Lambsauce

Lambsauce was interviewed:

Before we begin, let me give a bit of context. On this blog, I strive to make content that will be accessible to a reader in the future, that has never met the subject, and doesn't need to have met the participant who we are analyzing in order to experience and understand the sort of person that the participant presents themselves to be. But, of course, I have met these paricipants, and sometimes I have extensive experience with these participants outside of the narrow window of content that I am curating for the future viewer. As in this case, where I knew the participant, who the interviewer accurately describes as infamous, long before I ever bothered to watch this interview; in fact I only watched the interview to make this post. I had already very firmly made up my mind about Lambsauce's type well before perusing the interview. And, as a word of warning, understanding the correct type certainly is possible from the interview and there are many clues available. But, it was more obvious, from interacting with Lambsauce over the internet, and observing him from a distance, for an extended time, and I will discuss later my observations from that modality.

One clue that presents itself immediately, as Lambsauce begins talking at about 00:30, already, he shows bitingly critical remarks of the opponents of his discord server, the Jungle, as though preparing for a verbal sparring match with such critics. Even though he restrains himself, his critical outlook contrasts with the interviewer's calm, welcoming disposition.

Lambsauce has a very obvious tendency to monologue freely, to rant openly and with bluster about a wide range of topics and to change the subject frequently in his stream of consciousness.

Lambsauce has a stern, focused, intense expression throughout the interview.

Lambsauce is and analytically deconstructive and verbally combative, perhaps, as though, welcoming a debate. At 3:00, but also throughout the entire interview, he at least discusses rigor of his positions on many intellectual topics, especially personality models that he mentions repeatedly (for example, around 50:00, although he slips in to speaking about this subject during his long unfocused monologues throughout).

Some use of singsong or mocking tones as voice modulation, for example at 14:30

Lambsauce has a dismissive attitude towards other people's ideas, and often as well towards other people directly. As at 31:00, where he calls other people "retards" in no unclear terms for their ideological positions about personality modeling. Lambsauce claims to be an open-minded person, and gives an interesting answer at 45:00 in response to the question of when he last changed his mind, to which he says, all the time. But, immediately, he proceeds into a digression about other people being extremely wrong a lot, and having no evidentiary basis for their ill-formed views. Overall, in spite of his repeated claims for open-mindedness, we can see that Lambsauce is a highly stubborn, ideologically charged and often ideologically uncompromising person. Although, referring to some observations not from the video, he is not lying that he does change his mind; he has done this many times for instance in his typing work, changing frameworks fastmindedly and at seemingly random times, making him look stupid and clumsy and suggesting that he obviously did not understand the model or the subject or both, to begin with. This can be understood as partially supporting his claim of changing his mind, but more fundamentally, he is not an openminded person; rather an extremely recalcitrant, discriminating person, and who appears not to be aware of his own extreme tendency towards stubbornness and opprobrium.

Lambsauce is, in my view, an SLE. He is prone to debate and to verbal conflict, and it seems the arena of intellect is the main arena where he prepares for challenge, although Lambsauce also uses language at other times emphasizing his competitiveness and his own attitude that he was lacking confidence in the past and had to, by his own bootstraps, pull himself together.

Lambsauce's style is exaggerative and confident, and makes ludicrous, exaggerative claims (for example, at 32:00 where he grossly exaggerates the ideological consensus of typists, by mainly focusing on his narrow group of followers and ignoring completely the very large number of other typists that fervently disagree with Lambsauce about many typings). Yet, while Lambsauce's confidence, and dismissiveness of other people's negative ideas can be seen readily, he claims repeatedly to have been anxious, unconfident, and in the past to have struggled with passivity and depression. Yet, he acknowledges his confidence at the present moment, as well as his stimulation seeking behavior, and inclination to (1:01:00) "scream it [the 'interesting' information he has to share] in [others'] face[s]". His emphasis on his own prior passivity and anxiousness, is, perhaps not an untrue characteristic of his experience, but certainly exaggerated in his tendency to decide what to present to us in his inner monologue at the present time.

The "meat" of ideological matters, whether other people are right or wrong in their conclusions, is something that he is willing to very freely challenge, but as an overall theme, can be construed less as understanding the evidence (which Lambsauce claims many times to do), but really as presenting a sound argument in a debate. In other words, his approach is not trying to solve the questions independently about the world by examining lots of evidence disconnectedly, it is more a process of building, and presenting persuasively, frameworks that are well justified, and ironcladly built, defending some idea positions. The persuasive, and combative disposition of Lambsauce's inner-monologue-presented-as-debate, speaks to this. This debating style, characterized by the ideological conflict of the beta quadra, is a feature of Se blocked with Ti. In Lambsauce's case, his highly analytical tendency to challenge, but also often to randomly switch frameworks, and his view of himself as a "depressive nerd" suggests a better fit in orientation to Ti in the ego block, rather than the super-id of the EIE. Likewise, he seems very little concerned (although partially he just did not focus here) on the way other people receive his tangential monologue, somewhat unlike Fe dominant types, but perfectly fitting the mold of Fe mobilizing types that are only beginning to realize the importance of not irritating other people in their way of relating -- which he seems overall to be dismissive of; again recall his defensive reaction at 0:00:40 into the interview.




