# How does your PoLR manifest?



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

From the same place:

"Because they're not good at these things, and have been painfully criticized for them in the past, Te-polrs can very sensitive about being corrected on factual errors, when someone points out that they made a factual mistake in an argument. It even comes down to knowing terms for things. I get really uncomfortable if I misuse terminology, but I still do it rather a lot. Ti-polrs can be very sensitive about someone pointing out failures in their logic, saying something illogical, etc. This is especially true of people who grew up in environments that emphasized weak functions.

With the polr, you either over-emphasize it or under-emphasize it, so some SEIs and IEIs may be super-obsessive about getting their facts right and super uncomfortable when someone points out that they got a fact wrong. Some SEEs and IEEs may be obsessive about making sure everything they say makes perfect sense and follows all of the abstract rules (grammatical, logical, etc.)."


I have this thing in arguments, where when it seems like one or both parties is not understanding what is being discussed, I will post up or locate the definition of the word I feel is disputed. By referencing the definition and then using that as a platform, I can ascertain what is being actually said. If the other person's definition is different, I discern exactly how it is different so that I can actually understand what they are saying. This is an effort to get my facts right and thus making sense when I either agree or disagree with whatever they are actually saying.

Oh, and I refuse to misuse terminology. Based on whatever I understand the term to mean, even if that is wrong. So if I look up a definition and the other person defines it differently, if I use that term in the ensuing debate I continue to use it to mean what I think it to mean. I often have trouble even (permanently) changing my own definition of the word to match what the dictionary even said, in the event I was wrong. I can accept others using it different ways and endeavor to understand them, but I won't try to redefine what the word means in my own view.

Also, I edited both this post and the above post. So if you read the above one already like inabox did, they are different now.


----------



## Entropic

Want to point out, because I do see some confusion about this, but some traits that apply to the PoLR apply equally to the DS e.g.:


Feeling that you are simply expressing yourself sincerely always by undercommunicating or overcommunicating is typical of 1D Fe;
Thinking that everyone is your friend vs everyone is your enemy/unrelated to you is typical of 1D Fi;
Changing one's mind a lot and being overall inconsistent or being overly rigid and law-abiding in other situations is typical of 1D Ti;
Being unable to gauge competency, skill and value by either undervaluing or overvaluing is typical of 1D Te;
Being unable to see and stake out opportunities, being overly rote and traditional or always seeking the new and novel to a fault is typical of 1D Ne;
Being late or always being on time by feeling like you have all the time in the world vs no time in the world is typical of 1D Ni;
Being too passive vs being too aggressive is typical of 1D Se;
Having an extremely poor sense of physical integrity which can either mean an extremely sloppy sense of health and hygiene or being overzealous with an anal-retentive attitude to cleanliness is typical of 1D Si.

In general, what defines the 1D and to a degree the 2D function, is the inflexibility to deal with that particular IE in a contextual and nuanced way so it results in under- vs overdoing them. I think the SSS had a good description of each dimensionality and how it manifests in an IE but it seems their site has changed so I can't find that anymore. It was very useful, though.

@Fenix Wulfheart provided an excerpt that demonstrates this also, I think. And like I said, this applies to both 1D functions, not just the PoLR. For some people, they try to avoid criticism in the PoLR by coming across as better than they are so they overdo whereas others underdo, hoping they can avoid criticism by flying under the radar or simply not caring. The same thing applies to the DS function, but for different reasons.

I would say the main biggest difference outside of the PoLR being unvalued and DS valued, is that the PoLR is _conscious_ but the DS is largely _unconscious_. This means that many experience an overt sense of inability to do perform something with regards to the DS even though they innately feel like they should know how but they have no real control how they should go about satisfying the DS within themselves; it's typical to see say, IxIs admiring power and force in other people and wish they could be like that too because they feel like they could but they just don't quite know how, whereas with the PoLR, it is mostly felt as an actual attack on the ego, that people are trying to force you to change who you feel that you are. This can apply to criticism regarding the ego functions as well, especially if people express that these elements are unwanted or an undesired aspect of the environment. However, in contrast, it is easy to shrug off criticism of being deemed incompetent with regards to the ego.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Along the lines of what @Entropic just posted. I am guilty of overvaluing what my Te is capable of and undervaluing what my Se is capable of, probably because the way I learned to survive until now was by adopting a persona of something akin to LII (with hints of EII). Until I discovered personality theory, I was firmly entrenched in the idea that I was the thinker who was the sole voice of reason, bringing sense and understanding to the ignorant masses. So I ignore resistance in the form of TeSe, just respond with NiTi, and as a result I am difficult to type.

EDIT: Does anyone have a copy of the information from the SSS that Entropic is talking about? I have some old links that I find pretty valuable for IEs in different positions as well:

http://www.tryukraine.com/socionics/wikisocion/Logical_intuitive_extrovert.shtml


----------



## Entropic

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> Along the lines of what @Entropic just posted. I am guilty of overvaluing what my Te is capable of and undervaluing what my Se is capable of, probably because the way I learned to survive until now was by adopting a persona of something akin to LII (with hints of EII). Until I discovered personality theory, I was firmly entrenched in the idea that I was the thinker who was the sole voice of reason, bringing sense and understanding to the ignorant masses. So I ignore resistance in the form of TeSe, just respond with NiTi, and as a result I am difficult to type.


Difficult to type? That you're an IEI is clear as day. To clarify also, a lot of what you describe sounds more like 2D Ti to me, than 1D Te. Ti is mostly about definitions, Te is about achieving results.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Haha well either I am difficult to type or it would have to be your opinion that most forumites are bad at typing slash don't know what an IEI is, @Entropic. ^^

Because a lot of peeps think I am all kinds of things other than IEI. I get INTj, INFj, ENFp, ISFp, even one guy thought ISFj.


----------



## To_august

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> EDIT: Does anyone have a copy of the information from the SSS that Entropic is talking about?


Probably these ones:
Dimension one | School of System Socionics
Dimension two | School of System Socionics
Dimension three | School of System Socionics
Dimension four | School of System Socionics


----------



## Entropic

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> Haha well either I am difficult to type or it would have to be your opinion that most forumites are bad at typing slash don't know what an IEI is, @Entropic. ^^
> 
> Because a lot of peeps think I am all kinds of things other than IEI. I get INTj, INFj, ENFp, ISFp, even one guy thought ISFj.


Yeah, well a lot of forumites think a whole bunch of things. My experience is that I wouldn't trust the opinions of the general forumite much since most of them don't know how to apply the system well with regards to typing other people. What you describe is a great example of 2D Ti to me, and I think it's typical for people to over-identify with their HA and think they are a "feeler" or "intuitive" or what have you, based on the type of HA you have.



To_august said:


> Probably these ones:
> Dimension one | School of System Socionics
> Dimension two | School of System Socionics
> Dimension three | School of System Socionics
> Dimension four | School of System Socionics


Do the text fields come up as empty to you, btw? I just get empty pages.


----------



## Immolate

Entropic said:


> Do the text fields come up as empty to you, btw? I just get empty pages.


I have to scroll considerably to get to the text.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

Figure said:


> * *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ti PoLR: *
> 
> Blind spot to identifying a consistent pattern of thought or rationale behind actions or ideas. Devalue methodical argumentation as boring or simply choose to ignore it. For ENFP this results in making grand, sweeping ideas, singling out single ideas or concepts that don't actually link back to a root cause or idea while still thinking they are being perfectly logical. Or, becoming OVER fascinated by one single principle and aggrandizing its importance to a logical system. Then, becoming indignant or snobby to people who calls this to their attention. For ESFP, this typically manifests as impulsive behavior that puts pressure on other people or systems without actually understanding how they work. They do things before knowing how or why to do them, which ignores having a thought-through rationale behind their impulse. There isn't a method to their madness, just madness, and a kind of manic zaniness.
> 
> *Ni PoLR: *
> 
> Blindness to time, and how much can be done within a span of time. Both of these types are E__J temperament, and as such become very antsy and anxious in general but especially when there is uncertainty to details or specifics on when something will happen or how it will unfold. They tend to do activities rapidly and set measurable goals without actually measuring how long it will take them to complete. They are largely unaware of what will happen later based on what is known now, and do not enjoy waiting for what they need to do what they are doing. In ESTJ this results in expecting consistency out of their everyday dealings, noticing small errors or discrepancies, and imagining the extent to be much worse but with no understanding of how the situation came to be or isn't as bad as they imagine because of the way the situation will unfold. ESFJ have more issues overdoing, then trifling over small petty details that do not have actual meaning to their overall goal, causing them to become sidetracked and overheated. Both types in general cling to only what they see in writing or in front of them, which causes difficulty in keeping a comfortable life rhythm.
> 
> *Ne PoLR:*
> 
> Blind spot is in seeing connections and opportunity. Both of these types are uncomfortable with change and duplicity. They struggle to see life situations outside of "what they are," outside of their ethical and logical systems. They rely more on the way things have always been, or the way things currently with skepticism to the positive aspects of what things could be. They can be over-conservative, or over-liberal in their life choices. They often fail to see prospect in people and vocation, keeping their noses down and doing what they do. The idea of people having hidden sides or multiple facets is either terrifying, foreign, or nonsense to them. ESI tend to completely shut people out of their lives when they are hurt, being blind to the fact that people can change or develop. LSI tend to struggle to deal with ideas that aren't evident or provable given what already exists. They can also think they can handle all situations using their will, not understanding the dynamics of changing environments or different outcomes from their behavior than what they expect.
> 
> 
> 
> *A few comments to differentiate: *
> 
> *PoLR vs. Role:*
> 
> Both functions are undervalued. The Role, however, is respected to some extent and being around people strong in your Role can earn your respect as equals or competitors. People strong in your PoLR will either completely repulse you, cause you to admire their skill, or make it difficult for you to see reason to interact with them. The difference in respect between Role strong and PoLR strong is that you are mature enough in your Role to see value in its use, and perhaps be receptive to learning new methods of using it whereas your PoLR leaves you flummoxed as to what is even going on. If you had to perform a task using your Role you could probably do it passably, eventually tiring out. Trying to perform a task in your PoLR would leave you wondering what is even being asked for.
> 
> You can learn common standards of wellbeing in your Role function, and periodically stabilize your life by focusing on it temporarily. You can't really become self-vested in it or be creative in using it, but you can parrot techniques of those strong in that area to become self sufficient and realize personal growth. Your PoLR is a completely helpless blind spot, and you are unable to be receptive of it enough to even notice others' techniques let alone incorporate them into your life.
> 
> 
> *PoLR vs. Suggestive/Dual Seeking:*
> 
> The similarity between PoLR and DS is in having overall helpless blind spot, and not being able to develop much if any personal competence or flexibility in those areas. You can't really develop either of these two focuses beyond dependency on others, and can't even bring your skills in them up to societal norms because of the lack of awareness.
> 
> The primary difference is that PoLR is undervalued and DS is highly valued. Your PoLR is an area you want to avoid, not be burdened by others, and think your own (albeit flawed) approach works fine. You want, and subconsciously expect from others a high degree of sophistication in your DS function. Your ways of asking questions, communicating, and lifestyle are innately positioned to accept input from your DS function and you find that when someone does provide this input you feel you got the exact response or action you wanted. Strength in your PoLR can temporarily "wow" you out of ignorance, whereas your DS function doesn't necessarily leave you awestruck because there is no difference between what you expected and what you received.
> 
> Another difference is in wanting to become better in your DS function, whereas you completely ignore PoLR. It is not uncommon to think you are really good at your DS function when in fact you are strongly seeking highly developed forms of it from others. The key to noticing these people is that they talk a lot about the subject of their DS function and describe it, but don't actually show an ability to be their own person by using it.


Thank you, this was way more in line with Ti-PoLR than what some other xEE's were saying about their PoLR, which I couldn't relate to. I'm an excellent teacher and I'm masterful at explaining complex topics in an easy to understand way.


----------



## To_august

Entropic said:


> Do the text fields come up as empty to you, btw? I just get empty pages.


No, I can see them all right.

Edit: Just tried on my Android tablet and yep, I get empty pages. Everything works fine on PC though.

Copypasting in case other people can't see those pages too. Maybe it has something to do with viewing site on something else rather than on desktop PC, or something.

