r/Socionics

Just curioussss

I've been wondering about this for some time. As a Fe-valuer myself, I feel like I cringe from stuff people say worse than anybody else in the group. Sometimes when I rewatch a show or a yt video, I skip some parts that are "too sincere" for me. Also I don't like it when people force their emotional atmosphere on the group while disregarding the overall emotional atmosphere present (usually it's either Fe lead or Fe PoLR types). Does this have to do something with me valuing Fe? Or can some of it be attributed to my hatred for Fi (demo)?

Also I like watching people's reactions to shows, vids, music, etc. Is this also related to me being a Fe-valuer?

I've been trying to type myself for a while, and I can usually get pretty close to narrowing down traits. But one thing I've been working on in therapy is allowing myself to properly individuate and just embrace myself without editing and living in survival mode. It's tricky though because my personality, type, behavior, all change based on my situation and what I'm doing in the moment. I have almost no consistent values and hide both strengths and weaknesses, so when others type me, or I have ai give me ideas, it's almost always different

How far does individuation go with typing yourself? Do you still embody your type/self even if your persona runs deep?

I can pin down some consistent traits but most of them have to do with me living in fear of not having total freedom when I'm able to finally live on my own/out of school

I am an EII woman and I have had relationships with two LSI men. Unfortunately, both of my relationships ended badly. I don't know if they could have continued with a more effort, but it doesn't seem like both sides could accept the other as they are. Therefore, I don't think it's worth the risk.

(Reminder: I am not a socionics writer. Those are my personal experiences and my perception. If you feel something is wrong, you are very welcome to discuss it on comments)

Frankly, they were strange relationships. They lasted not so long. In my opinion, an LSI man appears to me as rude, harsh, judgmental, lacking in kindness, intimidating, and dangerous at first. Later, I can see the deepness. However, it is very difficult to establish rapport with LSIs. Gaining their trust will be extremely challenging. Even for an EIE, this seems difficult. It will take a long time for these two types (EII&LSI) to understand each other. If there is no obligation to be around each other, they will probably break away from each other quickly. Even if they feel an attraction, what draws them together will be the same thing that initially push them apart. These men often struggle with intense feelings of judgment and insecurity within themselves. In fact, some may treat their partner badly just because they don't trust anyone. Because, according to them, everyone could betray them, and they need to take precautions before that happens. They have the idea in their minds that everyone could betray them. An EII will go to great lengths to prove to them the opposite. EII may assume the role of a mother in the relationship, but LSI does not need a mother! EII will constantly analyze her psychological state and try to understand what the problem is. LSI, on the other hand, will not like EII's overly emotional analytical stance. EII will hold up a mirror for him, but LSI will break that mirror and become angry. Because for LSI, emotions are like an unused room in the house. The room is there, it even needs some cleaning and maintenance, but LSI will often ignore this. EII's intervention is a threat to LSI. At times, LSI may rely on EII, only to later become disillusioned, believing that EII is trying to deceive them. LSI perceives EII's help and affection as manipulation and deception. Because EII's love means covering up the other person's shortcomings, helping them, and making them better. LSI, even if they need this help, will reject it. This can be a very passionate, toxic, and intense relationship for both sides. Both sides hate each other, but for some reason neither of them knows, they continue to respect each other. In sum, this is a love-hate relationship.

So, I know that ILEs tend to be considered as pretty chill and open, being extroverted irrationals.

Ne itself is a pretty wandering function, leaving space for a seemingly unrestrained and open approach and attitude.

For my case, that’s true in my external behavior. However, I feel mentally very rigid in some points. Not that I can’t change my opinions, quite the opposite I’m always interrogating them.

But I feel like everything I think and do (well the big things, you can imagine) must follow a very clear reason, a justified approach to a problem or question that will be established as a rule of behavior until I find it no longer relevant and change it. This rule first must be thought in my head, why would this work? From what general conclusions do I draw this rule? Etc.

So that’s where you’ll say « He’ll no, ILEs have strong Ti ». I know, but this part of strong Ti is not described in ILEs. It is most and foremost described in logic for abstracts questions, not for your life in general?

Then I’m ILE-Ti, could explain,

Glad to hear your thoughts on it!

• lacks tactfulness, can be described as harsh and bossy at times

• prefers honesty and truth; confesses her love in a “matter of fact” manner, openly asks people “am I getting on your nerves? answer truthfully so I can stop talking to you”, dislikes secrets and prefers if both parties lay their cards on the table.

• feels intensely, but has issues naming the core feeling; tries to “solve” emotions, which leads to over analyzing them

• processes feelings externally; talks about own emotions and expects others to solve them for her. oftentimes ends up rambling due to the inability to pinpoint the underlying feeling/situation bothering her.