I will also, for this exercize, post in full my comments about Lambsauce from another forum, in which I argued, speaking generally, that Lambsauce is the SLE, based on his behavior over a long period of time on discord. The extent of his belligerence, and tendency to argue with others without really letting them get a word in, may not be obvious from the interview, but as before, there are numerous hints.

He seems very willing to take a direct, belligerent approach towards others, and almost instinctively puts forward ideological positions in a challenging "this is the way it is" stance. Despite his more regular certitude, he also has an inherent inconsistency and flexibility, classically characteristic of the SLE in the application of ideology, which manifests occasionally in his tendency to "negotiate" with other authoritative figures to reach an ideological consensus, and which I predict would also manifest in occasional random changes to ideologies held (NB this analysis was written a year ago, I had not observed random shifts to lambsauce's ideologies at the time, but clearly this prediction has held correct) [editors note, i wrote the parenthetical edit about this protracted prediction long before writing this blog post]. His approach to socionics is clearly rather scattered in its source material and his interpretation of interview subjects is naturally (and probably somewhat incorrigbly) hurried and impatient, and his conclusions are generally based on discretized answers with chunked information. Ideological opponents are drowned out in a neverending sea of dyspeptic verbiage, which is putatively based on reason; in a deeper view, it is also a not-so-subtle form of messaging conveying expectations of ideological conformance. Despite his intellect, he is not really a very idea-oriented person to begin with, his intellect easily falls within a typical range of the SLE (which is not to say that SLEs cannot be even more intellectual). His overall public image is relatively clumsily managed, as he fails largely to recognize that other people often do not concern with his ideological games on intellectual subjects, he does a generally poor job of reading others' lack of interest in his widely ranging authoritative commentaries and does not make himself well liked beyond a relatively narrow circle of followers that don't seem to mind his bossy mentality.

Silveranstavern interview

I interviewed silveranstavern (as you can see, the video was recording the game I was playing during the interview, in which I was only doing a fishing minigame to acquire resources, which I do during interviews because this takes approximately 0% of my attention).

Some observations that I jotted down to myself while I was reviewing this interview:

Slow, contemplative cadence of speech.

Silverantsavern presents himself very quickly as an open book, a straightforward person willing to let the interviewer, and the listener, peer inside his brain pretty openly. Within the first few minutes (2:00) he discusses also his explicit principle of openness, and provides a relevant example of his upcoming ayahuasca experience. He has a relaxed, easy disposition, as if inviting the listener to be at ease in the conversation.

He is inclined to somewhat bold actions, including for example (25:00) moving to Colombia without knowing the language. This was an intentional move, perhaps not a spontaneous action, but quite a bold, life-changing one.

Silveranstavern demonstrates some spontaneous revealing of tangible, intimate details. Compared to some people that are really allergic to being specific and inclined to generalize, Silveranstavern's openness extends into telling his history in really a lot of unfiltered detail, although in many ways, maybe in more of the interview when not guided by my specific requests to discuss some examples, he often drifts into speaking abstractly, and philosophically about complicated and spiritual topics. It's easy (for me) to imagine him, in a different conversation and a different context, eliding much specificity about what he's talking about and talking abstractly himself indirectly through buddhist phenomology, without all that much slice of life to connect it to reality -- although, maybe not, that's not how our conversation went, and the interview context is an artificial context which different people approach very differently.

The section starting around 26:00 where silveranstavern discusses the circumstances of his first marriage and his exiting that situation with children that are not fully grown, is interesting for its window into silveranstwavern's emotionality and his choices in challenging emotional situations -- and also, for his selective attention to describing in laborious detail his own emotional responses, while not focusing much on how other people felt about his actions. He seems to have a disinterest in narrating other people's points of view, and maybe even a sort of flippancy about discussing other people's emotions, almost as though it's pointless to focus on or speculate about, others' inner states.

The section and its story displays a high level of adaptability and flexibility, and willingness to take life as it comes, but also a deeply resigned passivity -- an expectation that other people will do what they will do, and there is no point in ever trying to change them or fight about the circumstances of one's life (or, in this case, his childrens' lives, either -- something that some people fight vociferously over). I don't believe this passivity is only a product of buddhist self-awareness, I think this "passive, relaxed attitude" runs more deeply and has always been there (and at points in the interview, he seems to affirm this idea that he has always been chill), although maybe it's true silveranstavern's experience with mindfulness makes him more inclined to specifically ruminate about his experiences that are in his control, and not to talk about other people who aren't in his control.

There is some explicit mention at times of the principles, ethos, or "code" used to live by (28:30).

Silveranstavern gives a pretty good, detailed overview of his kids' personalities and character. He is capable of discussing in some detail the character of others (which he was clearly prompted to do).

At 1:44:00, there is a relatively open, unfiltered conversation about silveranstavern's perception that he is a "lighthearted" person, that he prefers to be lighthearted rather than serious, although he also mentions in his self-perception that he has the ability to create a degree of seriousness at appropriate moments in life, while preferring nonetheless to travel through life more lightheartedly. While this is all self-perception that he tells me rather than shows me, it is consistent with his chilled out disposition throughout the entire interview.

At 1:53:00, there is a short, but interesting conversation about nonmonogamy in which silveranstavern describes that his current relationship is founded on the principle of "relationship anarchy" -- which seems, in addition to being an unusual way of approaching relationships, very abstractly codified, and also, maybe returns to the concept above of regarding inner emotional states, (as in, in this context, other people's expectation about how relationships might develop) with some degree of flippancy.

