# My quick summary of the PoLRs as social critiques



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

_Was originally a response on reddit, but I realized it's probably better suited here. Please let me know if you think this is accurate/inaccurate for you and your PoLR and how you think about it as I am not entirely sure I got all of them right. I think people tend to deflect their PoLR with their HA, so most of what you see here is a transference from the PoLR to the HA. _

*xLE (Fi PoLR):* Too much focus on character judgements lead to favoritism/grudges and in-group/clique-like behavior which could be avoided if we all simply tried to enjoy the moment regardless of our past relationships with each other. When we let go of our idea that we must always have a specific relationship with everyone, we realize that we have an immense capacity get along with a great variety of people regardless of what we thought about them in the past. What's important is that we can have fun when spending time with them as opposed to creating needless animosity by playing favorites and holding grudges. Similarly, while respecting individuals is important respect should not be at the expense of one's right to speak your mind which ultimately leads to everyone feeling like they must constantly walk over eggshells; good character is also not just a matter of morality, but also a matter of being able to consistently adhere to a logical principle in how to behave.

*xLI (Fe PoLR):* Too much focus on trying to express ourselves and our feelings lead to a watering down of our feelings where feelings, instead of being said sincerely and genuinely because we truly mean it, become empty forms of expression that in themselves say nothing about what you really feel about others and yourself. Sincerity of feeling is not always the same as strength of expression and an overt emphasis on expressiveness can easily lead to various forms of emotional manipulation and drama where people use their expressions as a means to pretend they feel a certain way about you and things even when they really don't. This also results in an echo chamber where people are more focused on mirroring each other's feelings rather than standing up for what they really feel; subsequently social morality loses meaning because no one dares to take a moral stand even if it goes against the current emotional status quo. While emotional expressiveness is important in order to let others know what we think and feel about them, emotional expressiveness should also be accompanied by a sincere and heartfelt sentiment behind it in order to be truly meaningful and say something what you really think about other people and things.

*xIE (Si PoLR):* Too much focus on comfort and pleasantry makes us stagnant and hinders us in our ability to move forward. Sometimes we must press forward even when it makes us feel uncomfortable and we are outside our own comfort zones. Without force, we cannot mobilize and if we do not mobilize, we cannot act to satisfy our desires. Putting pressure on ourselves and our environment helps us to stay focused and engaged with the present and acquire/accomplish the things we seek out to acquire/accomplish. Satisfaction does not only come from our inner sense of physical comfort, but satisfaction also comes from our ability to gain a sense of material power, position and wealth. Physical comfort and pleasantness is important but not at the expense of being unable to take decisive action in order to push forward and get the things we need in order to accomplish that comfort.

*xII (Se PoLR):* Too much force creates unnecessary conflict where there needs to be none. Sometimes being forced to act too soon and too quickly only creates a lot of stress that burns you out instead of allowing you to act within the boundaries of where you feel comfortable; while it is important to be able to sometimes mobilize, it as important to be allowed to rest after mobilization since human energy isn't limitless. What matters is not just the ability to move forward and get where you want to be, but sometimes we also need to take a time-out and sit down and just enjoy life and ourselves. By re-focusing on ourselves, we feel more refreshed and comfortable so we can continue what we were doing and eventually get where we want to be in life. Taking decisive action is important, but not to the point where we are simply mindlessly moving forward and forget about the finer pleasures in life and how such things can infuse us with as much endurance and vitality as constantly moving forward/acquiring things can.

*xSE (Ni PoLR):* Too much focus on time and waiting for the best moment makes us lose sight of our present possibilities we have when moving forward. It makes us passive and unrealistic because instead of seeing what options we have, we are too focused on waiting for a future that may well never come. Development is not just a result of an unfolding process, but development is also a result from seeing various possibilities that allow us to change. In the same vein, it is not possible to make future plans if you don't know what optional futures you have to choose between. Not all inner truths come from observing ourselves in relation to the past, present and the future; consequently, being able to re-interpret how we see ourselves into something new and inspiring by thinking outside the box can bring the novelty we need in order to instigate change. 