*Dimension one*

* *




*Dimension one - the "experience" parameter*

With this parameter begins our perception of the world. You touch things, you get the feeling of the touch - this is your sensory experience. You feel sad, you live through this feeling - this is your emotional experience; you feel sorry for a hungry puppy - this is your experience of empathy (ethics); you understand the meaning of what has been said - it's your intuitive experience; you feel the length of the conversation - this is your experience of time; you hammer a nail - this is your experience with objects; you catch a logical connection between phenomena - this is your logical experience.
Every experience is individual. Every next moment there is a new experience, a new feeling, a new understanding. Experiences do not repeat, they accumulate. Every experience is a point in the space of the world. A single point. Nobody will be able to get exactly the same experience as you. No one can see with your eyes, nobody will be able to touch with your hands or able to understand with your mind. Experience can not be passed to another person, you can only put the other person in the same condition in which you received your experience so that he gets a similar experience. Similar, but not yours. You can try to describe your experience but it will only be a description. The listener will not pass your experience through his bodily sensors, he will reconstruct it in his imagination. All he can do is imagine your experience in his own way. Within the dimension "experience" you are alone in the whole universe.
Thus, the essence of the "experience" parameter, its distinguishing characteristic is individuality and non-transferability to another person. The "experience" parameter is present in all the functions. It is a fundamental parameter. "Experience is the basic component of information processing that allows us to link the internal operations of the human psyche with the outside world."








*One-dimensional functions (# 4 and #5) are the functions that have only one parameter - the "experience" parameter.*
The consequence of such one-dimensional perception by an information function is self-awareness: pleasant/unpleasant; I like it/ I dislike it; I feel good / I feel bad; I feel it/I don't feel it; I understand/I do not understand, etc. Actually that is what experience is - direct individual psychological reaction to a contact with the world. For a one-dimensional function there is no mechanism of comparison with any reference. If it is necessary to take a decision, one can remember his past experiences. And the typical solution (if there is a similar experience) is to retrace the same path by your old steps. This reinforces the "well-beaten track" of the reaction pattern.
Normally, a person always needs to get confirmation of the "correctness" of his responses (his understanding, his actions, his thinking) which relate to his one-dimensional functions (#5 and #4) simply because he lives in a society. Our education engraves in us the tendency to divide everything into right and wrong: "do you do it right?", "do you behave right?", "do you dress in a right manner?", "do you eat in a right manner?" and so on. Such confirmation or its opposite can be either approval or criticism. Of course, we all would like to get approved, but for some reason, life is such that others are eager to express their dissatisfaction and hold back their approval.
If a one-dimensional function accumulates a lot of negative feedback, a person may develop an inferiority complex, and adopt the attitude of a victim. Sometimes one can witness a burst of indignation (especially coming from the vital track function 5) when there is an accumulated expectation of positive feedback, and there in no feedback coming, and often the person may not realize the cause of such an accumulated frustration.
*The essence of the Ex parameter is the personal perception which is non-transferable to others.*
An individual needs a response to the question "what is the right way?", "what is required?". A one-dimensional function develops its own individual understanding of the "rightness", some kind of norms substitutes. And such norms substitutes often are expressed as a kind of "spell" or self-suggestion formulas (and in that they differ from the true norms).
Another way of comparing to others for a one-dimensional function is an assessment of the effort, energy invested into an action. Also, when there is a need to take a decision, a person can make use of the norms available in the adjacent function ( the block neighbor function) or make use of the second function of the same macro element (for example, P<-> L, E<-> R, etc.)
*Examples*If I feel lonely for someone it means that I love this person, if I do not feel loneliness - it means that I do not love him/her (interpretation of R through E)
If he tried very hard then the thing is done well, if he did not try hard then he did not do it well (evaluation or result by the amount of visible effort)
I try not to think about it, this way nothing bad will happen (individual suggestion formula)
If I understood it then I'm clever (block: interpretation of L through I 1 )
If you love me, then I'm a good person (block: interpretation of I through R )
A job is well done if I had not noticed shortcomings (individual formula of complacency)
A job is well done if I have a feeling of satisfaction with the result (judgement by evaluation of individual energy state).
If I read a lot then I am clever, if I don't then I am stupid (individual suggestion formula).​Having no comparison tool (no possibility to use any norm as a reference), a one-dimensional function can transfer the problem to a multidimensional block. For example, logical types understand relationships by interpreting them through logical rules.
Any information that ends up in a one-dimensional function is assessed by the function as pleasant or unpleasant. Natural (from the viewpoint of one-dimensional function) reaction when encountering an "unpleasant" information is the desire to get rid of it, to turn away, not to take it into account, to pretend that it does not exist, to forget, to fence off in any way.
One of the methods of "getting away" is mental time hastening - "I wish it ends quickly," which leads to the feverishness of the function. Thinking becomes impatient, shallow and very narrow. It can be compared with the rapid running through dark places, when your field of vision is narrowed to a spot, you do not want to see anything around. Reactions are accelerated, there is haste. We are hurriedly doing something to get rid of the unpleasant thing faster: we quickly tinker through our relationship, we hastily make our calculation, or in general, we quickly react to the information related to the element of our one-dimensional function. This, of course, often leads to mistakes, and we get the opposite of what we have hoped for - we do not get rid of the unwanted situation, we make it worse. Trying to "run through" the situation at high speed, just to feel relieved that it's over, deep down, we still feel that we are failing and we feel "suspended." The suggestive function (#5) may show feverishness of its reactions coming from the desire to quickly get the expected pleasure. Such "feverishnes" of one-dimensional functions is apparent for an outside observer.
What features of mental reactions point to the one-dimensionality of information processing?


Reliance on previous experience when trying to comprehend, evaluate, understand the new experience, when searching for a new solution. This is similar to walking the old beaten track: movement in one direction only, and only repeating the same track.
Repetition over and over of similar reactions, evaluations and decisions.
The use of language expressive means that help a person to isolate, mark-up individual perception.
Inability to make reference to a fixed norm, to a pattern or a rule, which causes constant anxiety.
Accumulation of errors resulting from inadequate (not complying with the social norms) decisions and actions, leading to formation of fears and complexes. It could be right the opposite - an inadequate over-confidence (a publicly demonstrated mask, behind which hide all the same fears and insecurities).
The desire to "cut off" part of the the information, "shut ones eyes", often it manifests in traces of failures getting "erased" from the memory.
Painful expectation of repetition of the bad experiences.
Haste in processing of unpleasant information.
Presence of fear.
Desire to get more and more information by the suggestive function(f. 5).
Confusion when evaluating new situations.
Processing of information feels like a huge loss of energy.
The lack of norms for comparison may cause unexpected inadequate self-esteem. The person may not be aware of how adequately he is processing the information, so he can can judge his one-dimensional function to be a very strong one.
Possible suggestibility. No critical assessment of information.
*Other papers on the topic:*


Eglit I.M. Dimensions of functions
Eglit I.M., Pyatnitsky V.V. Investigation of fears in one-dimensional functions.
Eglit I.M. Use of protocols for TIM identification by correspondence in the Internet
Eglit I.M. Low dimensional functions are not "weak".
Eglit I.M. Socionic type identification (more in detail and with examples)
Eglit I.M. Pyatnitsky V.V. Interpretation of human behavior inadequacies in terms of the A-model.
1 Our observations show that generally the concept of "clever" is perceived in terms of the L element.
Eglit IM ©


*Dimension two*

* *




*Dimension two. Parameters "experience" and "norms"*

How do we understand each other? How can we come to terms with the others? We can not live without communication, without coordinating our actions, thoughts, understanding and perception.

In order to come to a mutual agreement there must be something that is commonly accepted, something that is perceived and understood by all in the same way. And that's where comes into play the next parameter - the "norms".

*Norms* - are something which is conventionally recognized by a group of people. Norms are something which allows you to compare things, they are patterns, a standard reference. Society could not exist without such conventions.

If experience can be imagined as single dots on the world map, the norms could be seen as fixed lines stretching from some point to another. Norms perfectly reflect the dualistic division of the world into good/bad, good/evil, right/wrong, you need/you do not need accept/do not accept ours/strangers, etc. These are very definite guidelines. And because of their definitive quality, they are rigid and inflexible. They are firm as sentinels guarding what they are meant to guard.

Now you are able to explain to someone else what the green color is - because there are the color charts. Now you can be sure that you are holding your fork and knife up to the etiquette. Now you know that you won't to shock people, by putting on white socks together with dark trousers. Now you are firmly convinced that 2 +2 = 4, and thank God, everyone has been taught that in school. You can now refer to a dictionary or a textbook. All in all, we have finally found something definite in this ever-changing and multifaceted world.

*Two-dimensional functions ( #3 and #6) - are the functions that process information according to the parameters "experience" (Ex) and "norms" (Nr).*

How does the thinking of a two-dimensional (normative) function sound like?

It is clear that it must be the most correct and proper mindset in the world, because it is exactly up to the conventions, because it follows the rules and agreements. What could be better? Everything is predictable and determined, everything is right on the mark. Men are courteous with ladies. Everyone is kind and friendly. Long live general consent. Hurray!










And in order to create such a "paradise on earth" serve the following:



proverbs and idioms, which reflect established views and beliefs;
regulations, rules and laws;
reference books;
uniform education;
trusted sources of information;
set of superstitions and customs;
obligations;
conformism;
conventionalism.
Let's try to look at "norms" being applied to respective information elements.

For example, the *normative E* can be seen in identical cliche smiles. Examine carefully your photographs and photographs of other people. Particularly well this can be seen on photographs of children, because children are more spontaneous when express their natural emotions. If you scroll through a family album, you will notice that facial expressions of some people are nearly the same on all pictures, whereas others have a wider emotional range. Normative smiles look standard and correct in all situations. As if normative E-types feel some limit to how much they can stretch their facial muscles, and everything that goes further is risky and ventures beyond the the average. Normative E-types know well situations in which they are required to smile, for example, when meeting people, when saying "goodbye" when showing their disposition to someone during a conversation, etc.

*Normative R* is knowing the rules of manners, the rules of courtesy - men let forward women in the doorway, yield a seat in the public transport. One's behavior should not cause inconveniences to other people, one should always say hello, say goodbye, be polite, etc. The thing which we call good manners is normative behavior in terms of R. A normative R-type looks tactful, polite, courteous, in general he looks "correct" in his manners.

*Normative I* seeks to absorb the "right" understanding and interpretation of everything it is facing. Outwardly, this can manifest in frequent use of some idioms, witty phrases "hitting the nail on the head" joined with the urge to use them in conversation (show off one's erudition). But, be careful, this is rather not a sharp improvisation, not a game of the true wit, this is merely a repetition of the cliches which one considers to be witty. It takes some time and observation to clearly distinguish between the two cases. A normative I-type tends to convey ideas in unambiguous and accurate way and expects the same from the others. The game of meanings (creative manifestation of intuition) is not for him. He would rather not get confused in a labyrinth of meanings. Sometimes one could observe a manifestation of normativity related to the I-element as repetition of quotes or ideas after a smart and reputable person. A normative I-type is rigidly fixed to his set of meanings, and believes them to be uncompromisingly true.

Some examples of norms related to the I-element:



stereotype use of the meanings of words and concepts
plain messages in accordance with generally accepted meanings
The need to make everything clear and unambiguous
The need to understand the essence of things
the need to understand a person's motives, his personal traits and qualities
need to have a sense of everything
the need to understand and be understood
*Normative T* manifests in punctuality and stereotyped understanding of the course of events, fate, luck. Normative T is often characterized by fatalism trust in predictions (divination), making certain rituals in order to magnetize a desired event or avoid an undesired one. A person with the normative T is credulous towards the sources that seemingly accurately predict "what would happen", if he knows that many people rely on the source (for example, numerology, astrology, etc.)

*Normative F* relies on the existing social norms regarding the boundaries, space, financial wealth etc. It is guided by the standard, rather rigid rules regarding the need to protect property or accepted level of aggression. For example: "One must defend the homeland, relatives and people who can not defend themselves." A normative F-type is aware of socially accepted means of protection and standard ways to attack (for the minus sign), and is acting on the basis of general notions of limits of protection (aggression), for example, "never hit a man when he is down", "eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth", "a defense must be proportional to the attack" etc. A normative F-type can correctly estimate the degree of spatial proximity to another person and considers the property right: to whom the things belong and what could be taken without asking.

*A normative S-type* follows an inner drive to correspond to the established rules of clothing, color combination, follows the rules of hygiene and tidiness. He can follow certain stereotypes of how to dress, which are accepted within his social circle. He has a stereotype understanding of how visual perception of certain forms can be manipulated (for example, narrow/wide strips or checks used to create visual effects of narrowing or expansion). We can generalize this tendency with the maxim " to be like everyone else", where "everyone else" can refer to followers of a new fashion or a specific style as well as the classical standard. The person himself does not experiment, but is following and imitating the others. The vital track two-dimensional function is more likely to stick to its own acquired patterns, habitual dress models and color combinations.