I type Silveranstavern as an LII. Broadly, the most important themes that stand out to me as principally influential from the interview, are silveranstavern's chilled-out relaxedness, his interpersonal passivity and lightheartedness (i.e., nonseriousness) that he discusses, with which he traverses through life. This passivity is characteristic of Si-valuing introverts, and is a very separate way of being than the indifference and usually more substantial judgments of Ni valuing types. Ni dominant types are passive in their own ways, and also have capacity with Se suggestive for bold action (that is often inconsistent) -- and silveranstavern shows a capacity for bold action, but also an overall really loose, lighthearted, chilled approach to his surrounding circumstances. It took me some time in the interview to unpack the complex, abstract, and generally buddhism-influenced self-presentation, but when I understood this chilledness, it left me clearly with the idea of an Si valuing type, and in particular, of an Fi-devaluing Si-valuing type, with a more distant connection to seriousness. The LII with Fi role has a pattern, where they sometimes have a sort of almost-but-not-quite scornful attitude towards people who are too emotional, who can't seem to figure out how to "relax" to the engagement level of their surroundings. The LII type is outwardly subdued, and also, usually subduedly respectful of others' expressions of sincerity, and so this almost-scornful-but-not-quite reaction is not always outwardly obvious, but they nonetheless may find it overbearing, although also tolerable and doable, to focus on inner emotional states for too long, whether themselves or others, and they may also desire not to subject others to too much of their own inner turmoil.

I think silveranstavern might not see himself as "flippant" as I described above, with respect to understanding, navigating, and describing, other people's inner emotional states. Although he may not see himself as regarding others' emotions with flippancy, he probably would nonetheless agree that he focuses, and in this focused infinitely more, on his own inner state of mind, than speculating or describing the actual or hypothetical states of mind of others, something he did very little of in comparison to his own very lengthy and very precisely analytical description of his own motivations for his actions. Regardless of exactly the words used to describe it, in my view this flippancy or inattention to the emotions' of others, coming short of a wholesale indifference or incompetence at dealing with emotional situations, but maybe a light preference not to a lot of the time, is totally fitting with Fi role in the alpha quadra where a preference for positive emotionality is predominant. This is the primary piece of evidence that points me to a particular quadra.

It's also easy to see silveranstavern's unrestrained openness as like that of Ne ego types, and his often analytical and abstract approach to conversations, and his occasional forays into discussing important principles more readily than details, as signals of Ti values. Those signals are fuzzier, especially occasional discussion of principles -- the LII doesn't usually tend to express their principles as dogmatic ideologies that they rant about, in the way that can be seen sometimes in the spontaneous ideological ranting of LSIs and SLEs -- it's harder sometimes to see this type as ideological, because, they present themselves as more flexible than ideologically principled, and the discussions of principles and codes, however abstract, could just be explained as passing concepts in conversation that aren't very indicative of highly structured or principled thinking. Which is true, I don't view this observation as very definitive.

It doesn't seem very likely to see him as an extrovert, although sometimes the Ne dominants can have a mix of passivity in boldness; they usually are more principally bold in spite of their avoidant tendencies, while silveranstavern in my view is more principally passive, despite his boldness.

Blocks are subcategories of Quadras

This post deviates, as my other description content does, from example-focused content. This is probably the most theoretical post that will ever be made on this blog.


People have sometimes asked me, without additional context, to explain blocks. I define blocks and their associated characteristics as follows.

A block is a combination of two elements of opposite rationality. All elements of common rationality have a defined pattern of compatibility or opposition. In other words, Te conceptually has an inherently oppositional relationship to Fe and Ti, and an inherently complementary type of opposite relationship with Fi. However, in Augusta's model of IM there is no inherent complementary or oppositional relationship between Te and Si, or more generally between any rational and any irrational element. Therefore, blocks such as Te+Si, Te+Ne, etc. can be seen as describing meaningful independent combinations of elements whose combinations constitute thematic types of information metabolism (i.e., psychological filters), similar to how IM elements themselves are thematically meaningful IM elements. Each block is specific to one quadra, and each block is a specific emphasis of that quadra (e.g. Te+Si is a delta block, since both elements are delta). Different types within different quadras, emphasize the quadra's values differently, and may or may not have a strong expression of each individual block (e.g., the LSE strongly expresses Te+Ne, but maybe expresses more weakly Fi+Si). In other words, all blocks are subcategories of quadras.

Blocks can be ordered or unordered. An ordered block X+Y emphasizes the first element X of the block as more present than the second element Y. An unordered block, can be written either as X+Y or Y+X, and does not emphasize either element as more present than the other. For example, the ordered block Te+Si could be seen as the delta flavor of Te, which describes the LSE, while the unordered block Te+Si is the block which defines the delta ST. There is heretofore no standard notation for differentiating the ordered block Te+Si from the unordered block Te+Si. I suggest, where meaningful, to clarify the difference between the ordered block Te+Si and the unordered block Te+Si by saying ordered Te+Si or unordered Te+Si. Another possible terminology for unordered blocks is Te=Si. It's fewer characters. I am not a terminology nazi, keep your concepts clear. 