*xSI (Ne PoLR):* Too much focus on trying to find out hidden motives and intentions make us read into things that are not there and lead to speculation that hinder us in our ability to plan for the future such as looking forward to a nice dinner, being able to see our family or just get home from work. Meaning is not just found in the world of interpretations, but meaning is also found in our ability to see progress. Constant focus on seeing interconnectedness only lead us to a passive and an unrealistic attitude that gets lost in too many details instead of seeing the bigger picture of where we are and where we are going. Being able to connect current contexts to other contexts is important, but not to the point where we begin to create convoluted explanations that no longer have anything to do with how our lives fit into a flow between the past, the present and the future.

*xEE (Ti PoLR):* Too much focus on logic and structure makes us lose sight on that what ultimately matters are the results, not necessarily how we got there. When all time is spent on nitpicking semantics we are unable to move forward because we get bogged down in too much detail about who said what and why and what it meant, instead of actually doing what we intended to do and finish that product/project. In the bigger picture of things, as long as we accomplish what we set out to accomplish, how we got there is less relevant than our ability to produce high quality work. Instead it becomes a lot of chasing our own tail which stifles productivity because people spend more discussing what something is without doing something concrete about it. That's why facts are useful because they help us to quickly establish a common ground in what we think about things so we can easily move on to do what we intended to do. So while rules and procedures are important in setting up a guideline to follow, it does not mean that my work is of lesser quality just because I did not do it by the book; this is especially true if the end result is the same as everyone else's.

*xEI (Te PoLR):* Too much focus on productivity, efficiency and facts lead to group think instead of people being able to individually develop their own ideas and how things should be like. Instead of thinking for themselves people simply parrot the ideas of others and then we no longer know what truth really is because everyone says the same thing without trying to figure out why they are saying it. How can we assess how things work if all we have are unverified facts? Similarly, adhering to a proper structure is simply not just following the correct methods in order to produce the quickest results; it is equally important to make sure that your thinking is sound and thorough which includes questioning the established order of things and how much sense it makes to you. Without soundness and thoroughness we run the risk of creating various inconsistencies and errors that could be avoided if we simply took the time to follow the logical reasoning to its very end. Efficiency is important but efficiency cannot be produced without a strong sense of hierarchy and structure where every object has its role and function clearly defined within the system.


----------



## Stellafera (Jan 19, 2015)

Entropic said:


> *xEI (Te PoLR):* Too much focus on productivity, efficiency and facts lead to group think instead of people being able to individually develop their own ideas and how things should be like. Instead of thinking for themselves people simply parrot the ideas of others and then we no longer know what truth really is because everyone says the same thing without trying to figure out why they are saying it. How can we assess how things work if all we have are unverified facts? Similarly, adhering to a proper structure is simply not just following the correct methods in order to produce the quickest results; it is equally important to make sure that your thinking is sound and thorough which includes questioning the established order of things and how much sense it makes to you. Without soundness and thoroughness we run the risk of creating various inconsistencies and errors that could be avoided if we simply took the time to follow the logical reasoning to its very end. Efficiency is important but efficiency cannot be produced without a strong sense of hierarchy and structure where every object has its role and function clearly defined within the system.


I nodded my head when I read this and thought it all seemed very sensible/pandering to me, which I'm pretty sure means you nailed it. I tend to specifically dismiss Te-related topics as, variously, "illogical", "arcane", and "soooo stupid and specific that nobody could've ever figured that out on their own in a million years ever". :tongue:


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

I could have brought this up privately but I'll put it here so others can comment on it if they wish:

While I agree with almost everything expressed here I do take slight issue with the part about recognizing the function of the PoLR IE as important and necessary. A reasonable amount of life experience can teach anyone that whatever IE they have as their PoLR does have a place in society, and an important one at that, as every IE is important, of course. But I find that when someone's PoLR is challenged in the moment, especially in a way they do not anticipate, they tend to forget this fact and dismiss its importance altogether. After all, it is still an area that is a blind spot for all of us, and when we don't see an attack coming we react poorly or dismissively to it. (I'm referring to statements on the lines of "while I recognize [X PoLR] is important, [Y hidden agenda] is more useful and necessary..." in your text.)

