# Type my PoLR ;)



## flying anomaly (Feb 16, 2013)

Hi!
I've registered on this forum because of my socionics obsession . I have been reading a lot on the topic and it's still not that easy to type myself. I'm fairly convinced about Ne as my base, at first I thought of IEE but I'm not sure about Fi competence in my life . Maybe it's my PoLR after all? some of the descriptions of PoLR say that it's a part of information perceived in black and white, like an elevator that only stops at ground floor and the top one and cannot stop on any of the floors between  and it's a bit like that with me and my relationships and attitudes towards people. I constantly long for perfect relationships and think about them a lot, more than any logical stuff, my interests are much more stereotypically NF than NT, but it's more like it's a strong internal attitude that doesn't translate into real-life positive outcomes in creating and forming them , it's more like an ideal that doesn't combine with reality but diverges from it more and more . 

As far as interptype relationships are concerned, either too much Te or Fe in other people's behaviour is rather repulsive so it's not easy to determine which is my HA . I am dwelling on my work relationships situation in terms of socionics a lot. Recently I have been working with an EII who is constantly talking shit about me behind my back and constantly criticising me to my EIE boss, admiring the EIE's interpersonal skills at the same time. I think our situation in the team would fit the pattern of me being an ILE and being a benefactor to my boss more than us being mirrors according to the descriptions. 

Before the EII we were working with an ESI and the EIE was also more hmm... attracted ? to me than her. Me and ESI didn't got along that well, we had nothing to talk about imo, but I could see her as my supervisee in a way - she told me once that she was coming to work everyday anxious and thinking how my behavior towards her is going to be like  which was a surprise to me  because I have tried to be as civil towards her as possible but at the same time I guess I couldn't force myself to estimate her very much which is a pity. I saw her as a good person but lacking imagination, plus her views were really conservative and a bit fanatical. Our relationship seemed to bother her much much more than me. 

We have a lot of intense interpersonal situations at work breaking the schemes of buissness-like behavior norms in the workplace  so this makes me think a lot about socionics related patterns. The EII and EIE relationship fits the descriptions very much I guess . I'm aware that not every relationship has to fit the description  but I wonder a lot about the bad relationships I have with the EII.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

flying anomaly said:


> Hi!
> I've registered on this forum because of my socionics obsession . I have been reading a lot on the topic and it's still not that easy to type myself. I'm fairly convinced about Ne as my base, at first I thought of IEE but I'm not sure about Fi competence in my life . Maybe it's my PoLR after all? some of the descriptions of PoLR say that it's a part of information perceived in black and white, like an elevator that only stops at ground floor and the top one and cannot stop on any of the floors between  and it's a bit like that with me and my relationships and attitudes towards people. I constantly long for perfect relationships and think about them a lot, more than any logical stuff, my interests are much more stereotypically NF than NT, but it's more like it's a strong internal attitude that doesn't translate into real-life positive outcomes in creating and forming them , it's more like an ideal that doesn't combine with reality but diverges from it more and more .


If you find yourself mainly perceiving and thinking on such topics then it's likely that your F function is inert one. This would make you any one of the following types: SLI, ILI, ESI, EII, EIE, ESE, SLE, ILE -- they all have inert F.

If you're sure of being a Ne type then this would make ILE > IEE. Why do you think you're Ne dominant?

Regarding what you wrote about your relationships at work, there aren't enough relationships to make a confident judgement here. Do you know any other EIIs? What is are your relations like with them? It's possible that this one EII simply doesn't like you and that socionics supervision isn't to blame. Have you met any LSIs?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Try me in supervision.


----------



## flying anomaly (Feb 16, 2013)

cyamitide said:


> If you find yourself mainly perceiving and thinking on such topics then it's likely that your F function is inert one.


well, I haven't paid attention to that aspect of functions, maybe there's sth to it



cyamitide said:


> Regarding what you wrote about your relationships at work, there aren't enough relationships to make a confident judgement here. Do you know any other EIIs? What is are your relations like with them? It's possible that this one EII simply doesn't like you and that socionics supervision isn't to blame. Have you met any LSIs?


yes, I have met two EIIs I think and I got a chance to get to know them a bit better but I can't say there was a visible pattern there. I'm not that sure about LSIs or LIIs. Sure, she could just not like me  intertype relationshps are not everything. this EII also seems a bit unhealthy. apart from criticising me a lot she is also very jealous of me and the fact that I have better relationship with my EIE boss, who she kind of looks up too (I, on the other hand, do not ). I think she considers it as a great injustice in a "what is it that she has that I don't have?! I'm doing everything right and she is doing so many things wrong (or not doing them at all ^.^) so how can it be!?" way. 