A classical block is defined as a block with both elements in the mental ring, or both elements in the vital ring (alternately, either both elements are static or both are dynamic). A skew block is defined as a block with one element in the mental ring and the other element in the vital ring (alternately, one element is static and the other is dynamic). Sometimes classical blocks are also called standard blocks or accepting-producing blocks, even though the name "accepting-producing blocks" is a misnomer because classical blocks and skew blocks alike always feature one accepting and one producing function (the fault for this name is mine alone). Sometimes I also call them heteroverted blocks to be unambiguous. 

This post establishes definitions for five extensions of model A whose elements are blocks, in other words, subcategories of quadras. Rather than make creative names for these models, the names of these five models are A8, A8-skew, A16-unordered, A16-ordered, and A32, and the functions of these models will use block notation. I believe of these five models, A16-ordered is the most interesting and practical. 

These models differ in the number of functions because of their different choices of allowing the order equivalency, whether the ordered blocks are equivalent to the opposite ordered block, and are therefore unordered, and the skew equivalency, whether classical blocks are equivalent to their corresponding skew blocks leading with the same function. 

Model A32 has the most functions because it makes neither equivalency. 

Model A16-ordered, the most natural model, makes one equivalency, the skew equivalency, but holds the order inequivalency. Model A16-unordered does the opposite, making the order equivalency, but separates the skew blocks separate.

Models A8 and 8-skew, have the order equivalency, and have separate skew and classical blocks. If they allowed the skew equivalency, there is a transitivity problem, and the model would reduce to A4, a model which already exists in socionics, which is, the four quadras, with no subdivisions. 

The models are defined more formally as follows:

Model A8
Model A8 has 8 functions, which are defined as 1+2, 1+4, 2+3, 3+4, 5+6, 5+8, 6+7, and 8+7. Equivalent function names such as 2+1 are possible, but in Model A8, 1+2 is the same as 2+1.
The functions of Model A8 are the classical blocks of the quadras; in other words, the 1+2 function of the LSE is, delta ST, as in, the unordered block Te=Si. 
In model A8 there are no skew blocks. Defining that the classical block 1+2 is equivalent to the skew block 1+6, would break this model since it is unordered, since 6+1 would also be equivalent to 1+6 and 6+1 would be equivalent to 6+5. Therefore allowing for a skew block to exist in model A8 would make all blocks in the same quadra equivalent. Therefore the model would have 4 elements and not 8, so we must disallow this equivalency.

Model A8-skew
Because the Model A8 does not describe skew blocks at all, you could additionally define a new model very similar to model A8, model A8-skews, which uses skew blocks instead of classical blocks. In other words, the functions of this model are 1+6, 1+8, 2+5, 2+7, 3+6, 3+8, 4+5, and 4+7. The function 1+6 of the LSE is therefore, the delta extrovert block (i.e., the unordered block Te=Ne). It is not necessarily clear to me that this model is of more application than model A8, which emphasizes the classic construction of clubs in quadras like Delta ST, which is in my the view the most basic category subdivision of quadras.

Model A16-ordered
Model A16-ordered has 16 functions, which are, 1+2, 1+4, 2+1, 2+3, 3+2, 3+4, 4+1, 4+3, 5+6, 5+8, 6+5, 6+7, 7+6, 7+8, 8+5, and 8+7 These functions are all classical blocks. In this model, the classical blocks can be defined to be equivalent to their corresponding skew blocks, because now there is no transitive equality between 1+6 and 6+1, since the two ordered blocks are considered different depending on which function is "in charge." Therefore, the eleemnts in this model are "quadra IM elements." As an example, in the LSE, the function 1+2, which is Te+Si, is delta Te, which is equivalent to Te with Ne, which is also a valid description of delta Te. Delta Te contrasts with other elements, like gamma Te, and is also distinct from, delta Si, and delta Ne, although they closely related elements to delta Te. Likewise, the Delta Te used by the LSE as function 1+2 is the same delta Te used by the SLI in their function 2+1, and the IEE in their function 6+5, and so on, in other words, the elements of A16-ordered are quadra-element combinations in every respect.
It is worth noting also that, delta Te can be alternately defined as, the Te of the LSE. A16-ordered is the only model of the five models described here in which each socionics type has a unique block as it's leading function (this relationship is an isomorphism). 
To my readers that know that my emphasis is on quadras, it will make sense why I find this particular model, A16-ordered, of particular interest. This is likely the model with the most reasonable set of descriptions for how an individual of a certain type in socionics might represent an element. For example, the LSE has a particular attitude towards delta Te, it is their main, leading function, but characterizing their attitude towards gamma Te, which is not exactly the same as their leading function, but similar, may be well enough specified to write a description about. By contrast, writing descriptions about how individual types, like the LSE, would relate to elements differently in model A16-unordered, and model A32, are both more challenging to meaningfully specify, especially for non-ego-block blocks. (In A32, each type has two blocks that correspond to that type's identity, ie it's leading function, namely 1+2 and 1+6, and since both of these blocks describe the same type's leading function, it isn't so clear how different they are).