Being able to consistently recognize the importance of an IE and consciously setting its usage aside seems to be an attitude I see displayed towards the ignoring function more, while I notice a greater degree of dismissal, irritation, and flippant tendencies towards the PoLR. 

You know that friend of mine is an ESI (most likely, I still can't be 100% sure) and he can be open-minded and listen to my rambly analogies and tangents if he needs to, but when you direct the discussion onto him he always backs off with something like "that depends", "I'm not sure", "I never really considered that" and avoids speculating or assuming too much even about his own thoughts. If I ask what if questions he straight up dismisses them like "I don't think about things like that, either something is or it isn't" and instantly shuts down. If it's not relevant, it's not relevant. If I asked him how much he values speculation and figuring out the potential of something, he will definitely agree these things hold value, but _in the moment_, he dismisses them. In general, that's the attitude I see people display towards their PoLR when engaging it directly.


----------



## Kito (Jan 6, 2012)

Nice, definitely agree with the part about seeking meaning where there is none. In fact that's something that almost always irritates me in others. Can't stand when someone's entire existence is defined by seeking hidden motives where there aren't any 90% of the time.


----------



## Another Lost Cause (Oct 6, 2015)

I definitely relate best to the Se POLR. So many times I've wanted to tell certain people to take a fucking chill pill and not be so quick to turn everything into a contest.


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

Night Huntress said:


> While I agree with almost everything expressed here I do take slight issue with the part about recognizing the function of the PoLR IE as important and necessary. A reasonable amount of life experience can teach anyone that whatever IE they have as their PoLR does have a place in society, and an important one at that, as every IE is important, of course. But I find that when someone's PoLR is challenged in the moment, especially in a way they do not anticipate, they tend to forget this fact and dismiss its importance altogether. After all, it is still an area that is a blind spot for all of us, and when we don't see an attack coming we react poorly or dismissively to it. (I'm referring to statements on the lines of "while I recognize [X PoLR] is important, [Y hidden agenda] is more useful and necessary..." in your text.)
> 
> Being able to consistently recognize the importance of an IE and consciously setting its usage aside seems to be an attitude I see displayed towards the ignoring function more, while I notice a greater degree of dismissal, irritation, and flippant tendencies towards the PoLR.
> 
> You know that friend of mine is an ESI (most likely, I still can't be 100% sure) and he can be open-minded and listen to my rambly analogies and tangents if he needs to, but when you direct the discussion onto him he always backs off with something like "that depends", "I'm not sure", "I never really considered that" and avoids speculating or assuming too much even about his own thoughts. If I ask what if questions he straight up dismisses them like "I don't think about things like that, either something is or it isn't" and instantly shuts down. If it's not relevant, it's not relevant. If I asked him how much he values speculation and figuring out the potential of something, he will definitely agree these things hold value, but _in the moment_, he dismisses them. In general, that's the attitude I see people display towards their PoLR when engaging it directly.


^I agree with this. 
PoLR isn't so much about recognizing the importance of one IE over the other due to valued/devalued dichotomy. I think we have recognition of PoLR importance, it's just not a recognition of its importance to ourselves. It's of no use to our goals since ego as well as valued IEs make up different framework, we can't metabolize it efficiently, we don't spend much time thinking about it, whenever we try to produce something through PoLR it becomes very taxing and generally not worth the effort at the end of the day. There's still recognition that PoLR is meaningful to society, hence pressure appears because of the felt disproportion between conscious awareness of social demands (since IE is located in social conscious block) and poor IE capacity.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

For clarification: the reason why I phrased it that way was because I didn't want these to come off as too strongly and dismissive; I wanted them to be more neutral as to note create too much bias in any particular direction. The phrasing has nothing to do with that I think people naturally transfer and can view the PoLR positively, but more so because I think people try to justify their dismissal of the PoLR by justifying why another valued IE is more important, typically the HA.


----------



## Shiver (Nov 10, 2016)

Kito said:


> Nice, definitely agree with the part about seeking meaning where there is none. In fact that's something that almost always irritates me in others. Can't stand when someone's entire existence is defined by seeking hidden motives where there aren't any 90% of the time.