People with *normative P* tend to the exact implementation of technology, methods, specific actions, they tend to be "right" professionals. That usually makes them diligent executors. Work is work, work is duty.

*Normative L* manifests as effort to be consistent (in thought and deed) - usually for rational types it is striving to follow the rules, fixation on a certain theory, it can be a correctness of reasoning, a standard approach to the classifications, generalizations. This is the standardization itself. 1

This all serves as a basis for people's two-dimensional functions - in their thinking, in their outlook. And people can confidently defend their normative views, because it is important for them to feel the certainty and firmness of the things. Thus, the essence of the dimension two is the quality of being right and rigidity, there are definite black-and-white style guidelines.

*The essence of Nr paramener is the perception of the world through patterns and established norms*

All that was said above about the characteristic features of the normative functions is completely true for the mental track normative function 3, also known as the "function of social norms." The function 6, as you know, belongs to the vital track of information processing, and it is called "the function of individual norms." The same norms are present there, the function is rigid in the similar way, but the norms here are not regarded as social, they are rather meant "for personal use". This does not mean that they are formed in isolation from the society, on the contrary, these rules are formed in the childhood, under the influence of the family and the school. But it looks as if a person selects from all the norms that society has to offer those with which he agrees. It turns out that the rules are assimilated on the personal level, in the form in which the person had learned them. Therefore, the personal norms may be the same as social ones, or may differ. But the general feature of a normative function is there, which is following the set patterns, the quality of correctness, and the feeling of duty.

Another feature of the function 6, (also known as the "reference function") is the desire to get confirmation (preferably a praise). Asking for a praise often bypasses awareness of the person himself. It seems as if an adult person should not be asking for a praise, it looks childish to act like that (because the norms are already internalized), but the wanting of a positive feedback is still present, and it comes through to the surface somehow. Typically it can manifest in the form of non verbal signs. The person does not say bluntly: "Come on, someone praise me", but instead he pleadingly looks into your eyes, or repeats the same sentence several times, as if expecting the desired reaction, or keeps returning the conversation to the "sweet" topic over and over...

*Other papers on the topic:*



Eglit I.M. Dimensions of functions
Eglit I.M., Pyatnitsky V.V. Investigation of fears in one-dimensional functions.
Eglit I.M. Use of protocols for TIM identification by correspondence in the Internet
Eglit I.M. Low dimensional functions are not "weak".
Eglit I.M. TIM identification
Nr parameter definition
Normative functions: functioning and identification (materials from the Internet forum)
[HR][/HR]
1 Similar descriptions of normative functions' manifestations could be used to for TIM identification based on the behavioral description. We would like to warn against such a simplified approach. The main purpose of these examples is to show how the phenomena related to the dimension "Nr" manifest themselves outwardly - generally they manifest as a form of the inner desire to pin down a certain fixed rule. This is what you need to pay attention to when identifying a TIM. It can be manifested in a lot of ways, and I describe here only some of the manifestations which, from my experience, seem to be most typical ones.

Eglit IM ©[/SPOILER]


*Dimension three*

* *





*Dimension three. Parameters "experience", "norms", "situation"*

The third dimension is a breakthrough from relying only on function's experience and norms to being able to consider the situational circumstances. With the norms we have got a solid foundation to help us stabilize the world. But this is not enough. We need to "look further out" beyond the walls of regulations. We are not robots, by God! The world is too complex to fit into the "Procrustean bed" of rules and patterns. And besides, it is colorful! People want to create. Creativity is our engine, a kind of luring "carrot". And we enjoy the process of creation itself as well as its fruits.

*Three-dimensional functions (#2 and #7) have parameters of "experience", "norms" and "situation."*

Of course, everyone at least once in his life, had experienced something like: "Yes, I understand that it would be all right if I do it so and so, but in this particular case... I am going to do it the other way. " The function 2 (the so-called "creative" function) is flexible and adaptable to each new situation. It is impossible to measure everything applying a "common yardstick", and it takes a three-dimensional function to realize this fact (for normative functions the "common yardstick" is a most perfect measure).

For example, a creative approach to education is situational, but if "one size fits all" then we have the standard educational system. "White top, dark bottom" uniforms is a normative approach, but when your clothing respects your shapes, sex, mood, needs, and so on - this is a situational approach. Whereas a two-dimensional function distinguishes minimum number of grades, which can be generalized as thinking in terms polarities, the three-dimensional function 2 discerns many shades, subtleties and details. This is not any longer a Lumberjack's blunt ax - swung and cut, it is a tool for fine tuning and adjustment. You can find there so many linguistic means to convey the full range of situational shades! What a variety of approaches! And for each new situation a new solution is offered.









When processing information using the situational approach, it is difficult to agree with the narrow limits of the normative "correctness":- How do you know what kind of relationship between people is right and what is wrong?

- I would say that all relationships are right in their own way. Calling them "right" or "wrong" seems inadequate to me. Any relationship has a right to be, because it has been caused by some natural reasons. Another thing is that we might not like that relationship. The word "wrong" is probably applicable to the type of relationship when people violate the very naturalness of human relationships when they are trying to do something out of some idealistic notions or speculations. Then it looks unnatural, artificial and, one might even say, wrong.
​***- How to distinguish between right and wrong relationships?

- It is impossible. The concept of relationship is too broad and multifaceted, it is impossible to determine whether it is right or not. Relationship just is.
​A three-dimensional function rises above norms. But this does not mean that it ignores the generally accepted conventions. Each of the higher dimensions is based on the foundation of the lower ones. Without the "experience" and ''norms" there would be no "situation".

*The function 2 of the model *is not only a tool (this was discussed in the topic " Function blocks "), but also a field of manifestation (conditions the basis for realization) of the first function. This field is very flexible, supple, adaptable to the tasks of the function 1. The function 1 is realizing itself in element of the function 2. If the conditions of the function 2 are not suitable, they are changed for better ones.

A LSE-type







discovers various properties in this world of objects. He is a master of things and objects, he juggles with the objects, transforms them, he notices the undiscovered properties which are overlooked by the others and discovers them. He is the master of matter (materials), a creator in the material world. All that is described above is the P element







. In order to make a masterpiece, you need to create the most comfortable conditions and remove all that could bother







. A LSE-type operates in the field of senses , space, shapes, sizes







.

In contrast to the PS-type, a LIE-type







operates in the field of events, temporal changes







.He grasps the fine tendencies of time







, knows what actions are required by the moment







and what will be needed in the future







.

An ILE-type







sees capacities of objects, either real or virtual (L is the element that has to do with relations between objects), An IEE-type







reveals the capacities (the inner nature of the persons) in the world of relationships.

Emotions of an ESE-type







are directly related to the field of sensory perception (comfort, aesthetics, and beauty), emotions of an EIE-type







manifest themselves in the field of events, changes, global temporal processes ("to preserve the enthusiasm through hardships and difficulties").

A SEE-type







exerts in the field of relationship, an SLE-type







- exerts in the field of logical structures (rules, laws, schemes).

One of the names of the function 2 is "the creative function". Are we creative only when it concerns the function 2? No. Even a one-dimensional function can create, in the sense of making something new. Many creative people - artists, designers, sculptors, fashion designers - create new things using their one-dimensional functions. And their deeply individual vision of the world surprises us with its unusual, unconventional, shocking, sometimes strange and incomprehensible side. The socionic term "creative function" should be understood as a "function, which serves to finalize the goal-setting of the function 1, thus creating "production" of the function 1."

*The function 7* is another three-dimensional function, i.e. it processes information, with reference to "experience", "norms" and "situation". However it has some specific features related to its affiliation to the vital track super block: the function 7 performs its functions in an automatic, habitual way. Is there no contradiction between the automatic nature of its functioning, which presumes lack of awareness characteristic of the vital track, and the requirement to take into account the situational parameters (to function in accordance with the current situation)?

*The essence of the parameter "situation" (St) is the capacity to process information with reference to the conditions of a specific situation*
V.D. Yermak calls the function 7 "the function of individual programs". It is as if this function contains programs to various situations that occur in our life. Such programs are similar to templates. What is the difference then between the normative function 7 and the function 6? The difference is that the function 7 is automatically considering circumstances of the current situation. So, if your function 7 processes information on the L element, then you are able without being aware of it to feel flaws in logic or inconsistency of your interlocutor. Sometimes you might be not aware what is the cause of this feeling, but you feel that there is some logic flaw for sure. Because of the automatic nature of this function, its reactions tend to rely on some fundamental, underlying set of attitudes and become habits: stereotyped emotions, conventional relationships patterns, habitual ways of seeing the nature of things, usual relations with time, familiar logical patterns, habitual work techniques, habitual attitudes to comfort, stereotyped dress styles, proven defensive reactions or aggression bursts.

So far - so good, but sometimes we notice that there is something wrong with some of our habitual reactions. That's when arises a need to change these reactions. As you know, habits are hard to change. If one could at least stop the undesirable reaction before the function 7 habitually turns on. And it is extremely difficult, otherwise the reaction would not be automatic one. The ID-block functions' reactions can be changed only with help of the mental track EGO-block functions. For example, if the usual for a RI-type gloomy mood (-E) bothers his partner, then in order to avoid worsening of relationships (+ R), he will gradually change his emotional habits. If a LII or a LSI need to change their habitual programs of the function 7 (practical logic), they need to elaborate the new algorithms and operational sequences using their function 1 (structural logic), etc.

Another feature of the function 7 - is that it caters for individual needs of a person. For the most part everything that is happening in the ID super block - serves only to your personal needs. This logic (ethics, comfort etc.) is just for yourself and no one else. When it comes to the ID functions the social attitude could be described as: "let me live and express myself the way I like, the way which is convenient for me." And if suddenly the function 7 receives information that is not consistent with the individual understanding of a person, it can be annoying. The function 7 has no claims towards the society at least as long as the sosiety does not contradict to the person's individual programs. These programs had been accumulating in the early childhood, they are quite familiar and handle life situations rahter well. But they are viscerally individual.

The functioning of the function 7 seems very similar to that of a normative function: it relies on long-standing, rigid, individually developed techniques and methods. You may ask, how do you distinguish a nomative function from a situational yet automatic (belonging to the vital track) one? It can be done by noticing specific reactions, as well as the dimension of information processing. A multidimensional function, as opposed to a normative one, can confidently function in different situations, including difficult ones. It faces a failure as normal thing - there is no reason to get upset, it is rather an occasion to correct a mistake, change the approach (according to the situation), to learn from the result . Unpleasant? Yes. But nothing dramatic. The function 7 is a kind of "hard-nosed" self-righteous one1. However the outer appearances are not emough to identify the function - one has to "measure" its dimension, i.e. confirm the presence of the St paramenter.

Because the function 7 is a vital track function, the verbal information that is coming from this function does not sound as thoughts (like mental track information would sound) but sounds rather like remembering of what usually happens.

So, now we can summarize and draw a list the characteristics that can be seen at the three-dimensional functions:



avoiding the rigid "correctness" of normative functions;
going beyond the norms, if it is required by a specific situation;
abundance of gradations, shades and details instead of the extreme polarities of fixed rules;
flexibility and adaptability to each new situation (function 2);
confidence in their decisions, in their own self-esteem.
*Other papers on the topic:*



Eglit I.M. Dimensions of functions
Eglit I.M. Use of protocols for TIM identification by correspondence in the Internet
Eglit IM TIM identification
[HR][/HR]
1 Maybe that is why some socionics call it "restrictive".

Eglit IM ©
[/SPOILER]


*Dimension four*

* *





*Dimension four. Parameters of "experience", "norms", "situation" and "time" (or "globality")*

The most difficult to understand, but perhaps the most interesting dimension - is the dimension four. V.D.Ermak defines it as "a point on the timeline serving as a reference parameter for an information function and binding information processing to a certain point in the past, present or future." A.V. Bukalov calls it "the globality vector", or "the time vector."

So, we have the two references: *time* and *globality*.

Lets examine the "time" parameter. It is important not to confuse the "time" parameter with the information element T (intuition of time). A clear distinction needs to be made here.

Time as the _information element_ T (intuition of time) represents *information about changes*. When we are mentioning an information element we are referring to the semantics (meaning) of the information being processed. What is the meaning of a T-message? Changes. For example:Yesterday I left my home half an hour later, and was nearly late for work.
​This is an example of an information message having semantics of T element (intuition of time.) It has to do with how events correlate in time: the usual routine of leaving the house, yesterdays event of leaving the house and the moment of arrival to work. Alternation of events is perceived by us as the flow of time. Describing the relationship of some of the facts, we're talking about events i.e. T element. It should be mentioned here that every person has the notion and vocabulary of time, i.e. everyone can successfully use linguistic expressive means to describe temporal phenomena regardless of his/her TIM. Everyone has understanding of what is "yesterday" and what means "one hour later". From the above example we can conclude that the main information element of the message is T - the intuition of time. And that's all we can do. The passage contains no other indicators (regarding dimension or sign or pertinence to either mental or vital track of information processing).