• not quite sensitive, but explosive (easily raises her voice, starts crying, bursts out laughing, etc.)

• good at reading social cues, clueless about utilizing social norms. needs reassurance and clear “guidance” in most social situations.

• has trouble engaging with strangers/acquaintances in a free, natural way.

• when helping others, prefers to give practical advice (“do this and this”) rather then to empathize.

• likes exploring her own preferences, interests, behavior and such patterns.

• often knows what would be the most optimal thing to do but has trouble putting her plans into action

• lacks an idea of what she is and isn’t “allowed” to do; who she can talk freely with, who she must tone down with, etc. which can make her come across as shy, withdrawn or disinterested

• awkward movements, insecurity around physical matters

• can get hysterical when someone interferes with her plans

I've seen a ton of people go type as high valued and high dimensional Ni but some of them have strong vision and refuse to consider alternatives like ILI and IEI often seems almost like LSI and ESI but I've noticed many who are very indecisive and haven't found their vision yet.

Would Ni types be really natural at having vision or is it likely that they haven't found one which makes them look like indecisive Ne type?

What do you guys think?

I've been piecing together some patterns based on observation on how a person might dictate their approach to energy management and work ethic. Due to these patterns being quite cohesive, I am wondering if they could be somehow related to IMEs, considering Kępiński talked about energetic-information metabolism. Some people around here are very knowledgeable in the theory, and while I have my own hypothesis, I want to know what other people think, since there can be quite a bit of contradictory info out there. Here goes.

We are talking about a person that has large amounts of trouble starting tasks, but once started, it is also very hard to stop until the task is complete. This is focalized towards daily energy expenditure, and I will talk about tasks that require continuity across multiple days shortly. It is hard to understand the origin of the trouble for starting the task, it might be a question of efficiency, where tasks are selected very carefully and only those that are worth it are undertaken, and this could lead towards prolonged periods of apparent idle research. However, other reasons for failure to launch can be present. Once the task is started, there is an initial surge of energy, the person becomes hyper-active and explosive and can clear huge amounts of work in a low amount of time, however, this explosion leaves the person tired and the rest of the task becomes more slow paced. This is particularly interesting since this person doesn't know how to manage their energy in a nuanced way, they either go 100% or 0% but there is no in-between (something something dimensionality), this is why, by going 100% at the beginning of the task, they tire out quickly and then continue to go 100% but they are unconsciously more tired and go slower, at around 70%. As I said, this is a person that most of the time doesn't understand their energy levels, they don't feel tired or stressed, and can only notice that they are tired if they are yawning a lot, or their eyes are closing automatically (objective measures).

Once the task is started, this person hates being yanked out of their state of flow. This person can be engaged in this task for hours, and in their mind, it has only been minutes. They ignore bad posture, hunger, bathroom breaks etc. Yet when anything interrupts their flow, it can get very annoying and spike their blood pressure. In their mind, the task is always "about to be complete", just "two more changes and its finished", so while working on the task, the goal is always in sight, and getting interrupted feels like that goal was robbed from them, or like they are losing the great vision they had been slowly forming in their mind. This person often chooses not to engage in a task if they have another task coming up, due to not wanting to leave the task unfinished. This person also runs into the problem of prolonged breaks, if this person takes a break, the length of the break is inversely proportional to their feeling of being locked into the task. This person is also not particularly a perfectionist, it is very easy for this person to understand when the task is done, and for them, a job done (thanks J Peterman) is better than a job well done.

For tasks that require continuity over time, the trouble becomes increased, not only is it hard to begin the task in the present day, but the person is also left confused as to when to stop with their task, since there isn’t a "done" factor, so theoretically they can go on forever. And if the person stops, not only are they left with a feeling of incompleteness, but are expected to start again soon (in the next couple of days or the next week), which is, again, hard to do. This leads to some preferred working environments: for example, if the person is told on Monday to have the task done by Friday, then the person waits until Thursday to do the task in a big surge of energy, and doesn't know how to manage their time during the week, this style of work doesn't suit them, considering that if there is a surge of work on Thursday, they are Fkd; However, if the person is given lots of small 1-2 hour tasks every day, then they are able chip away at their goals perfectly fine and maintain a steady workflow, this work style is much better for them.

This is overall the natural way this person gravitates towards their energy expenditure. The problems are easily dealt with by creating a schedule and sticking to it. Utilizing clear step-by-step goals that allows the person to manage their tasks. Lets say this person decides to study 1 chapter of a book per day, however, 1 chapter is relative, some are harder, some are longer (yeah yeah..), which means one day they can be there 3 hours, and another day 30 minutes. It becomes an effort of time management rather than goal management, this person should put an alarm that rings after 1 hour of studying, and then take a break or finish studying. The person will be left with an awful feeling that they left their task incomplete (i.e "I didn't finish the chapter/paragraph"). But overall becomes a good chain that gives them control over their absolutely awful energy management.