Aha, there's the solid pattern between Ne PoLRs - if _they_ don't pick up on connections, it must mean "there aren't any", even to the point of aggressively resisting available explanations. On this token I don't think I necessarily agree with Entropic's intent that these shouldn't come off too strongly and dismissive. Many of the statements I see people make with regards to their PoLR come off as _very_ much devaluing a certain IE to the point where they almost seem to want to invalidate its existence, or to bluff the devaluation of it as a strength. I don't mean to pick on Kito, but I find the above statement to be good for illustrating this:

"They imagining a connection that does not exist; they are observing nothing. Their view/argument is therefore invalid."

In a sense it comes off as seeking to devalue another's existence to validate one's own.



Entropic said:


> For clarification: the reason why I phrased it that way was because I didn't want these to come off as too strongly and dismissive; I wanted them to be more neutral as to note create too much bias in any particular direction. The phrasing has nothing to do with that I think people naturally transfer and can view the PoLR positively, but more so because I think people try to justify their dismissal of the PoLR by justifying why another valued IE is more important, typically the HA.


I've actually got a number of quotes in mind that would possibly be able to demonstrate what you're saying as likely true, although organizing them all will have to be a project for later. I'd like to see a collection of things that real people have said along the lines of what you posted here - it would make for great supporting evidence.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Shiver said:


> On this token I don't think I necessarily agree with Entropic's intent that these shouldn't come off too strongly and dismissive. Many of the statements I see people make with regards to their PoLR come off as _very_ much devaluing a certain IE to the point where they almost seem to want to invalidate its existence, or to bluff the devaluation of it as a strength. I don't mean to pick on Kito, but I find the above statement to be good for illustrating this:


But that's the thing; if I had, people would begin to say "I don't relate to that, I don't dislike it that much" or "that PoLR sounds way worse than this PoLR" or even "I think you're making them sound worse than they really are" etc. So it's not like I couldn't, but then people would nitpick on it even more. 



> I've actually got a number of quotes in mind that would possibly be able to demonstrate what you're saying as likely true, although organizing them all will have to be a project for later. I'd like to see a collection of things that real people have said along the lines of what you posted here - it would make for great supporting evidence.


There is already a very good post that you quoted recently that demonstrates this... With that said, yes, I'd like that too. Would be interesting to see what people can come up with.


----------



## Stellafera (Jan 19, 2015)

Entropic said:


> There is already a very good post that you quoted recently that demonstrates this... With that said, yes, I'd like that too. Would be interesting to see what people can come up with.


For Te PoLR, I can provide any number of personal examples of me learning new "nitty-gritty" concepts. The first time I used a debit card, for instance. When do I hand in the card? Now? *Oh, like that was obvious.* What? I have two receipts? Okay. You want me to sign this? *What the hell?* Do I sign the other one? Oh, I keep it? For what? That makes sense I guess. Thank you sir. There aren't any more steps, are there? Oh okay I'm done. *Whatever, it's not my fault that these things are so complicated and illogical.*

As I walked out of the store, I calmed down a bit and realized that I was making a big production in my head out of nothing, but in the moment I felt really defensive. 

The other day I brought my father to a Japanese restaurant in town. I knew my dad had some sort of folding technique that he did with the chopstick wrapper in order to rest his chopsticks on it, but I couldn't remember it. I kept trying different shapes based on what I thought might be structurally stable (note: I am NOT an engineer) while asking him "Is this right?" until he sighed, folded it in half a few times, and set it on the table. _That_ was the secret technique. Obvious in hindsight but somehow I couldn't translate how to get from point A to point B. It's like this huge mental block for me. 