Model A16-unordered
Model A16-unordered has 16 functions, which are, 1+2, 1+4, 1+6, 1+8, 2+3, 2+5, 2+7, 3+4, 3+6, 3+8, 4+5, 4+7, 5+6, 5+8, 6+7, 7+8
This model represents classical blocks and skew blocks as separate functions. In other words, the LSE has as their function 1+2, Te+Si, which is distinct from function 1+6, Te+Ne. In addition, the blocks are unordered, such that The LSE's function 1+2 Te+Si, is identical to the function 1+2 of the SLI, which is also Te+Si. However, the SLI has a different function 1+6, Si+Fi, than the LSE. This model therefore describes as its elements, all possible unordered quadra blocks.
Whether or not it is sensible to write a description where the LSE's unique relationship to blocks not of its own quadra, for instance, how the LSE as a type expresses Ne+Fe, compared to Ne+Ti, is not really clear if this is grasping at straws. That said, the elements of this model are interesting to talk about because different quadra blocks represent different emphases of quadras.

Model A32
Model A32 makes both of the distinctions in A16-unordered and A16-ordered, of separating classical from skew blocks, and distinctly addressing ordered blocks where one or the other element is in charge. Therefore, the 32 functions of A32 are 1+2, 1+4, 1+6, 1+8, 2+1, 2+3, 2+5, 2+7, 3+2, 3+4, 3+6, 3+8, 4+1, 4+3, 4+5, 4+7, 5+2, 5+4, 5+6, 5+8, 6+1, 6+3, 6+5, 6+7, 7+2, 7+4, 7+6, 7+8, 8+1, 8+3, 8+5, and 8+7.
This is the set of all possible blocks representing all possible quadra emphases in every subtlety.
A full description of every type's attitude towards every function in this model, is definitely too complicated to be of use. It is fair to say that it is already grasping at straws to describe that the LSE's attitude of Ne+Fe is a meaningfully different thing to their attitude of Ne+Ti, without additionally adding more functions of extremely similar attitudes, like Ti+Ne.


One of the reasons for discussing these models is to compare one's views on how the different types have different attitudes towards blocks from other quadras. Some disagreements exist among western socionists about how emphasized certain non-quadra blocks are. Ibrahim Tencer, for instance, wrote about a 16 element model which he calls model A2 (Ibrahim, provide me with a link to the description of model A2, all I could find that is not deleted is this, which to the best of my recollection isn't structured the same way as your original article and is filled with confusing nonsense language). Ibrahim argued, for instance, that in many types the block 6+7 was used a lot compared to 6+5, which seems overall dubious but I agree that certain types (like the EIE's use of Se+Fi) seem to use 6+7 more extensively than others (like the SLI's use of Fi+Se).

A full elaboration of all of the different function attitudes in all of these models is beyond the immediate scope of this article. However, I will provide a brief outline of functions in model A16-ordered, the most interesting model here defined.

Function 1+2 This function, which is the main quadra expression of the identity type, is, well, the main quadra expression of the type, which is emphasized the most fully in their interaction with the world.
Function 1+4 This function is the main quadra expression of the kindred type. Like many other adjacent quadra blocks, it is probably not very often emphasized by an individual, but it is probably relatively easy for many people to understand.
Function 2+1 This function is the main quadra expression of the mirror type. People use this function extensively, as it is the main form of expression of their creative function. Like the creative function in model A, it is not "on" at all times, but it is a much more recurring emphasis than 2+3.
Function 2+3 This function is the main quadra expression of the supervisee type. Probably, this function has an inconsistent emphasis, certainly less persistent in its presence and goals than function 2+1. That said, as a kind of creative function, that is not on all the time, it might be on occasionally as a way in which people interact with the role function more easily than dealing with the role function.
Function 3+2 This function is the main quadra expression of the business type. This function is likely the more well represented by Augusta's description of the role function in general, which is partially valued, partially used, and has an element of colloquial super-ego feeling that one should be doing better with this function, but a lack of drive to interact with it with consistency.
Function 3+4 This function is the main quadra expression of the super-ego type. It is hard to see why anyone would focus on 3+4 rather than 3+2. As an opposite quadra block, this is pretty substantially opposed to the individual's own quadra values. Probably this block is hardly ever focused on at all.
Function 4+1 This function is the main quadra expression of the supervisor type. Between 4+1 and 4+3, both are blind spots, but probably if people's attention is redirected towards the vulnerable function, it would be redirected more readily to the 4+1 information.
Function 4+3 This function is the main quadra expression of the conflictor type. It's hard to see why anyone would focus on this preferentially to 4+1. It should be the least attended block in A16-ordered (Keep in mind that this block is equivalent to 4+7, but does not include the demonstrative function, whereas block 7+8 is equivalent to 7+4 but does include the demonstrative function.
Function 5+6 This function is the main quadra expression of the dual type. It is the main manifest weakness of the individual. Whether it is easier to access 5+6 or 5+8 is open for interpretation. If we considered skew blocks, you might consider that 5+2 is relatively more accessible and relevant, whereas 5+4 is relatively disattended. But, by the same token, the influence of the demonstrative function might make 5+8 a relatively more obvious pattern of interaction, than the "dual's" suggestive function 5+6 that seems an elusive weakness.
Function 5+8 This function is the main quadra expression of the semi-dual type. As before, it is a potentially open question whether this is easier to access than 5+6, or whether it is altogether less of a focus. One interpretation is that this block is relatively unused and unattended, and the 5+6 block is the weakness and point of growth. What do you think? Does it vary between different types?
Function 6+5 This function is the main quadra expression of the activator type. This is clearly the main expression of the strong mobilizing function, in people who strongly express the mobilizing function, which is a majority of people.
Function 6+7 This function is the main quadra expression of the beneficiary type. In all cases, I conjecture that 6+5 should be used more strongly than 6+7. But in the case of some types more than others, there is more reason to feel that they might use 6+7 more extensively. Overall, I would think of 6+7 as a relatively minor cousin to 6+5, but one which still has some emphasis in some cases.
Function 7+6 This function is the main quadra expression of the mirage or illusion type. To the extent that people focus on their ignoring function, it seems likely that they will probably focus on 7+6 much more than 7+8. But, it seems overall very likely that people will completely ignore them both, while interacting with the ignoring function primarily from the lens of 1+2 instead, or, possibly, 2+7 rather than 7+2.
Function 7+8 This function is the main quadra expression of the contrary or extinguishment type. This is the total opposite value of people's quadras and almost all of the time it will be the "true" ignoring function, ignored completely.
Function 8+5 This function is the more likely avenue of considering the demonstrative function compared to 8+7. 8+5 should probably be considered the "true" demonstrative function that is seen as a strong function in some balance with the creative function 2+1.
Function 8+7 Compared to 8+5, this function is much more likely to be seen as a waste of time or misguided approach, and probably will not be attended very much.

