if a kid goes to school after seeing Kill Bill and starts slicing up other kids? You know, I’ll take that chance! Violent films don’t turn children into violent people. They may turn them into violent filmmakers but that’s another matter altogether.”
“I feel like a conductor and the audience's feelings are my instruments. I will be like, 'Laugh, laugh, now be horrified'. When someone does that to me I've had a good time at the movies,"

Tarantino is LIE. Whenever he was filmed with Fiona Apple(IEI) on Iconoclasts, he barely let her get a word in. He was very bossy, if not downright controlling, to say the least.