How do I do something effectively? How do I do something efficiently? Intellectually I know it's about optimizing the numbers but it's hard to see which courses of action result in the most productive outcomes. I remember seeing a summary on another forum for Te PoLR that I liked:



> Painful Extroverted Logic - is an always agonizing conscience about one's own (in)activity. It is constant subjective undervaluation of one's own labor; it is eternal uncertainty in one's own performance at work; it is an inability to take a break with a clean heart and soul. It is a fundamental inability to say "I will not!" when you are being asked to do something that you don't know how to do well (especially asked "nicely"). For difficulties and poor results you will blame precisely yourself, remembering your entire life and blaming yourself for being too lethargic and insufficiently active, blaming yourself for being incapable and never learning the necessary skills.


Not so sure in the "Te-PoLRs usually blame themselves" aspect though. That sounds cute and humble but in real life I blame myself for some things and blame the world for others. Depends on how I value the task involved. 

I often try to use my Ti in order to puzzle out these situations (because I _do_ feel expected to "perform" when Te stuff comes up) and tend to reach... incorrect conclusions. 

*Real Life:* "Do you know how this works?"

*Te PoLR:* _*freezes into deer-in-the-headlights stance*_

*Ti HA:* "Ohhh, no prob Te I've got your back. It works like _(explanation)_ because X, Y, and Z, clearly. I drew this from all the facts of the situation and used my expert insight to confirm it. "

*Real Life:* "It actually works like SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT but thanks for trying"


----------



## Mr Oops (Jun 29, 2016)

Well, one problem that I have experienced is that my analytic conclusion can be seen as some sort of moral judgment and then the meaning completely disappears. 

Me: What if we go extinct? (It is just a thought experiment.)
Someone: Yeah, I hate people too!
Me: Well, that was not the point at all. I don't hate people; even Hitler is OK... (I might get frustrated with their ideals but it is not hate rooted in person). I might see humanity just being hopeless.


----------



## Kito (Jan 6, 2012)

Mr Oops said:


> Well, one problem that I have experienced is that my analytic conclusion can be seen as some sort of moral judgment and then the meaning completely disappears.
> 
> Me: What if we go extinct? (It is just a thought experiment.)
> Someone: Yeah, I hate people too!
> Me: Well, that was not the point at all. I don't hate people; even Hitler is OK... (I might get frustrated with their ideals but it is not hate rooted in person). I might see humanity just being hopeless.


That sounds so weird to me. I can't point out a moral flaw in a person without judging their entire character as bad, corrupt, evil etc.


----------



## ShuttleRun (Jan 5, 2017)

Kito said:


> That sounds so weird to me. I can't point out a moral flaw in a person without judging their entire character as bad, corrupt, evil etc.


Yeah, that must be Fi, more precisely an ESI thing...

I guess in @Mr Oops's example, Fi is most likely to respond like that, especially SF. To get a Fe to say "I hate people too!", you'd have to say something like "People suck."


----------



## atamagasuita (May 15, 2016)

How can you knoe your Polrs


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Entropic said:


> For clarification: the reason why I phrased it that way was because I didn't want these to come off as too strongly and dismissive; I wanted them to be more neutral as to note create too much bias in any particular direction. The phrasing has nothing to do with that I think people naturally transfer and can view the PoLR positively, but more so because I think people try to justify their dismissal of the PoLR by justifying why another valued IE is more important, typically the HA.


You could always take a page out of Jung's book. He would describe some of the variance he observed within the types, making them sound less rigid.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

> xEI (Te PoLR):[/B] Too much focus on productivity, efficiency and facts lead to group think instead of people being able to individually develop their own ideas and how things should be like. Instead of thinking for themselves people simply parrot the ideas of others and then we no longer know what truth really is because everyone says the same thing without trying to figure out why they are saying it. How can we assess how things work if all we have are unverified facts? Similarly, adhering to a proper structure is simply not just following the correct methods in order to produce the quickest results; it is equally important to make sure that your thinking is sound and thorough which includes questioning the established order of things and how much sense it makes to you. Without soundness and thoroughness we run the risk of creating various inconsistencies and errors that could be avoided if we simply took the time to follow the logical reasoning to its very end. Efficiency is important but efficiency cannot be produced without a strong sense of hierarchy and structure where every object has its role and function clearly defined within the system.