Ordered blocks are 16 element models and share some structural equivalence with other 16 element models. The most notable alternative 16 element model in practice are the signs of functions in Model B and Model G, developed by Aleksandr Bukalov and Viktor Gulenko, respectively. Both of these models describe their elements not as Alpha Fe and Beta Fe, etc., but instead as Fe+ and Fe-, etc. They additionally impute some semantic meaning of the positive and negative charge attributed to these elements. The semantic meaning is dubious; it makes sensefor certain elements, e.g. it makes sense to describe Delta Fi/Fi+ as positive in its judgments while Gamma Fi/Fi- is negative in its judgments. But other elements are complicated, for instance it would be logical to think of Alpha Fe as positively valenced and Beta Fe as negatively valenced, but the actual signs in model G are reversed, where the ESE has Fe- and the EIE has Fe+. Likewise, Delta Ne is described as Ne- while Alpha Ne is Ne+, the meaning of which is confusing to understand and much less obvious to apply in practice. I suggest therefore to disregard the semantic meaning of signs entirely and instead conceptualize these models as erroneous formulations of quadra-based blocks.

Also, while I refer to ordered blocks by their quadras, for instance, Alpha Fe which is the same as Fe+Si, the signed functions in the Gulenko and Bukalov models are not necessarily quadral. For example, in Model G, it is normally described that the ESE has Fe+, Si-, and, additionally, Ne- and Ti+ (whereas, the LII has Ti- and Ne+ instead). Therefore, in this model the ESE is not described as having access to Alpha Ne, but rather has Delta Ne as either the main or only type of Ne in the mobilizing function (probably the only type, since in Model G the 16 element model is not elaborated). This is aquadral, and in my view should be considered a design error. In other words, model A16-ordered is the correct 16 element model of signed functions, and model G's charges are an error. (Model B charges are different than Model G charges, but they also are aquadral in the mobilizing function. In Model B, alpha Fe is called Fe-, whereas in Model G it is Fe+, but in both models the ESE has delta Ne instead of Alpha Ne. As an aside, Gulenko used to follow the same charges as Model B, but he changed his mind in or prior to 1998, discussed here https://socioniko.net/ru/articles/sign.html)

Machine Learning Socionics Test

I am now developing a data-driven and self-reported likert style socionics questionnaires. The test items in the inventory are brought together from various different sources, and I have no idea what variables many of them measure, and moreover I have made no attempt to create any answer key to figure out what they measure. The idea of this test is to examine whether different representatives of different types will give systematically similar answers such that a machine learning classifier could predict the type a human diagnostician would assign. To the best of my knowledge, this has never been done before (if you know of anyone that has done a similar project, please let me know in the comments), in any typology (I am aware that Viktor Talanov collects extensive self-reported data in a vaguely similar vein, but does not employ machine learning to classify types, in fact his questionnaire appears to take a totally theoretical rather than data-driven approach in its design).

In order to train the classifier, a large amount of sample responses of people known to be each type is needed. In order to collect a lot of data in a way where I am confident of the ground truth types used to train the classifier, I am offering free diagnostics interviews to anyone who participates in the project and submits their answers to the lengthy questionnaire (and whose type I am not already confident of from another method). In order to do diagnostic work on a large sample, I need to be able to collaborate and discuss any interviews done with other people in private, and likewise it is important that other interested researchers and skeptics be able to examine and potentially reclassify the ground truth types in order to fully evaluate the method. As such, the interviews will be recorded and shared privately for research purposes with some people I trust, but do not need to be publically available to the world as the other interviews on my blog are. Interviews must be done over voice, although video is preferred. 

This free interview service will not last forever, but probably this project will take a very long time.

The questionnaire is divided into five sections which can be taken separately and at different times (since the whole thing is quite long). All five sections must be completed.