Time as a _parameter (the dimension four)_ relates to the *quality of information processing*, its power or measure. Lets look at the process of information perception starting from the dimension one and going up to the dimension four. First we pass the information through our senses, we touch it and give a name to our perception (experience) then we correlate what we have felt with some templates (norms), then we assess the current situation and make corrections accordingly (situation) and, finally, we see what is going on as flow, constant change (the time parameter). In fact, we have four measuring tapes, four gauges to _assess_ the incoming information: we can gauge it up to our experience, up to the norms, up to the situation and up to a moment in time. So, when in comes to the parameter "time", we are talking about_ gauging information processing_, we are talking about _how_ the information is processed.

The essence of the parameter "time" is perception of any information related to the respective information element in the context of constant time changes, which results in having a global perspective, a position of a bird's-eye view observer.
The third dimension parameter ("situation") is actually static. It's like a frame of a photo camera film. One shot - one situation, next shot - next situation. This is a 3D snapshot, it covers a lot of detail, but still it is just a frame. The fourth ("time") parameter, to continue our analogy, resembles a functioning movie projector: there are no individual frames - only a constant movement of the film image. It's impossible to tear out a single frame from this film, as one can not tear a day from his life. I think, that explains why some socionic authors describe the function 1 as a continuous function, and the function 2 (the resulting one) is described as a pulse function.

*Four-dimensional functions (#1 and #8) have parameters "experience", "norms", "situation" and "time".*

Imagine that you were shown a single situation-frame and asked how you would act in it. Your reaction will depend on the dimension of your respective information function. A three-dimensional function handles the information that is contained in the frame, so that the decision is made with reference to this situation. A four-dimensional function processes the information contained in the situation-frame, as well as the preceding frames and keeps in mind possible frames that could follow and considers all this material to make its decision. A four-dimensional function simply cannot be narrowed down to the situation, it perceives the situation not as something static but as a development. That's why these two functions could come to different solutions.

The dimension four is synonymous to dynamic perception of the constantly changing world. And how this perception is reflected in responses given during TIM identification interviews? Our observations show that a person is not inclined to give a definite and fixed answer, because in the world of constant change there is little place for fixed things, but he would rather say that _at the moment_ such-and-such solution is the best possible one. And this, of course, implies that the solution is subject to change.

A solution of a "situational" function resolves the situation. A solution of a four-dimensional function solves the situation *for this moment*. For example:We have made a very detailed study of the fourth dimension, and have identified a number of indicators, which are found in speech and point to this dimension. The situation is such that study of external manifestations of the fourth dimension in speech is only possible for people whose TIMs are well known and who themselves are able to track the functioning of their TIM models, who can distinguish reactions of each function, and constantly monitor their thinking. There are not many such people. At the moment this is all that we can offer to those who study socionics.
​The above passage is about an object - the "dimension of a function", which has been studied to a certain extent and for which are revealed some of its properties (the object and its properties, you can work with, belong to the information element T). The reference _to "the moment"_ focuses on the fact that the author suggests further study of the object and that its properties are not yet fully explored (and can they be fully explored at all?). A four-dimensional P works constantly, every following moment it is not the same. Change in perception of object's properties can also happen constantly. It is reluctant to fix only one understanding or perception, but still it is necessary to do it to be able to convey to people the _up to date_ results.

A four-dimensional function makes a "snapshot" and describes the frame. Sometimes it is called "in this situation", because it is a situation - stopped in one's mind and static. More often it is referred to as "the moment", and this expression reflects the dynamic ongoing nature of information processing. But sometimes you wouldn't catch any obvious indicators at all. That's why the dimension four is so elusive. 

The capacity of a four-dimensional function to encompass the thinking (related to the respective information element) in its development engenders its following peculiarity - *"globality"*.

Globality of the function 1 is manifested in the fact that in the light of the fourth dimension a person can see all the "film" of a lifetime in its motion; he encompasses it with the mind's eye and understands where his development is heading. What it looks like in reality? For example, a person can see or simply understand that something constitutes his Way.R, f. 1: You'd better ask yourself: "What does it mean - "my type"? What do I want from him? What can I personally accept in my life and what not"? I think, over time, this understanding changes, and so change the answers, they will be different in different periods of life, so the concept of "my type" will be different.

... From my experience, when I evaluated to what extent we [me and my girl] are compatible, I used to draw a mental picture: we are together doing ordinary everyday things that I usually do alone, that is, here we are living under the same roof, having breakfast together, we go shopping, discussing something, we are having good and bad moods, get sick, etc. If you can draw such a picture, and if you can believe in it, then you'll be able to co-exist with this person. Finally, if you want to invest more (ambitions) into the term "my type", you could imagine the picture: "I'm building a career, and he is patiently going through all the hardships of feeding our baby." If such a picture is plausible, then he is the "right" man.
​The dimension four in T is constant awareness of the flow of changes and events.

The dimension four in I is constant following of relations between meanings and possibilities.

The dimension four in L is constant awareness of facts and actions related to the laws of cause and effect.

The dimension four in P is constant awareness of the facts and actions of the world of objects.

The dimension four in S is constant perception of flowing shapes, colors, tastes, and other sensory information.

The dimension four in F - is constant tracking of borders and boundaries, their movement and the force fields which influence the border configurations.

The dimension four in E - is constant feeling of energy states and their changes.

The dimension four in R - this constant tracking of the play of feelings.

*Other papers on the topic:*



Eglit I.M. The base function .
Eglit I.M. Dimensions of functions
Eglit I.M. Use of protocols for TIM identification by correspondence in the Internet
Eglit I.M. TIM identification
Recognizing the Tm parameter

Eglit IM ©
[/SPOILER]


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

To_august said:


> Probably these ones:
> Dimension one | School of System Socionics
> Dimension two | School of System Socionics
> Dimension three | School of System Socionics
> Dimension four | School of System Socionics


Oooh, thank you. Articles I have not read. ^^

Hmm. Maybe one of these days I'll make a big thread o'links with all the links I have found and been given. I have dozens at this point.


----------



## SheWolf

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> I found this in another forum. It works well for me on telling Ti PoLR from Te PoLR:
> 
> "Theoretical:
> 
> This is a bit of an experiment, but I would describe it primarily in terms of internal and external.
> 
> Ti-polrs want all of their thinking externalized: they need facts, concrete, step-by-step explanations of what to do, lists of all the parts (objects), etc. How a system breaks down into its discrete component parts. If they don't get this, they don't really know how to do objective analysis. So if it's something that requires thorough understanding of a system, they have trouble with it.
> 
> Te-polrs want all of their thinking internalized: they need abstract systems to explore, "neatness" of logic, clear explanations of how one thing relates to another (fields), etc. How discrete pieces of information fits into an overarching system. If they don't get this, they don't really know how to do objective analysis. So if it's something that requires dealing with "just the facts," they have trouble with it.
> 
> 
> Practical:
> 
> Te-polrs hate having to do anything that they consider boring or dry or too factual. If you put a bunch of unorganized data in front of them, they will have to organize that data into a system in order to be able to do anything with it at all.
> 
> Ti-polrs hate having to do anything that they consider too abstract and theoretical/rigid. If you give them a big, abstract system but refuse to explain to them how the step-by-step process works, it annoys them. They need to know the individual facts, or an explanation of what they literally have to do, what the procedure is, etc. "
> 
> I also personally hate having things listed to me. Like someone listing out all of their stats and abilities in an RPG, or all the Magic cards they wanna buy, or stuff like that. Its like, why not tell me what you are going to DO with all that stuff?


The Ti PoLR is exactly me and the reason why I struggled like fuck in computer classes. They're like...

heres this abstract system! Figure it out.

Nope. Fuck that. Tell me WHAT TO DO. And they literally looked at me like I was nuts. Actually figuring out myself was part of the credit/grade.
I won't be a programmer anytime soon.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

Um so... sorry everyone. I goofed a bit. Turns out I'm actually an LIE so Si is my PoLR, which makes a *TON* more sense to me than Ti-PoLR.

As an LIE and an Ni subtype Si is particularly vulnerable to me. So it's pretty standard though, an inability to rest, an inner restlessness. A constant drive for change. Although I will say that I do enjoy pleasurable sensations, it's just not something I will willfully seek out. It's more like, "Oh! A delicious cookie, what a fortunate find. *proceeds to munch on cookie*". I find this is where an Se ego really helps. Se is my mobilizing function and Se egos do exactly that. They mobilize me and get me out from planning stage to action stage to rock and roll and kick some bum. :smile:


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Something else I found valuable in that other forum

"Ti PoLR is mostly about focusing in the way you understand things (how they are connected through Fi) rather than what things actually are. Ti PoLRs often get pissed off when they are pointed out that their long descriptions about something actually have a short, single word name.

Symbolic understanding of things is mostly a Ti thing. Ti PoLRs, being weak at describing things using symbols, usually try to give as much information as possible without any kind of associated structure. This confuses Ti types (specially Ti dominants) because they are not used to deal with raw data. Ti PoLRs often feel symbols are too restricting and that they don't convey all the details. This is often true, though not to the extent the Ti PoLR thinks.

A real life example would be a SEE girl I know. She sleeps with many men, mostly to get material things such as money, cars, etc. The definition of a woman who exchanges sex for commercial gain is a prostitute. However, she wrongly believes that her circumstances make her something else, but not a prostitute. That negation of a general category and stubbornness to insist that minor details make up for a qualitative change is the manifestation of the Ti PoLR. "


----------



## Regnum

I self-type as IEI. Te POLR and Ti HA manifests as a need to have a consistent system of principles rather than an accurate collection of facts. In my interactions with my supervisor LIE, I have noticed that I will state some principle which they will suddenly contradict with a fact, putting me on the spot and forcing me to cover up the discrepancy with an explanation about how that fact really is consistent with my principle lol.


----------



## Entropic

Scoobyscoob said:


> Um so... sorry everyone. I goofed a bit. Turns out I'm actually an LIE so Si is my PoLR, which makes a *TON* more sense to me than Ti-PoLR.
> 
> As an LIE and an Ni subtype Si is particularly vulnerable to me. So it's pretty standard though, an inability to rest, an inner restlessness. A constant drive for change. Although I will say that I do enjoy pleasurable sensations, it's just not something I will willfully seek out. It's more like, "Oh! A delicious cookie, what a fortunate find. *proceeds to munch on cookie*". I find this is where an Se ego really helps. Se is my mobilizing function and Se egos do exactly that. They mobilize me and get me out from planning stage to action stage to rock and roll and kick some bum. :smile:


An honest suggestion, but I think you're Ti DS.



Fenix Wulfheart said:


> Something else I found valuable in that other forum
> 
> "Ti PoLR is mostly about focusing in the way you understand things (how they are connected through Fi) rather than what things actually are. Ti PoLRs often get pissed off when they are pointed out that their long descriptions about something actually have a short, single word name.
> 
> Symbolic understanding of things is mostly a Ti thing. Ti PoLRs, being weak at describing things using symbols, usually try to give as much information as possible without any kind of associated structure. This confuses Ti types (specially Ti dominants) because they are not used to deal with raw data. Ti PoLRs often feel symbols are too restricting and that they don't convey all the details. This is often true, though not to the extent the Ti PoLR thinks.
> 
> *A real life example would be a SEE girl I know. She sleeps with many men, mostly to get material things such as money, cars, etc. The definition of a woman who exchanges sex for commercial gain is a prostitute. However, she wrongly believes that her circumstances make her something else, but not a prostitute. That negation of a general category and stubbornness to insist that minor details make up for a qualitative change is the manifestation of the Ti PoLR.* "


Ok, but the bolded sounds like BS, it's a poor application of the word "prostitute" because it's too literal not considering the rest of the context. If she disagrees with that, I'd agree; she sounds more like a gold digger type, using men's love and desires to make them give her things. 

An important aspect of prostitution is to sleep for money as a source of income; but cars? Then we speak of such huge sums it's outside prostitution. I'd never call someone a prostitute if they have sex for a car. That suggests an emotional attachment from the people she's sleeping with that prostitutes don't have with their clients because they are willing to invest in more money in her than what a mere fuck is worth. So typical of a Ti ego to miss out on that certain words also carry connotations of relationships.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

Entropic said:


> An honest suggestion, but I think you're Ti DS.