Ne as the 1st function is sth I identified with immediately and the description was the most obvious and ringing a "wow that's me!!" bell. The only other type that I could consider apart from ILE and IEE would maybe be ILI, but I don't feel like Se is the way to go as my dual-seeking function at all .


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

flying anomaly said:


> yes, I have met two EIIs I think and I got a chance to get to know them a bit better but I can't say there was a visible pattern there. I'm not that sure about LSIs or LIIs. Sure, she could just not like me  intertype relationshps are not everything. this EII also seems a bit unhealthy. apart from criticising me a lot she is also very jealous of me and the fact that I have better relationship with my EIE boss, who she kind of looks up too (I, on the other hand, do not ). I think she considers it as a great injustice in a "what is it that she has that I don't have?! I'm doing everything right and she is doing so many things wrong (or not doing them at all ^.^) so how can it be!?" way.


She sounds more like an unhealthy 4 than EII to me, based on this. Which is why I'm suggesting you'd try me in supervision since I self-type as EII-Ne, and I'm fairly sure about my type being correct.


> Ne as the 1st function is sth I identified with immediately and the description was the most obvious and ringing a "wow that's me!!" bell. The only other type that I could consider apart from ILE and IEE would maybe be ILI, but I don't feel like Se is the way to go as my dual-seeking function at all .


Well, there's a big difference between Ne and Ni base. You're right that you don't strike me as Ni base.


----------



## flying anomaly (Feb 16, 2013)

to be deleted


----------



## flying anomaly (Feb 16, 2013)

LeaT said:


> She sounds more like an unhealthy 4 than EII to me, based on this. Which is why I'm suggesting you'd try me in supervision since I self-type as EII-Ne, and I'm fairly sure about my type being correct.


she is an EII - no doubt about it, even though many of her unhealthy behaviors could be seen as not compatible with the EII's stereotype. I'm not sure if she is a 4 in enneagram, she fits the descriptions of 6 or even 1 more I guess. 

not sure how am I supposed to "try you in supervision" ?  



LeaT said:


> Well, there's a big difference between Ne and Ni base.


which is why I think I am a Ne base and not Ni . But I'm not that sure about the rest. maybe I don't have a PoLR or I have many ^.^?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

flying anomaly said:


> she is an EII - no doubt about it, even though many of her unhealthy behaviors could be seen as not compatible with the EII's stereotype. I'm not sure if she is a 4 in enneagram, she fits the descriptions of 6 or even 1 more I guess.


Well, tritype theory says she can be 146.


> not sure how am I supposed to "try you in supervision" ?


Just chat along. See where it goes. 


> which is why I think I am a Ne base and not Ni . But I'm not that sure about the rest. maybe I don't have a PoLR or I have many ^.^?


Well, you only have one PoLR.


----------



## flying anomaly (Feb 16, 2013)

LeaT said:


> Just chat along. See where it goes.


ok, is there a chat as well or only the forum? 




LeaT said:


> Well, you only have one PoLR.


that was a rhetorical question


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

flying anomaly said:


> ok, is there a chat as well or only the forum?


Can be in this thread if you wish. I already notice communication problems though that could be indicative of many things. 




> that was a rhetorical question


Ergo the above.


----------



## flying anomaly (Feb 16, 2013)

Well, I guess you could have assumed that I was serious and really didn't know since it's only words without non-verbal cues and stuff like that.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

flying anomaly said:


> Well, I guess you could have assumed that I was serious and really didn't know since it's only words without non-verbal cues and stuff like that.


Well, I'm serious by default almost to a fault, even if I'm given non-verbal cues.


----------



## flying anomaly (Feb 16, 2013)

LeaT said:


> Well, I'm serious by default almost to a fault, even if I'm given non-verbal cues.


is it because you don't naturally notice that someone can be otherwise or you do but you want to keep it serious anyway?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

flying anomaly said:


> is it because you don't naturally notice that someone can be otherwise or you do but you want to keep it serious anyway?


I'm just naturally prone to interpret things seriously.


----------



## flying anomaly (Feb 16, 2013)

LeaT said:


> I'm just naturally prone to interpret things seriously.


well, delta is supposed to be a serious quadra . In real life the EIIs I have known were too serious for me in a way too. on the other hand I have found many of the alphas not serious enough.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

flying anomaly said:


> well, delta is supposed to be a serious quadra . In real life the EIIs I have known were too serious for me in a way too. on the other hand I have found many of the alphas not serious enough.


Too serious but alpha not serious enough? Explain?


----------