This one is mine as an ISFJ. For me, Te PoLR comes in the form of trusting information that resonates with me. I'm more subjective with what I'm willing to accept as true and reliable. I can read one comment from a random forum or Yelp review (for example) and I'll give weight to the comment only if I feel it is true or based on instinct. This sometimes means in debates I can get uncomfortable if information is presented that goes outside my framework. So being Te PoLR really is a push for individuality in a way, and honoring subjective experience. I don't respect information just because it is information. I need more than that and I go beyond that. Also, I'm concerned with efficiency, and doing things right places a lot of stress on me. I feel uncomfortable admitting or justifying that I'm qualified or efficient in areas (which is a problem especially in interviews where that is the focus) cause I don't think I am. Basically it's subjective experience with information, getting uncomfortable with facts that contradict me, and feeling like efficiency is a vulnerability. I wouldn't say I'm inefficient though... I think most J types aren't anyway. We put a lot of effort into our work.

I think what we lack in our PoLR we make up for in our hidden agenda. Opposite direction but same function. So I place a lot of emphasis on introverted thinking and I respect it tremendously. I'd rather understand than know, and I'd rather analyze and categorize information based on a conceptual framework than objective reality.

Meanwhile my Ti-PoLR ENFP and ESFP friends don't care about the framework. They also can't see both sides of the aisle and are determined to stick with what they think or see as factual. So Te-PoLR sticks to reality based on subjective experience but is willing to compromise and incorporate other viewpoints (still hardcore facts that contradict our framework make us vulnerable), while Ti-PoLR is less open to doing that if it's only conceptual. Basically I can see the other side easily, but it makes me uncomfortable when the facts are laid out on me so ruthlessly and I'm put on the spot. I see facts and statistics and what not as very cold.

Ti-PoLR = defensive in debates, sticks to original stance, vulnerability = admitting they don't understand or know how to explain something, cares more about knowledge

Te- PoLR = uncomfortable in debates with contradictory info, vulnerability = admitting they aren't efficient or qualified doing something, cares more about understanding


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Fried Eggz said:


> You could always take a page out of Jung's book. He would describe some of the variance he observed within the types, making them sound less rigid.


Do you have an example you were thinking about?



TheDarknessInTheSnow said:


> snip


Thanks, this was very useful and illuminating! I agree with you that I think we tend to go to our HA when we experience issues with the PoLR. I notice this with myself too, so whenever there's some Fe stuff I find difficult to deal with, I just automatically try to justify myself with Fi instead. 

Unfortunately I can't think of any good example right now.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Entropic said:


> Do you have an example you were thinking about?


Jung would frequently make comments about the types varying in some way:


> (Se) the more pronounced he is, the less use does he make of his experience.
> 
> (Fe) Except in extreme cases, feeling has a personal character.
> 
> (Ti) with a more extreme type he feels himself warded off as something definitely disturbing.


This could be worth a try if it gets less people taking your descriptions rigidly. But to some degree it's inescapable with how many pedantic folks are around.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Fried Eggz said:


> Jung would frequently make comments about the types varying in some way:
> 
> This could be worth a try if it gets less people taking your descriptions rigidly. *But to some degree it's inescapable with how many pedantic folks are around*.


Indeed.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart (Aug 18, 2015)

Entropic said:


> *xEI (Te PoLR):* Too much focus on productivity, efficiency and facts lead to group think instead of people being able to individually develop their own ideas and how things should be like. Instead of thinking for themselves people simply parrot the ideas of others and then we no longer know what truth really is because everyone says the same thing without trying to figure out why they are saying it. How can we assess how things work if all we have are unverified facts? Similarly, adhering to a proper structure is simply not just following the correct methods in order to produce the quickest results; it is equally important to make sure that your thinking is sound and thorough which includes questioning the established order of things and how much sense it makes to you. Without soundness and thoroughness we run the risk of creating various inconsistencies and errors that could be avoided if we simply took the time to follow the logical reasoning to its very end. Efficiency is important but efficiency cannot be produced without a strong sense of hierarchy and structure where every object has its role and function clearly defined within the system.


It's like YOU are quoting ME...I think I've said these exact things to people over the years, and even had some arguments with people over these points. :/


----------