Thanks for the suggestion, I looked into EIE and ESE when I first learned about Socionics and I ruled out Ti valuing at the time but I'll look into it again tomorrow. LIE is what I first typed myself but everyone kept suggesting different types and I'm very certain I'm Fi-valuing, not Ti.


----------



## inabox

@SheWolf, I hear you. I hated physics and maths; it always felt like someone threw me in a canyon and said, 'Have fun figuring a way out!' Tears in my effing eyes, man :'( .


----------



## inabox

@Fenix Wulfheart, dude, you are killing it with the descriptions, power to Ni doms! 

One of the greatest struggles in my life (perhaps the greatest), is the inability to see things as they are instead of what I wish it was. :'(


----------



## Rose for a Heart

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> A real life example would be a SEE girl I know. She sleeps with many men, mostly to get material things such as money, cars, etc. The definition of a woman who exchanges sex for commercial gain is a prostitute. However, she wrongly believes that her circumstances make her something else, but not a prostitute. *That negation of a general category and stubbornness to insist that minor details make up for a qualitative change is the manifestation of the Ti PoLR. *"


Eh...of all the examples they could have come up with...why this? 
Being called a "prostitute" is not a mechanical, dry category. It carries moral and ethical meaning with it - it ties in with the worth of the person. Of course she doesn't want to be called that.

Also @Fenix Wulfheart and @To_august could you guys please make a thread with all the links to the articles (and close it)? I would like to come back to them but I don't have time right now and this thread is going very fast.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

inabox said:


> ( @Scoobyscoob , here's some feel good stuff for you; ESI-Fi Aishwarya Rai being charmed by her husband Abhishek Bacchan's (EIE-Fe) Ne demonstrative: )
> 
> 
> * *


Quite the power couple if you ask me. 



inabox said:


> ALSO, is your wife ESI-Fi or ESI-Se?
> 
> 
> 
> I am very happy to hear that you are set @Scoobyscoob  ! Warm wishes to you and missus (is she a base or creative subtype?) !
Click to expand...

Yes, between trying to watch that 17 minute long video and reading the subtype descriptions, it took me a bit longer to reply to this. The wife has some elements of ESI-Fi due to her upbringing but it seems to me ESI-Se describes her nearly perfectly.  Thank you for asking as I was kind of unsure when you asked but now I know.


----------



## Dragheart Luard

FearAndTrembling said:


> This is also how I relate to Fe polr. It isn't about emotions or being unfriendly. It is about group activities you give no shits for and will not bend for.
> 
> I'm the kind of guy that never dresses up for Halloween. Would never have a big wedding. You cannot enthuse me that way. Fe polr is not about speaking bluntly or being rude as others have said. It is refusing to be involved with the group and even feign enthusiasm. Which comes across as rude.
> 
> I'll put it another way. I am the least festive person you will ever meet. lol. I have no enthusiasm for all this shit.


 Yeah, parties bore me to death unless there's some food that I like, to the point that I only visit one of my aunts for getting lunch. It may sound utilitarian as hell, but that's the only thing that I do at parties when there's nothing better to do. Hell, I may act like a Grinch at times and is hilarious to see others being pissed off by my comments when I point out how pointless is to be with people that you don't like at all.


----------



## Blue Ribbon

Rose for a Heart said:


> Oh so I had a question: what's the base and creative subtype of a type? How's EII-Ne different from IEE?


That's a little difficult to answer, but I'll try using my own example as that is easier.

I'm ILE - Ne subtype. I have a more dreamy nature to me. I'm more comfortable with using my Ne than my Ti. I can think up new and strange ideas without checking in with reality, so to speak. With ILE - Ti types, there's akways this idea that they need to check in with their Ti more often. Their Ti is more developed and they're more opinionated and less flexible. Between the aux and tert functions, I've observed that using one suppress the expression of the other, so Ne subtypes appear a lot friendlier and have better use of Fe. Ti subtype seems to be more serious and if you got into an argument with him, he's going to be more concerned with logical consistency than with not offending sentiments. The two are essentially the same type. 

An LII - Ne can look like an ILE but the LII is a Ti dom and will filter their thoughts through Ti first and Ne second. An ILE- Ti is still using Ne first. The differences are observable but they're not enough to put the two subtypes into different type categories.


----------



## FearAndTrembling

Mordred Phantom said:


> Yeah, parties bore me to death unless there's some food that I like, to the point that I only visit one of my aunts for getting lunch. It may sound utilitarian as hell, but that's the only thing that I do at parties when there's nothing better to do. Hell, I may act like a Grinch at times and is hilarious to see others being pissed off by my comments when I point out how pointless is to be with people that you don't like at all.



Both Fe polr types hate to do things. lol. I remember I went on date and this girl had all this stuff was planned. And no, I'm not doing that. And I look like the ass. Same thing with my family. I am antisocial. My feelings don't matter. Only the family does. I am the grinch too. 

I think that is a key part of Fe polr and I have seen it in descriptions. They are rocks. They are gonna mess up your plans. lol. They are seen as deadweight often. But they just refuse to go along with Fe. Being Fe polr isn't "speaking bluntly" as others have said. It is being truly isolated from the feelings of the group. And proud of it.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

Entropic said:


> Didn't you type her as an ILI before you changed to LIE? Your wife doesn't have to be your dual just because she's your wife, you know.


She frequently types INTJ using the MBTI so I didn't really question her results. Having looked into ESI though, it's very apparent that is her sociotype.



> This is why I suggested Fe base for you before; in retrospect I take that back. However, I have a feeling you're an alpha though, not a gamma, as I think you're Ne-valuing as a whole and what you describe here sounds more along those lines as well. LIEs can bea lot of things, but having an "off-keel nature" or having sudden plans for adventure isn't what I firstly associate with LIEs. They tend to be very strict and fastidious people. Can definitely be spontaneous, but there is always a clear sense of direction even within their spontaneity which is because they lead with Te; there has to be a sense of productivity to what they do, always. In a way they are oddly linear in their approach to life, I think. LSEs share some of that linearity too, but they are much more pragmatic and not as risk-taking as LIEs are.


You seem to be thinking more about Ejs in a professional setting. Of course I'm not going to be expressing my Ni in the work place very often because that'll hurt my reputation and have me viewed as weird by Si types. Compared to an LSE, an LIE is much more willing to take risks as Gamma and Beta are known to do. That willingness to take risks is what can sometimes cause a smooth operation to run into some SNAFUs. I think you're thinking about very Te-heavy LIEs or LIEs who work in a stifling work setting where NO VENTURES are allowed; and trust me there are a lot of work places out there who actively crush any sort of introverted intuition.



> In general, I think a lot of what you describe simply describes a good relationship with someone else, though, and isn't type-specific. Just saying.


Understood and noted, but introducing Socionics has cleared up a lot of uncertainty for me; also thank you for the compliment.



> Either way, @Rose for a Heart, I don't mean that Fi doms are all bitches. ESIs though, they usually come across as very harshly judgemental, sometimes openly and sometimes implicitly. It's just an air about them that's like that. EIIs can have that too, to a degree. Just a bit of an air of moral superiority. It kinda fits the vibe of LxEs though, that have that sense of linearity to them. Difficult to describe since it's vibes.


Yes, Gamma in a nutshell, tbh. Deltas lack the hashness that Se/Ni quadras have overall making them more pleasant if a little on the stagnant side, IMO.


----------



## Blue Ribbon

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> Could anyone explain to me what the Fi DS of an LIE looks like? I know this is the PoLR thread, but I think it is relevant due to it still being 1D. Maybe contrast it with the Fi PoLR of ILE?


As an ILE, my PoLR is not something I'm aware of. Like being unable to predict my own feelings. (Fi PoLR) I don't understand it, can't use it in productive ways. For me, there are moments where I kind of discover I have a heart. I can rationalize an action with Ti and perform it only to have an unexpected feeling reaction to it. I might end up feeling bad for doing something that I should be okay with doing. 

For Fi DS, they're aware of their Fi and they know it's a weakness to them. I'm assuming that the LIE would be able to use their Fi and enjoy it's expression just like how I'm able to use Si. They value this trait (Fi) in others which is something that I don't. They can take their Fi into consideration when making a decision.


----------



## Blue Ribbon

Rose for a Heart said:


> I am wondering how Fi PoLRs _feel _when they encounter objections from a Fi-user?


We feel nothing. Fi expression is something that happens to us as a byproduct of our own actions. We don't care for it, we don't want to express it. We're not even aware that it exists. If we act, we may feel Fi as the aftermath of the action. 

When an Fi user makes a value based judgemet, I suppose we can understand it in a theoretical sense. But when Fi users use an Fi judgement as a valid point for argument, we're either scratching our heads because we don't understand or feeling annoyed especially if the Fi user is also a Ti PoLR. In that case, neither of us is going to understand the other.


----------



## Rose for a Heart

Blue Ribbon said:


> *We feel nothing*. Fi expression is something that happens to us as a byproduct of our own actions. We don't care for it, we don't want to express it. We're not even aware that it exists. If we act, we may feel Fi as the aftermath of the action.
> 
> When an Fi user makes a value based judgemet, I suppose we can understand it in a theoretical sense. But when Fi users use an Fi judgement as a valid point for argument, we're either scratching our heads because we don't understand or feeling annoyed especially if the Fi user is also a Ti PoLR. In that case, neither of us is going to understand the other.


I don't think I agree ("neither of us is going to understand the other"). Also does the bolded mean you are not really going to try to understand what they want from you or..?

I had a crush on an ILE once, lol. Atleast I am pretty certain he is. He definitely shared with me that he sometimes felt very sad because he felt misunderstood...and I wondered if it might have to do with Fi-PoLR. Because he can act in ways that many might consider disrespectful (Also Sx-7 in enneagram), but I don't think he really understood that. He was innocent...and I felt bad for him. Anyways, understanding people is one of the biggest reasons I have been drawn to typology


----------



## Blue Ribbon

Rose for a Heart said:


> I don't think I agree ("neither of us is going to understand the other"). Also does the bolded mean you are not really going to try to understand what they want from you or..?
> 
> I had a crush on an ILE once, lol. Atleast I am pretty certain he is. He definitely shared with me that he sometimes felt very sad because he felt misunderstood...and I wondered if it might have to do with Fi-PoLR. Because he can act in ways that many might consider disrespectful (Also Sx-7 in enneagram), but I don't think he really understood that. He was innocent...and I felt bad for him. Anyways, understanding people is one of the biggest reasons I have been drawn to typology


Well, it's like, we're not attuned to our emotions? ILEs have tert Fe and it is possible to affect us emotionally. We are also affected by other people's moods. But it is not possible to convince us that something is wrong or right. Typically, if an Fi user tells me that it's wrong to do something, I'm not going to believe them and I'm going to argue my point. This upsets a lot of Fi users. One example I can give is that an IEE told me that I should be a vegetarian so that it I could be a better person. I told him I didn't think so. He showed me some slaughter house footage hoping to get some kind of reaction. I saw the whole thing and said, 'Humans don't have empathy for other humans. Why do you think we are capable of showing it to animals?' I do agree that was a cynical thing to say but I didn't like the way he was using 'the poor condition of the animals' as an argument. That's not hpw you convince an ILE of your point. If he had said that being a vegetarian had these benefits and was good for my health, I might have agreed with him. But from his perspective, how can anyone be so cruel as to not care about the poor animals. 

I've often felt misunderstood but not in 'people don't understand my feelings' kind of way. I've often felt that people are not intellectual enough to consider my point of view. Why couldn't the IEE see things from my perspective? Now I know it's because of his Ti PoLR but at that time, it agitated me how he could argue something so stupid. I suppose there are other ILEs who'd agree with him, but this is just my opinion. 

People who do stupid things and disrupt my life solely because they're passionate about something irks me so much. I don't understand how people can use their passion as the sole justification of their actions. I'm someone who doesn't feel passionately as I feel it will cloud my judgement. I suppose that's what it's like to be Fi PoLR. I can't debate with people who argue from a moral position. The debate ends there. 

Acting in disrespectful ways is something that's a result of underdeveloped Fe (IMO) Ti users typically have an air of innocence, or so I've been told. 

Hopefully this clarifies my point.


----------



## SheWolf

FearAndTrembling said:


> This is also how I relate to Fe polr. It isn't about emotions or being unfriendly. It is about group activities you give no shits for and will not bend for.
> 
> I'm the kind of guy that never dresses up for Halloween. Would never have a big wedding. You cannot enthuse me that way. Fe polr is not about speaking bluntly or being rude as others have said. It is refusing to be involved with the group and even feign enthusiasm. Which comes across as rude.
> 
> I'll put it another way. I am the least festive person you will ever meet. lol. I have no enthusiasm for all this shit.