Section V (approximately 15 minutes)

Section R (approximately 5 minutes)

Section L (approximately 20 minutes)

Section P (approximately 15 minutes)

Section T (approximately 10 minutes)

To participate and schedule interviews, please first fill out the questionnaire with a good email address to contact you at, and I will contact you. If I do not get in touch with you after you complete the questionnaire, feel free to email me at aestrivex at gmail dot com.

Model A description

Axes

A primer on the way I see Model A: Below I describe the individual qualities of each function. But I think it's most useful to look at functional pairs or axes, such as Te/Ti in tandem, etc (as in my element descriptions). The way I think this plays out in model A is this: Each person prefers to view reality from one point of view rather than the other, for instance the LII prefers to use Ti to interpret logical information according to its structural foundations and has very little attention to its accuracy, usefulness, or quantity of evidence. Each axis is lopsided in this way, but some of the axes are lopsided more than others and with different characteristics.

Primary axis: The base function is unambiguously in charge of interpreting information on this axis and the ignoring function is not attended at all.

Creative axis: The creative function is the preferred way of interpreting this dimension of information, but ambiguously, both the creative and demonstrative functions are attended to considerably.

Vulnerable axis: This axis is more similar to the leading axis; the mobilizing function is in charge and the vulnerable function is not attended at all. But the mobilizing function is "bad at it's job." See the discussions of the super-id block below.

Suggestive axis: Here, the function typically more attended is the role function, which is the true "super-ego" of the psyche. The suggestive function should be in charge, but its so "bad at its job" that it isn't. Consequently there is a component of ambiguity in this axis also -- the role function cannot ever truly be in charge because of the suggestive function's privileged role in the psyche.

Functions in Model A

Base function

Also known as the program function, dominant function, leading function.

The base function is the function most intimately tied to the psyche of a person. The IM element corresponding to the base function can be conceptualized as the person's main cognitive filter, or lens, through which they view and interpret all of the experiences in their life. It is the primary type of information to which they are attuned, and the aspect of their experience which they are often most comfortable discussing, making inferences about, etc. Many people also have a tendency to assume that attention to one's base function is something that merely comes naturally to all people, and that "most people are like that."

Creative function

The creative function is a lens that is an important life emphasis which is not always on. The base function, by contrast, is always on -- the base function is a lens that drives everything a person sees and innately skews their perception of the world. The creative function can skew perception, and is a very conscious orientation and goal, but situationally, from time to time, it can be overlooked.

Role function

The role function is, perhaps moreso than the vulnerable function, the true "super-ego" of a person. Most people tend to be moderately aware of the information addressed by their role function, and at least somewhat actively concerned with managing that aspect of their life. At the same time, when evaluation information dealing with the role function is a concern, it is typically a secondary concern at best, and is likely somewhat limited in scope. Often these concerns mirror the idea of a "super-ego;" that is, situations that people are concerned with as something that they "should" do, or that they feel others expect them to do, rather than something they would do from their intrinsic motivations. The predominant way of evaluating the world around oneself is the base function, which actively prevents the role function's concerns from being fully realized, or even framed in the correct perspective (as any concerns related to the role function are automatically perceived through the lens of its exact opposite.)

For example, an role type might have some awareness that he is not fun, engaging, and comes across as somewhat too blunt and that this might cause him some problems professionally, but can only make mechanical and formulaic adjustments rather than really feel innately the way that he might be expected to act.

An role type might have some concern for the comfort and correct operation of their physical environment, but despite understanding the need to attend to their physical environment at heart always have an attitude of internal disinterest towards and little motivation to tend to their physical surroundings. And so on.

In practice role can be a blind spot of one's primary focus in life, and in the outward messages of one's life work likely to be neglected.

Vulnerable function

Also known as the point of least resistance (or "polr), sensitive function

The vulnerable function is the least valued function in the psyche. The vulnerable function represents an aspect of reality that is ignored, either willfully or out of sheer ignorance. It is best conceptualized as the life focus that makes you ask "Why on earth would anyone care about that?" The expression of the vulnerable function can range from blissful ignorance of the use or emphasis of this function, to a very contentious rejection of this program of life values.

It is unnvering to individuals to be expected to make use of their vulnerable function in settings where it is required of them, and unnerving to others who value the expression of that function when their interactants blithely ignore it. In some cases, the differences in values epitomized by the non-expression and lack of valuation of the vulnerable function can be the source of substantial personal, cultural, social, or ideological conflict.

For instance, an individual with as a vulnerable function might be inherently unaware of the value of experiencing his own emotional responses, and may see no need at all to speak about or reflect on and manage their emotional responses to a situation -- which may be highly unsettling to -valuing types that might expect this behavior.

The concept of a "polr hit" does not fully make sense as it is conventionally described as a paralytic response to criticism in the vulnerable function. In fact, quite often people are not at all sensitive to criticism in the area of their vulnerable function. Instead, criticism in this domain is often seen as misguided or irrelevant, or the criticism is not fully understood or appreciated. Sometimes, people feel poorly about having incited disappointment in others by not using the vulnerable function when they were expected to -- along these lines, a "polr hit" best refers to the sudden realization that one was expected to make use of his or her vulnerable function, but had not been previously cognizant that other people would care about it. Some types are more susceptible to feelings of remorse for failing to meet others' expectations, and not all types experience this to an equal degree.