So anyway, if you've read this far, thanks for sticking with it, and please share your thoughts on what kind of Socionics process this may be pointing towards. As I've said, I have my own theories, but I'd rather not say as to not influence the outcome. I know some people here are very knowledgeable, and I'm really curious about what you think, perhaps this is a well documented energy management style and it is pretty obvious? Overall, I'm taking this as a big learning opportunity since I'm genuinely curious. If you have any questions, need me to expand on anything? Give context? Clarify some things? Please ask in the comments, I think there is a lot I haven't shared just because I didn't want to make it too redundant. Thanks again for reading.

I've been doubting my self-typing in both socionics and Jungian for several months now, and at this point I just think I need to ask actual people instead of being in a loop of always searching and reading the same things over and over while also not completely understanding...

I think I relate most to LII and EII. I've been typing myself as LII, but EII also speaks to me. Yet there are things that don't feel right in both based on what little I know of socionics, which basically amounts to Wikisocion's function and type pages (I know there are others, I just don't know where they are or how to access them, and frankly don't really have the time or energy to read those in depth...) I feel like I'm in-between and I'm really confused.

Because so far, on the little definitions I've got:

• Base Ti (LII) The individual views reality through the lens of logic, immediately recognizing the correctness and appropriateness of things and their proper place in reality and in his system of views and behavior. => I relate, but is that really my only way of perceiving reality? I don't think so

He freely makes logical assertions, often exaggerated, about new information and experience. => yes

He holds highest those rules to which exceptions do not exist, and is a habitual critic of people or things that don’t follow a set of rules, whether they are those accepted by the community, or his own, or even the other person’s. => yes

Although he is able to adopt others’ rules, his own are always the last word, and these are subject to continual refinement. => I often refine my own logic system if I find out it might be erroneous. So I'm confused on how my own rules would have the last word since I let others influence mine... I don't think I understand.

Often seen as “demanding”, due to high standards. => I don't think so, no. Though maybe? But I don't think...

• Base Fi (EII) The individual sees reality primarily through static personal ethics and stable interpersonal bonds between individuals, including himself, where the status of such interpersonal bonds is determined by his personal ethics. => I don't know if I see it primarily through that, but yeah?

The individual is very confident in evaluating the ethical or moral qualities, and their consistency, of other people. => yes

This makes the individual seem “judgemental” or “self-righteous” to people less so inclined. => maybe? I don't think so...

If he has difficulty in deciding the status of a personal relationship, he will take action to try to reach a conclusion but if that continues to elude him, he will regard the relationship as not worth it. => yes

His own sense of constancy in personal ethics and in his relationships with others is a very strong factor in his sense of self-worth. => don't think so?

Fi in this position implies the ability to almost instantly recognize whether someone is a friend or an enemy, whether they are demonstrating good will or ill will, and whether they are drawn to or repelled by the individual. => relate

• Role Ti (EII) The individual is able to talk about things from a dispassionate academic or theoretical point of view for brief periods of time, but seems overly bookish when doing so and tends to grows tense. When feeling obliged to justify logically a personal decision taken for reasons determined by Fi, the individual attempts to do so but grows quickly annoyed especially if the inconsistency in the logical argument is pointed out. He then either explains the ethical motivation or avoids the issue altogether. = yes

• Role Fi (LII)

The individual recognizes the existence and importance of personal relationships, so he is usually cautious at first about offending others if he does not know them well. To minimize this risk he adheres somewhat simplistically to the relevant social conventions (e.g. political correctness). => yes

However, if taken too far this produces stress, as it inhibits his natural introverted logic (Ti) inclination to voice exactly what his thoughts are on a given issue or situation, with the expectation that others will appreciate his straightforwardness, rather than accusing him of being insensitive. => I think I can relate, but not exactly. I would still be tactful with it.

This caution gradually disappears as he gets to know people better. => yes, I think so

He prefers to develop relationships indirectly with others based on open conversation and common activities => not sure, again I'm not the best at socializing

And only reveals his innermost personal feelings to those he has known for a long time. => but yes, that.

He may become confused and suspicious if they are directly solicited by others. => I wouldn't say suspicious or confused, more like panicked and would probably hide them if I don't know them well or say "I don't know" or "I'm not sure".

• Suggestive Fe (LII) The individual often becomes engrossed in serious work, which leads him to neglect his complementary need for fun and emotional release. => don't think I relate... at least most of the time. I procrastinate a lot and have trouble focusing. I actually procrastinate both from work and from my own hobbies... I suspect I might have ADHD though.