How I've witnessed Fe PoLR is more how they tend to feel uncomfortable if they are forced to be emotionally open. My ESE mother tries to make me be open with people I don't feel "close" to. An example I see she made me give my brother in law a hug after leaving from Thanksgiving dinner. I don't feel close to him. I'm nice to him but when speaking to him but I'm very cordial and business-like. ("Oh hello. How are you?", "That's good. I'm fine too.") I stick to small talk. Mom gushes and hugs him and is very open and warm. Why? "Because he'a family now."
She tells me I need to be more open and warm just because he's family and wants me to participate more in those sorts of rituals. I groaned quietly at her, saying I felt uncomfortable doing so even though I awkwardly did it anyway. But even that wouldn't bother me near as much as I think it might an Fe PoLR type.

I'm not very festive either. I tolerate it though. So I don't think its strictly Fe PoLR.

Except Halloween. Because Halloween is the day I can walk
around looking like "myself" without getting side glances.  Plus Halloween is just mah shit.

I was the kid that didn't care about getting up on Christmas morning. Presents and food will still be there when I wake up at 9 AM or whatever. I hate being drug to family parties. I used to like Thanksgiving when we went to my Dad's family's house because I could see my favorite cousins but I wasn't comfortable with all these other people I barely know wanting to hug me and such. My mom loved going around talking and helping prepare the food with Grandma and my aunts. Me? I either stuck like glue to my dad or when my cousins showed up played with them.


----------



## SheWolf

FearAndTrembling said:


> Both Fe polr types hate to do things. lol. I remember I went on date and this girl had all this stuff was planned. And no, I'm not doing that. And I look like the ass. Same thing with my family. I am antisocial. My feelings don't matter. Only the family does. I am the grinch too.
> 
> I think that is a key part of Fe polr and I have seen it in descriptions. They are rocks. They are gonna mess up your plans. lol. They are seen as deadweight often. But they just refuse to go along with Fe. Being Fe polr isn't "speaking bluntly" as others have said. It is being truly isolated from the feelings of the group. And proud of it.


Mmm. ILI's like when Se mobilizes them. But I'm not the type to plan out this intricate date or something. I see something I wanna do and perhaps ask others if they wanna go too. If they do great and if they don't...
I don't care I'm doing it myself anyway lol. Fe is more persuasive and wants people to join in on things. A big theme in my life has been doing whatever I wanted regardless of anyone else. I somehow always find that people trail behind me, but it's not purposeful. I just... do what I want. Lol. I see a lot of talk about Se being pushy. I'm not necessarily pushy. I am more "This is what I'M doing" regardless of what everyone else wants to do. I'm not forcing anyone to do shit, just don't stop me from doing it if I want to. I guess that's a type of bossiness...

meh.


----------



## Typhon

I used to have really problematic Si polr. 

I used to be really restless, didn't take care of my self (enough), didn't enjoy calm (and still don't at times), got myself into harsh situations and conflicts, etc. I didn't want to hear anything about health related matters. 

I think I've changed quiet a bit, as now I care more about my health (though still not a health freak and don't intend to be) and generally lead a calmer, more balanced life. 

I like how I am better now.


----------



## Chicoisking

My Fe polr is annoying.

For me it manifest in looking cold and unemotional. It also manifests in me not having a clue about why people like the stuff they like. For example, I have no idea why some people act the way they do. My Fe dom cousin always criticizes me for not "understanding the world." She criticizes me for being cold. Like I literally don't understand why people, shout and scream and show a bunch of emotions over things that aren't even that funny. Fe polr manifest in my confusion of why people act the way they do. For me it seem so stupid.


----------



## SheWolf

Since I've changed my type...

I think it only appropriate to talk about the reasons I was told/believe are Si PoLR. (people are free to add critique if they want)

First off, I'm a total hypochondriac. I have been since I was little. I am often totally unaware of my body or suddenly become aware of it. Every little thing that goes on that seems "off" I kinda freak out about.

A few examples of this. I was going through a pretty stressful time in life. I started noticing elevated heart rate and palpitations in myself. I called the doctor and made them run a bunch of tests on me only for them to tell me I was perfectly fine and was just anxious. 

There have been times where I have been out doing something with friends or whatever and start to notice that I hadn't eaten anything and am very hungry. I'll sit forever doing whatever, knowing that I'm hungry, but choose to ignore it until it becomes unbearable. I don't hate eating, though. I love food, but sometimes it's annoying and gets in the way.

When someone gets the stomach flu in my house I freak out. I have to leave the house and won't come back until they are better/things have been sanitized. 

When I have a cold or something, it irritates me and I continue to try and operate as if I'm not sick. 

I just... don't know what the hell to do with my internal body. I am puzzled by every little thing that happens with it. 

Despite this fear of being sick or in pain, still when someone tries to get me to do things to better it I am very irritated. I hate it because it's boring or it takes time away from things I want to do so I tend to short-cut my health. 

I also have a bad tendency to let day-to-day chores go. I hate cleaning and often half-ass it. Just enough so I'm not living in squalor. I forget where I put shit because I'm off in La-La Land. 

I hate when I'm expected to just chill and do nothing. It's boring. I want to move. I want excitement.
LET'S GOOOOO. I'll actively try to spur people into action if there's just a bunch of sitting around. 

In my acting class, my partner disliked the scene we were doing because he had to raise his voice and that cause discomfort for him (He was likely a Ne ego?) I was beyond irritated. Like shit, dude, buckle down and just DO IT. I wasn't really that commanding with him, but we did end up doing the scene since I'm such a master manipulator (*Sarcasm*)

ALSO I'M A TERRIBLE PROCRASTINATOR OF DAILY THINGS

I SHOULD BE DOING HOMEWORK OR SOMETHING LOL.


----------



## Scoobyscoob

@Thorn Yep, you nailed it. That's Si-PoLR alright. I'm actually not that bad with my PoLR but it still definitely is not my strongest suit. I do appreciate receiving Si support from a helpful person, as Caretakers tend to be very giving and supportive unless they're angry with you.


----------



## SheWolf

*To correct my mistake in this previous post...*



Thorn said:


> But I have an ILE computer instructor a year ago. Him and I did _not_ see eye to eye. My issue was that he wouldn't ever stick to the lecture with what we needed to know. There was zero structure or organization in his class. He even claimed himself that he "tends to get excited" about his ideas and gets majorly off-track. He'd start talking about current trends in technology or even just stuff that had nothing to do with the project at hand. His instructions on how to do things sucked ass. Whenever I would ask him for help, I wouldn't get the straight answer I wanted and was only left more confused. Honestly it was like this guy was speaking Greek to me. Thank the gods that written instructions for projects were online so I was able to go home, print them out, and follow things in the clear step-by-step way I wanted. You should have seen the notes I took for this class. I tried to copy one day exactly what/how he wrote on the board just so I could show my sister (I usually try to organize my notes in my book) and I literally had writing/scribbles all over the place that didn't connect together at all. He just wrote wherever and whatever his Ne took him which was just basically word vomit.
> 
> There were a couple other people who really struggled with him too and actually ended up coming to _me _to help them with our projects/homework because after class I would always go home and get it done via the instructions. I even showed up quite early to the computer lab to help them out who responded better to my Te way of explaining things. I can say to this day I didn't learn a _damn_ thing from that instructor. Everything I learned I learned from the online tutorial site he provided, the virtual textbook required from the class, and good 'ol Google.
> 
> I shouldn't totally trash him though. There were definitely some other Ne/Ti valuers in the class who loved the free, laid-backed, emotionally positive atmosphere he created (He had a decent handle on his Fe HA. Though it was hit and miss) He did provide an atmosphere that was very free-for-all and allowed for creative freedom. He was certainly not the type of teacher to get pissed if a student deviated from the project and created something new. In fact he encouraged it and would get irritated with me for wanting to stick to what was written. I am 90% sure he saw me as a stiff with zero creativity. He liked for people to work out their own problems or whatever, but I wanted to shit the right way.


I was under the impression that this was the devaluing and dislike of Ne/Ti.

Rather, as someone pointed out to me elsewhere when I showed them this post, that is it actually rather Ti/Se-seeking as fuck lol. Ti wasn't the issue. It was the lack of non-ambiguous reasoning and hard-lined organizational structure. I desired information that was completely non-ambiguous an straight forward.

In short....



> _EIEs admire people whose thinking is clear-cut, unambiguous, and stalwart, who reduce the myriad of possibilities down to one single option. This is something they are almost completely unable to do on their own (they easily doubt their ability to choose right), but have a deep need for in other people._


Sorry about that. :kitteh:


----------



## myst91

Thorn said:


> Since I've changed my type...
> 
> I think it only appropriate to talk about the reasons I was told/believe are Si PoLR. (people are free to add critique if they want)


OK. Interesting. I'll try to analyze a bit as to which parts are specific to Si PoLR and which parts are not.




> First off, I'm a total hypochondriac. I have been since I was little. I am often totally unaware of my body or suddenly become aware of it. Every little thing that goes on that seems "off" I kinda freak out about.
> 
> A few examples of this. I was going through a pretty stressful time in life. I started noticing elevated heart rate and palpitations in myself. I called the doctor and made them run a bunch of tests on me only for them to tell me I was perfectly fine and was just anxious.


You remind me of my ESI-Fi ex, he had hypochondria too. I always attributed it to him having weak T.

I don't know if he experienced his body in the same way internally, I was an outside observer only, but he was definitely anxious about body stuff that I brushed off myself.




> There have been times where I have been out doing something with friends or whatever and start to notice that I hadn't eaten anything and am very hungry. I'll sit forever doing whatever, knowing that I'm hungry, but choose to ignore it until it becomes unbearable. I don't hate eating, though. I love food, but sometimes it's annoying and gets in the way.


Same in the sense that I don't want to spend all day eating. :laughing: I don't care enough about Si for that.

I do easily ignore hunger etc if I'm focused on a task I need to get done.




> When someone gets the stomach flu in my house I freak out. I have to leave the house and won't come back until they are better/things have been sanitized.
> 
> When I have a cold or something, it irritates me and I continue to try and operate as if I'm not sick.
> 
> I just... don't know what the hell to do with my internal body. I am puzzled by every little thing that happens with it.
> 
> Despite this fear of being sick or in pain, still when someone tries to get me to do things to better it I am very irritated. I hate it because it's boring or it takes time away from things I want to do so I tend to short-cut my health.
> 
> I also have a bad tendency to let day-to-day chores go. I hate cleaning and often half-ass it. Just enough so I'm not living in squalor. I forget where I put shit because I'm off in La-La Land.
> 
> I hate when I'm expected to just chill and do nothing. It's boring. I want to move. I want excitement.
> LET'S GOOOOO. I'll actively try to spur people into action if there's just a bunch of sitting around.
> 
> In my acting class, my partner disliked the scene we were doing because he had to raise his voice and that cause discomfort for him (He was likely a Ne ego?) I was beyond irritated. Like shit, dude, buckle down and just DO IT. I wasn't really that commanding with him, but we did end up doing the scene since I'm such a master manipulator (*Sarcasm*)
> 
> ALSO I'M A TERRIBLE PROCRASTINATOR OF DAILY THINGS
> 
> I SHOULD BE DOING HOMEWORK OR SOMETHING LOL.


I relate to not wanting to chill doing nothing. I think this in general is Se valuing. 

I'm less worried about taking care of my health being boring - I just do it on "autopilot", easy to sort, automatic and so on. Chores are neutral to me.

If you can't sit on your ass for long without seriously fidgeting and you can never find an easy way to relax even for a short time, that would be more specific to Si PoLR.

Contrasting this to just not wanting to consciously chill - I'm able to get rest for a short time when I feel I need to, that's no problem at all, but if I'm to just chill for a long time, that'd be no good. I can sit and wait if I have to, though. It's just not for enjoyment.

Cognitively Si PoLR is about being very disconnected from the pure physical side of the world in the Si sense - Se PoLR is disconnected too, but that one is about the Se side of this.




Thorn said:


> *To correct my mistake in this previous post...*
> 
> I was under the impression that this was the devaluing and dislike of Ne/Ti.


It does seem strong devaluing of Ne.  I still feel like we have very similar Ne PoLR, I can't forget your questionnaire :kitteh:




> Rather, as someone pointed out to me elsewhere when I showed them this post, that is it actually rather Ti/Se-seeking as fuck lol. Ti wasn't the issue. It was the lack of non-ambiguous reasoning and hard-lined organizational structure. I desired information that was completely non-ambiguous an straight forward.


I don't know, I'd have to see how you do NOT relate to Te seeking vs relating to Ti seeking.

I never had much doubt that you were T-seeking, though.


----------



## SheWolf

@myst91

well... my form of "sitting and doing nothing" is still doing something. I'll be on the computer researching typology, Paganism, watching YouTube tutorials on how to do something I want to do... I actually don't watch TV or read books too much as it requires me to sit still and focus. Unless it's a show or movie that I really enjoy. Even at the movie theater I feel myself twitching to want to get up especially if something arouses me more emotionally. 
(Ive noticed that Te with Si PoLR is more workaholic pragmatism.)

For example. I dislike going over to friends' houses and just "chilling." Like a friend of mine always had me come over to sit in her room and she would make some food and just listen to some music. I was so bored. I ended up persuading her to go for a walk or something. Something that aroused more emotional excitement (Fe)

in contrast to another Of my friends SEI mother. She liked to get in the pool, grab a drink, and just float around. I can't do that. I was actually swimming, splashing around and stuff. I really don't even like to swim unless it's for exercise or I can physically goof around without friends.


----------



## FearAndTrembling

Thorn said:


> Since I've changed my type...
> 
> I think it only appropriate to talk about the reasons I was told/believe are Si PoLR. (people are free to add critique if they want)
> 
> First off, I'm a total hypochondriac. I have been since I was little. I am often totally unaware of my body or suddenly become aware of it. Every little thing that goes on that seems "off" I kinda freak out about.
> 
> A few examples of this. I was going through a pretty stressful time in life. I started noticing elevated heart rate and palpitations in myself. I called the doctor and made them run a bunch of tests on me only for them to tell me I was perfectly fine and was just anxious.
> 
> There have been times where I have been out doing something with friends or whatever and start to notice that I hadn't eaten anything and am very hungry. I'll sit forever doing whatever, knowing that I'm hungry, but choose to ignore it until it becomes unbearable. I don't hate eating, though. I love food, but sometimes it's annoying and gets in the way.
> 
> When someone gets the stomach flu in my house I freak out. I have to leave the house and won't come back until they are better/things have been sanitized.
> 
> When I have a cold or something, it irritates me and I continue to try and operate as if I'm not sick.
> 
> I just... don't know what the hell to do with my internal body. I am puzzled by every little thing that happens with it.
> 
> Despite this fear of being sick or in pain, still when someone tries to get me to do things to better it I am very irritated. I hate it because it's boring or it takes time away from things I want to do so I tend to short-cut my health.
> 
> I also have a bad tendency to let day-to-day chores go. I hate cleaning and often half-ass it. Just enough so I'm not living in squalor. I forget where I put shit because I'm off in La-La Land.
> 
> I hate when I'm expected to just chill and do nothing. It's boring. I want to move. I want excitement.
> LET'S GOOOOO. I'll actively try to spur people into action if there's just a bunch of sitting around.
> 
> In my acting class, my partner disliked the scene we were doing because he had to raise his voice and that cause discomfort for him (He was likely a Ne ego?) I was beyond irritated. Like shit, dude, buckle down and just DO IT. I wasn't really that commanding with him, but we did end up doing the scene since I'm such a master manipulator (*Sarcasm*)
> 
> ALSO I'M A TERRIBLE PROCRASTINATOR OF DAILY THINGS
> 
> I SHOULD BE DOING HOMEWORK OR SOMETHING LOL.


You have nothing on my hypochondria. I've been in the ER many times over nothing. Ambulances and fire trucks roaring into my driveway. I would check ingredients on all foods and products like shampoo, soaps. I am the same way about freaking about body sensations too. But why? It is a distorted cognition. It is an irrational thought. Cognition consist of thoughts and beliefs. If you have an underlying belief that you are sick, then thoughts and sensations will be crammed into that belief. There are sheets to fill out on this, like say you feel a slight pain your stomach. How does that make you feel? Makes me feel nervous cuz it could kill me. Then in another column the question is, "How would this make a rational person feel?" And I think of people like my friends who wouldn't even notice it much less dwell on it. Your body shoots off harmless sensations all the time. 

And do not come around me when you are sick. I don't want to be in the same house with a sick person. I am exactly like that.

I also grew up in house where hygiene was king. Both of my parents obsessed with cleanliness. And the house I grew up in was white. White is the color of sterile things. Hospitals and shit.

That cleanliness crosses over to other parts of my life. Loneliness is a form of cleanliness. 

"Emptiness is loneliness, and loneliness is cleanliness
And cleanliness is godliness, and god is empty just like me"


Anxiety is also a great mimic. It can manifest itself in so many ways. Heart problem. Tight throat. Digestive system. 

Perhaps what Si is knowing what sensations are comfortable or not. I never learn that. It is like in one ear and out the other every time. Si can have a stomach pain and know it is X, and remember that. I can't. I can't believe it. I don't not trust my body bottom line. We are not in sync.lol

I think it may go back to a bad allergic reaction I had and almost died. Was close. And what is an allergic reaction? Your body being a fucking idiot. An overreaction that could kill me.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Whereas I will happily eat leftovers from my friends, double dip chips, eat a chip off the ground after just blowing on it. I don't freak about that at all. I pay it little mind. I tend to think "Watch out for the permanent diseases and other than that, let your immune system work. You'll be stronger for it anyway, as it learns new ways to deal with all these illnesses."

I don't know if it works or what, but I rarely ever get seriously sick these days, and I used to be sick almost half the time. I say I leveled up my immune system. ^^

I do these things that people will say would get me sick, knowing full well it might happen, but okay with it because I don't want to live in fear. For whatever that says about me.


----------



## ae1905

it usually doesn't because my Fe holds back my Se--eg, I usually let people save face in real life discussions and arguments


----------



## FearAndTrembling

Thorn said:


> Alright. Now, I'd kind of like to talk about Fe PoLR despite not being an Fe PoLR.
> 
> Fe PoLR is *not* about being rude, blunt, emotional idiots, or an asshole. (That's actually more my 8w7 LSI brother. He's a dick. Lol.)
> However, my dad was almost a stereotypical SLI.
> My father was a very gentle soul. He was peaceful, had an aura of being solid and grounded. He spent his days outside in the garage, tinkering with stuff, gardening, he even loved day-to-day chores. He reveled in the simple things and the wonders of life. Very, very Judicious thinking.
> He seemed very "gruff" and dry on the outside but he was literally one of the most kind, caring, and "fatherly" people you could have ever met. He was an So/Sp 9w8 as well.
> 
> However, he had no tolerance for dramatics. When us kids would fight my dad was the one that was untouched by it and always mediated it calmly. You literally could not impose any emotions onto my dad. He was an unflappable stone wall with the emotions of others ("What's all that fussin' for, girl?" was a statement I heard from him a lot) Very rarely did he come apart at the seams. He had some angry fits, but it took a lot of provoking to get him there. Now he did plenty of smiling and he loved to talk with his coworkers. He was actually a very sociable guy. More than me, even. He was plenty loving, he told me stories and played music (though most of his stories were pretty "dry" LOL)
> But yet, he was impossible to "read" emotionally. He was not naturally expressive. He literally never "made a fuss" over anything. Easy-going. Never ha an interest in participating in excitement of things like Christmas morning.
> My mother is an ESE and you did see the supervision come out occasionally but they were married for 46 years. They had their issues, but they had a bond that you don't see in married couples these days.
> 
> I loved my father dearly and he was the best dad I personally could have asked for. I often held my tongue around him though, as arguments could spark easy. Our personal communication was often restricted to day-to-day stuff. When I started throwing some Ne at him we could have some good conversations but usually I found it kinda hard to talk about the stuff I was really interested in with him.
> 
> I find it easy to talk to ILI's, actually. The contrast comes out though when it comes to how we choose to interact with the world.
> 
> But anyway, I believe as @*FearAndTrembling* (And I believe @*Figure* in another thread somewhere) said earlier, Fe PoLR is not about being a dick or hating emotions. It's about your own emotions being completely unaffected by those around you and not feeding into it. It was rare for my dad, or the ILI's I've spoken to, for them to show overt emotional reactions to anything.
> 
> It's usually the Ti/Fe types I've seen over-react to emotions imposed on them. Lol.
> 
> Which brings me to duality. Duality isn't glitter and rainbows and true love. Actually, it's your dual that can hurt you more than any other type. They notice where you are weak and they can either chastise and ridicule you for it or help you with it.



Yes, it is the person who cannot get excited by the atmosphere. Like people say men don't like emotions. Ya, they do. lol. I am truly emotionless and it makes men uncomfortable. Because I don't laugh at their stupid jokes or am excited about the atmosphere. Like I said about a Halloween party. I never dress up. lol. I always go against inauthentic environments when possible. I actually went off on a girl from high school recently on Facebook. She is trying to put together a reunion. I said why relive inauthentic moments? I like what Tony Soprano said, "Remember when is the lowest form of conversation." These people want to create memories for "remember whens". And shit like putting baby pictures and christmas cards on the fridge. Any kind of family portrait. Fuck no. Never. I am the least family orientated person there can be.


----------



## SheWolf

FearAndTrembling said:


> Yes, it is the person who cannot get excited by the atmosphere. Like people say men don't like emotions. Ya, they do. lol. I am truly emotionless and it makes men uncomfortable. Because I don't laugh at their stupid jokes or am excited about the atmosphere. Like I said about a Halloween party. I never dress up. lol. I always go against inauthentic environments when possible. I actually went off on a girl from high school recently on Facebook. She is trying to put together a reunion. I said why relive inauthentic moments? I like what Tony Soprano said, "Remember when is the lowest form of conversation." These people want to create memories for "remember whens". And shit like putting baby pictures and christmas cards on the fridge. Any kind of family portrait. Fuck no. Never. I am the least family orientated person there can be.


Dude, I'm pretty much with you there. My sister is over-zealous about Christmas. When I was a kid I was like my dad. Didn't care. Presents will still be under the tree when I want to wake up and I never felt the need to participate or show a lot of liveliness with such things. 

I literally have no pictures of my friends or family in my room or anything. I hate kids and don't want one of the little demons myself. 

I don't mind "remember when" that much but I'm not necessarily sentimental either.

When people throw into a lot of dramatics and such (I knew a girl who would cry or do stupid shit for attention) I'm like ugh, stfu. Or I knew this girl who would be overt with things just to attract male attention. Gross. Grow up. So yeah, I'm with you on disliking inauthentic bullshit. 

Or in highschool these guys would say a bunch of really fucking stupid jokes and I would just roll my eyes and in some cases be disgusted and leave. I've been described as a "frigid bitch" before because of this. I just have no time for your senseless crap, fuck you very much. Lol


----------



## FearAndTrembling

Thorn said:


> Dude, I'm pretty much with you there. My sister is over-zealous about Christmas. When I was a kid I was like my dad. Didn't care. Presents will still be under the tree when I want to wake up and I never felt the need to participate or show a lot of liveliness with such things.
> 
> I literally have no pictures of my friends or family in my room or anything. I hate kids and don't want one of the little demons myself.
> 
> I don't mind "remember when" that much but I'm not necessarily sentimental either.
> 
> When people throw into a lot of dramatics and such (I knew a girl who would cry or do stupid shit for attention) I'm like ugh, stfu. Or I knew this girl who would be overt with things just to attract male attention. Gross. Grow up. So yeah, I'm with you on disliking inauthentic bullshit.
> 
> Or in highschool these guys would say a bunch of really fucking stupid jokes and I would just roll my eyes and in some cases be disgusted and leave. I've been described as a "frigid bitch" before because of this. I just have no time for your senseless crap, fuck you very much. Lol


Holiday decorations are Si. lol. My mother lives by that shit. Change with the seasons. Wreathes were on the windows now there will be Halloween shit and then Thanksgiving shit and then it is Christmas again. lol.

And my uncle, her brother, supposed hot shot from California was visiting our house. My mother must have spent 2 weeks doing up our house to make it look good for him. Who do you think this guy is? lol. Fuckin seriously. The effort put into making us look richer and classier than we actually are disgusted me. That those things were so important and so much time was devoted to them.


----------



## SheWolf

FearAndTrembling said:


> Holiday decorations are Si. lol. My mother lives by that shit. Change with the seasons. Wreathes were on the windows now there will be Halloween shit and then Thanksgiving shit and then it is Christmas again. lol.


I fucking love Halloween. But my sister (SEI) and mother (ESE) like it because they love doing it for other people mostly. My sister says it's because it's pretty and everyone's all happy and cheerful. Ew.

I'm selfish. I like Halloween stuff because it's for me. Lmao.

My sister often yells at me because I "don't seem enthusiastic for anything" and in her view I probably am not. I don't get excited over decorating the Christmas tree or even carving pumpkins on my ever-so-beloved Halloween. It's just boring. 