He also feels vulnerable expressing himself spontaneously in public, which allows bad emotions and stress to build up, leading to depression or sudden hostility. He enjoys being around people who make him feel comfortable expressing himself, and who can make every day new and exciting. => relate

Although he may present a hard exterior in the company of strangers => I wouldn't say I'm hard, I'm just really shy and quiet. I'm not the best socially speaking.

He is likely to not be serious at all with people who know him better. => not necessarily, it depends of who I'm with. I can be serious with people who are close to me.

His behavior changes radically - a calm and serious structured person will suddenly become jovial and warm. => relate

• Suggestive Te (EII)

The individual is attracted to people seen as knowledgeable, as well as truthful and willing to share that knowledge, in matters seen as interesting and useful to the individual towards achieving productivity and efficiency. => yes.

Reliable information rather than the finished analysis is what attracts the individual; facts and explanations, not answers limited to the conclusions. => both interest me pretty much, but yes I would much rather have them all rather than just the conclusion.

For the same reason, the individual avoids people who are inclined to give out unreliable or simply untruthful information. => yes.

The individual tends to neglect to think about the productivity of his actions and unconsciously relies on others to give him directions and advice about the best, most productive ways of doing things. He has difficulties measuring how much work he has done, whether it is sufficient, and how much it is actually worth. The individual admires people who are aware of the productivity of their actions and are always trying to do something rational and worthwhile. => yes.

• Ignoring Te (LII)

The individual is adept at finding external sources of factual information and confident in his ability to evaluate their value => I don't think so...

But regards collecting data as secondary to making them fit into a consistent logical system. => yes?

To him, listing facts without analyzing their relationships is a trivial and boring exercise. He values efficiency and productivity but is skeptical that they will be achieved if one’s actions and process do not follow a clear procedure. => yes

• Ignoring Fe (EII) The individual is perfectly able to integrate in a group emotional situations, such as people having fun and trading jokes, and sustain that for a long period of time. He is also usually adept at promoting such an atmosphere himself. => absolutely not, especially when I don't know them.

However, he sees no point in doing so if his own inner emotional state does not prompt him towards that. => It's not that I see no point, I just cannot do it. I can make some small talk with a singular individual if they approach me first, but I'm otherwise pretty quiet in groups, especially when I don't know them.

Especially if he does not feel as having positive private feelings towards the other people involved. => does that refer to me not liking certain people, and thus not partaking in having fun with them? Then yes?

He is aware of the need to keep a “polite façade” in certain social situations even in the presence of people he personally dislikes or during periods of negative inner emotions, but he refuses to actively attempt to integrate in, or promote, a positive external emotional atmosphere in such occasions. His disinclination for doing so increases along with his feelings of closeness with the individuals present. => I guess yeah? If I even understand that correctly.

View Poll

The only thought going through my mind as I was watching this lol 😂

https://preview.redd.it/h4xay5si3jwg1.png?width=880&format=png&auto=webp&s=1abe9ecdb45f9e41ede4c74424d481e2fd25bbde

Disclaimer: SHS is a separate typing system that establishes a person's social purpose as opposed to their method of information metabolism, and is in fact more than just its subtype system.

Might be my people pleasing personality but I think I’ll be liked by certain people more?

I thought about my SEI friend who is always very warm, sincere and sweet. Perhaps it’s just that she tries to be more sociable, like she’ll hit up people with questions and attempt to understand by directly engaging with them, while I just like sitting back to understand first.

Most of time, I’m described as super aloof and if I do forced myself to be super friendly I feel uncomfortable cuz that’s not who I am :((

The questionnaire dropped an interesting statement to assess I definitely wasn't expecting in a sense of typing.

The thing is that I wasn't just like "uh, probably 1-2, im really bad here so 1", it was a thing I'm called out by. Ever since childhood I was excellent at maths, mental calculations, solving complicated problems, but I always had troubles with spatial thinking. I couldn't just understand it as normally people do. I can imagine it all, but realization always sucks.

Currently I'm 21 and I have gotten better at maths, better at mental calculations, at thinking and solving, but *this* is still so much of a weak spot. It even made me change my area of education. I started off at robotics but when I realized that I'm literally unable to make the blueprints and understand them, I shifted to stress analysis and now on my way to a master degree in it.

In the end of a questionnaire I got IEE (which means Ti polr, right?), the question is if it checks out, if it is a Ti polr problem or more of a Te one (as earlier I've been thinking about SEI)?

So I'm asking this just cuz i often feel like i am slightly more shifted towards Sensation>Intuition.

Their se made them so attuned to their environment, know how to size people and most of the time they are not afraid of confrontation too. They are also quite resilient. I need that as an EII so bad 🥀

Or for example do science backed research so i can confirm the relevance and existance of socionics?