I like dressing up for Halloween and being extravagant/weird but that's a pretty Beta NF thing of me to do lol. Some like to be bizarre and stand out with their image/aesthetics (EIE's David Bowie and Lady Gaga, for example) or Marilyn Manson (IEI) While others just don't give a shit and have more a more "unkempt" style. 




> And my uncle, her brother, supposed hot shot from California was visiting our house. My mother must have spent 2 weeks doing up our house to make it look good for him. Who do you think this guy is? lol. Fuckin seriously. The effort put into making us look richer and classier than we actually are disgusted me. That those things were so important and so much time was devoted to them.


Ugh. Anytime my aunt comes over my mother flies into a frenzy to make sure the house is perfect. It's irritating as hell. I'm not a slob but I don't give a fuck about what the house "looks" like. As long as it's clean so I don't have to deal with gross stuff or get sick it doesn't matter to me.


----------



## Entropic

Tad Cooper said:


> I get this too I think? - your internal world takes over a lot of the time, and suddenly you're ripped from it and you feel like you got rudely awoken into the real world...


It's not about an internal world and the real world is somehow interrupting. It's just that the world itself feels very ethereal and not real in the first place, that there's a reality to it that we don't necessarily see with our physical eyes, but it's always lingering there just out of sight. 

That's why I like that picture that I linked before in the Visual Typing thread:










It kind of grasps at that though in physical form. It's immensely difficult to describe because honestly it's something that must be felt in order to be understood. I think this song also captures that eerie feeling:


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

Entropic said:


> Do you ever feel like there is a physical world at all but then suddenly you realize with this oh shit moment that things are actually real and exist? XD because I do. Most of the time I don't even experience, consciously or unconsciously, that this world is actually real if you know what I mean? Like it too, is just another abstract entity you move through.


Yes, exactly. Or get lost in a vivid daydream and perceive the dream as far more real than reality. And it is super jarring if someone jerks you out of it before the daydream naturally concludes. There is like a disorientation.

And, like, when imagining things I can have a totally different body. I can be alien beings, and experience their bodies in my mind. I don't feel tied down to a single physical form, yet as far as I can tell in truth I am. That is so jarring to experience, you know?

I feel like I am so much more than my body. My body is a prison, and my mind is tied to it by a chain. I have a good length on the chain, and I can float around with some freedom, but eventually that chain will retract.

And the world...the world should be more than just this little shell and all the things it sees. I'm not really as sure what reality is, not like other people are. If I experience it, I feel like that means it is real. And it impacts and changes me from the experience. So it is real. But what is real to me may not be to others. Its like drifting through a sea of make believe.


----------



## owlet

I think my experience with Se PoLR would probably be things like apparently over-using indefinite language (I've had a few comments on it), not knowing where people's boundaries are so avoiding them the vast majority of the time - or accidentally overstepping them (instances like avoiding physical contact). I've been told I can come off as either too reserved or too intense, and I can at times react strongly to people seeming aggressive (mostly when it's towards other people).

I need to work on these things..


----------



## Entropic

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> Yes, exactly. Or get lost in a vivid daydream and perceive the dream as far more real than reality. And it is super jarring if someone jerks you out of it before the daydream naturally concludes. There is like a disorientation.
> 
> And, like, when imagining things I can have a totally different body. I can be alien beings, and experience their bodies in my mind. I don't feel tied down to a single physical form, yet as far as I can tell in truth I am. That is so jarring to experience, you know?
> 
> I feel like I am so much more than my body. My body is a prison, and my mind is tied to it by a chain. I have a good length on the chain, and I can float around with some freedom, but eventually that chain will retract.
> 
> And the world...the world should be more than just this little shell and all the things it sees. I'm not really as sure what reality is, not like other people are. If I experience it, I feel like that means it is real. And it impacts and changes me from the experience. So it is real. But what is real to me may not be to others. Its like drifting through a sea of make believe.


Yeah, I totally get what you mean. Before I and NH got together I once told her I feel more like a ghost in a room floating around. Like some people say they are like heads because they feel so disengaged from their bodies, that doesn't seem right either because a head still suggests that you _do_ have a physical form you know? Your head is still real. But this is different, this is almost as if you're not a part of the physical reality everyone else seem to be operating in in the first place. And I totally get what you mean with how it can almost be frustrating sometimes with how your physical body so clearly anchors you and ties you down to this place. I think I used to experience myself to have a more antagonistic relationship with my body in the past though. 

It helped to begin to get a regular workout routine which ironically grounded me more and in a way I could learn to appreciate that you can have a lot of impact and power in the physical too. I still feel frustrated about it sometimes, though, like I feel as if I could dictate the way things ought to be with my mind only, everything would just be so much infinitely awesome if you get what I mean? Like I would have so much more power and impact. If I had a magic power, my preferred power was always telekinesis. 

Anyway, I was thinking very hard and long how to express this better, and I was thinking that it's more like there's this threshold where the physical meets another dimension where the physical as we know it just doesn't exist. It's infinitely abstract where everything and nothing resides at once. It may seem paradoxical, but it's a bit like a Shrodinger's box. Because of that, it means you can simultaneously move forward and backward in time, see into the future and the past and when you do, you realize there is no beginning or end, it's all just the same thing existing in this endless cycle of infinite looping. Yet, perhaps weirdly enough, time stands still here, because time itself is akin to this entire place. I think that's what they tried to get at in Interstellar towards the end:






So it's just extremely abstract and full of symbolism which makes this place so extremely rich. It's not full with physical objects, but it's full with our secondary natures, the shadow that follows us around but we never see. If you're familiar with His Dark Materials/The Golden Compass, every person is in possession of a daemon, an animal spirit that takes the shape of your inner nature. I think of this dimension as being the place where this inner nature of everyone resides. I guess that's a bit what Jung was trying to get at with his idea of the collective unconsciousness, except I am not sure this reality is necessarily shared by everyone or everyone has access to it or wants to access it. Most people honestly seem extremely oblivious and unaware that this is a part of the reality in which we reside, that there's a reality within our reality.


----------



## SheWolf

There have been days where I have woken up from a dream. But I'm still very, very "stuck" in it. I even gave it a name known only to me (until now that is) called "Dreamscape." I always thought I was weird for it. 

I usually hate when it happens and it's very hard to describe. Basically that I feel like I'm still in a dream. The only way for me to break out of it is to force myself into contact with the physical. 

Even my memories feel like dreams... I'm not crazy, of course. I know they happened but it's still more like I see them as a dream. Even now, I'm trying to pull up memories of living in one of my old homes. I remember it very clear in my mind but it's hazy like I dreamed it up. A lot of things feel like dreams to me. Lol.
@*myst91* I've been meaning to try and put this into words. Lol.

EDIT:

I can't put it into words... but the Kingdom Hearts 2 opening has always kinda "spoke" to me. Because it gives that sort of feeling.


----------



## Immolate

Thorn said:


> EDIT:
> 
> I can't put it into words... but the Kingdom Hearts 2 opening has always kinda "spoke" to me. Because it gives that sort of feeling.


Why not the first intro? His very first thoughts seem relevant


----------



## SheWolf

@lets mosey

yes that one too. Actually the beginning of KH1 is very "it" as well in general. I just used the KH2 opening in particular because for some sort of reason it made an impression on me. One of those things I can't put into words.


----------



## Verity

Entropic said:


> So it's just extremely abstract and full of symbolism which makes this place so extremely rich. It's not full with physical objects, but it's full with our secondary natures, the shadow that follows us around but we never see. If you're familiar with His Dark Materials/The Golden Compass, every person is in possession of a daemon, an animal spirit that takes the shape of your inner nature. I think of this dimension as being the place where this inner nature of everyone resides. I guess that's a bit what Jung was trying to get at with his idea of the collective unconsciousness, except I am not sure this reality is necessarily shared by everyone or everyone has access to it or wants to access it. Most people honestly seem extremely oblivious and unaware that this is a part of the reality in which we reside, that there's a reality within our reality.


Concerning the last bit, since I was in an argument recently with someone about that: I think one reason why so many people are superstitious(such as by believing that ghosts _tangibly_ exist in the real world, or that a benevolent creator _actually_ watches over them) is because they can't align the internal world of ideas, thoughts and feelings with the external one. To them, there is not one world with infinite "layers", but two binary categories; what is real(the tangible and apparent), and what is not. To them, a ghost for example cannot exist if it's intangible, but since they're able to experience the effects of their unconscious nudging them, the weight of that "haunting" must be projected somewhere, and since the effects are too heavy to come from the world of "what is not", then it *must* exist in the world of "what is real and tangible". 

Just like the haunting, this internal divide manifests itself in the tangible world, and it perpetuates a division not only of belief, but also between people. It's not even restricted to traditional superstition, but also to how we live our daily lives, since people constantly rationalize choices that they don't understand to maintain control, and when you question them why, the answer is ultimately: _I don't have the time_. In essence, they are projecting the concept _time_ unto the tangible world in the same way that some project _ghost_ or _God_, or even one's understanding of oneself as a person. To me, the way forward lies in the alignment of these perspectives.

To quote the log lady:

 _"There are clues everywhere, all around us. But the puzzle maker is clever. The clues, although surrounding us, are somehow mistaken for something else. And the something else, the wrong interpretation of the clues, we call our world. Our world is a magical smoke screen. How should we interpret the happy song of the meadowlark or the robust flavor of a wild strawberry?"_


----------



## Immolate

^tagging @owlet especially because of the log lady


----------



## Entropic

@Verity

Yeah I actually initially went on a tangent about that this is what I think people actually mean when they think of magic, but I realized I didn't know how to phrase it well enough so I dropped it.


----------



## owlet

@*Entropic* @*Fenix Wulfheart* I find myself relating quite strongly to what you two have described with feeling disconnected form your physical selves/reality, while simultaneously feeling like the body is a form of entrapment. I'm curious about this, as I do think my LII typing is correct.



Verity said:


> To me, the way forward lies in the alignment of these perspectives.


This was such a great post - so thank you for that!

I find myself thinking of the Corum books by Michael Moorcock with the idea of overlapping realities - all are equally valid, but we're just mostly focused on one at a time and so lose perspective. It's very interesting!
(Also Log Lady is the best)


----------



## FearAndTrembling

See my sig. Great show. 

 Houdin was the greatest magician who ever lived. And do you know what he said? "A magician, he said, is just an actor-Just an actor playing the part of a magician."


----------



## SheWolf

This was brought up in a Facebook group I'm in and I think someone pages back mentioned it, too but I'm not sure.

That's that we actually can really admire people in our PoLR because they have an ability that we just... can't really do.

One of my best friend's mother is an SEI. I have always admired the hell out of her. First off, I admire most Judicious mindsets of being confident and comfortable in what they have. She had immense confidence, perfectly fine with "you have your stuff and I have my stuff." She was not competitive and easily dissatisfied with what she had like I was (Judicious "accepts" reality whereas Decisive "rejects" reality) 

She was also so... classy. She knew how her body worked, how to take care of it and the natural initiative to do so. Her home was always so clean, spacious, and well-decorated. I looked up to her so much because she herself always looked good and knew how to style things. She was one hell of a cook and a great hostess. She's a nurse practitioner and very successful. 
It took me a long time and a lot of persistence to be able to even replicate anything close to that. She did it naturally. I looked up to her a lot and when she gave me a compliment on how I looked or something like that it was like oh wow... thanks! It was great.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart

owlet said:


> @*Entropic* @*Fenix Wulfheart* I find myself relating quite strongly to what you two have described with feeling disconnected form your physical selves/reality, while simultaneously feeling like the body is a form of entrapment. I'm curious about this, as I do think my LII typing is correct.
> 
> 
> This was such a great post - so thank you for that!
> 
> I find myself thinking of the Corum books by Michael Moorcock with the idea of overlapping realities - all are equally valid, but we're just mostly focused on one at a time and so lose perspective. It's very interesting!
> (Also Log Lady is the best)


Did you also identify with what @Tad Cooper said about this subject? Because I doubt it is only Ni dominants that feel what is being described, but is it experienced in the same _way_? That, I want to know.

How do you experience this phenomenon?


----------



## SheWolf

Fenix Wulfheart said:


> Did you also identify with what @*Tad Cooper* said about this subject? Because I doubt it is only Ni dominants that feel what is being described, but is it experienced in the same _way_? That, I want to know.
> 
> How do you experience this phenomenon?


Yes, I really wonder if this sort of feeling isn't really just associated with Ni.

I know I frequently experienced this strange... whatever. I never really told anyone as I assumed they would think I was nuts. 

Reading up on Ni from a Socionics standpoint, this sort of thing is never really brought up in association with it. Hm.


----------