It is worth noting here that, moreso than any other subject in socionics, my views on the character of the vulnerable function represent a sharp divergence from classical socionics. In classical socionics, the vulnerable function is described as a sore spot, highly sensitive to criticism and disliked by the subject whenever it is the focus of attention. I think that this is wrong, the function is perhaps disliked whenever it is the focus of attention but this is due to being a blind spot and not a sore spot, whereas Augusta clearly says it is a sore spot. Not to get into a long discussion here, but in my opinion this is the *only* really significant divergence my interpretation of socionics from classical socionics. In my opinion, the classical socionics interpretation of the vulnerable function as a sore spot is untenable and inconsistent with my observations.

Suggestive function

Also known as the dual-seeking function.

The suggestive function is the function in the psyche that underlies a person's insecurities, uncertainties, and fundamental psychological needs. The suggestive function can be immensely variable in its expression. In a basic way, people are primarily unaware of their suggestive functions. Most conventional descriptions of the suggestive function describe it as a domain which people are incapable of producing for themselves, but look for in others, and unconsciously expect others to supply in their interactions in the social world. Substituting my own views for that of the conventional literature -- that is not true; that is, it is entirely possible for people to produce their suggestive function themselves, though to do so tends to require what effectively amounts to laborious spiritual betterment.

The suggestive function is more simply a lens through which people have enormous difficulty perceiving the world; often people are instinctively unaware of the alternate explanations for others' behavior as related to the information in the suggestive function. In reality, however, many interactions and quadra values dispositions are characterized by use of the suggestive function, and it can also be a sort of doorway by which people newly (and perhaps obsessively) see the world in a different light.

More deeply in the psyche, however, the suggestive function is undernurtured rather than painful. While it is often useful to conceptualize the suggestive function as a painful lens viewed with difficulty, this isn't exactly true. What the suggestive function is is really a lifelong function of growth that starts out undernurtured and unattended. But, when it emerges, it is not because of outside impetus -- maybe something else had something to do with its emergence -- but it is very important to remember that the orientation to the suggestive function existed all along, it merely needed time and space to grow.

Becoming more aware of and skilled in the use of one's suggestive function can be part of a process of growth and acceptance of one's insecurities. However, excessive use of the suggestive function can also come across as excessive, over-the-top, and annoying, especially to those that don't value the function. The phenomenon is similar to how one's obsessions can come across as annoying to others.

Mobilizing function

Also known as the estimative function, or the hidden agenda, nomenclature introduced by Sergei Ganin, but this name is misleading and I do not use it.

The estimative function is a lot like the suggestive function, in the sense that it is a point of growth that is highly valued and essentially painfully disattended. However, it is less of all these things; it is more towards the surface, more accessible, and of less catalysmic psychological importance.

The suggestive function is seen in the classical literature as something that cannot be produced by the self and instead as something that is "sought" in a dual or other relation. While this isn't necessarily completely true, it's a useful abstraction for understanding the estimative function. In contrast to being sought out and not actively attended to by oneself, which is how the suggestive function at least can go, the estimative function is more like something that is actively produced by the self, and perhaps guided later if necessary. Because it is produced by the self, and still painful -- more painful than ego functions, for instance -- there is often a quality of stubbornness towards ones evaluations from the suggestive function; as in the unwavering and immovable character judgments of estimatives, or the immovable ideological judgments of estimatives, and so forth (see expat's essay on the pathetic hidden agenda -- I will try get a copy of it at some point and put it on this blog).

Like the suggestive function, the estimative function is a point of growth that may not be very present early in life, and may be a life focus adopted somewhere in between. However, even so it is more conscious and more on the surface when not emphasized than the suggestive function.

Ignoring function

This function is the second-least valued function in model A, second to the vulnerable function. It is typically the function that one cannot bring oneself to care about or use, and results in boredom and disinterest when people are forced to use it. People may try to avoid placing themselves in situations or environments that call for this function.

If the vulnerable function constitutes an "active" or "conscious" rejection of a certain form of information exchange, the ignoring function consistutes a "passive" or "unconscious" such rejection -- one out of sheer disinterest and apathy rather than conscientious devaluation. In this way, the ignoring function is actually less in conscious view, and less utilized, than the vulnerable function, in my opinion.

Demonstrative function

The demonstrative function, a lot like the role function, is a sort of partial life value. It's easy to reason about the demonstrative function and very easy to engage and pay attention to in the right circumstances, but inasmuch as it flies in the face of one's more pressing values in the creative function, it is easy to discard. That said, the polarity between the base and ignoring function favors the base function orientation unambiguously; the polarity between the creative and demonstrative function is ambiguous. Although when one looks the beneath the surface the quadra-favored orientation is clearly the driving value and the demonstrative a dismissable value, it isn't always easy to see that.

IEE description

Dominant extroverted intuition

IEEs are predominantly motivated by their feelings of interest and boredom. They are attracted to novel ideas, unusual or peculiar goings-on in day-to day life, and new experiences. They may have a tendency to frequently engage themselves in novel life "projects," which can and often consist of novel concepts or fields of thought, new activities, and new lifestyles (this list is not all-inclusive). These types of projects often take the form of activities that are uncommon, concepts that are unknown or avocations that have not been done or tried before. Regardless of the nature of their interests, they often have a tendency to try to accumulate as much knowledge about the field as they can, and sometimes to improve the field by finding new ways of conceptually framing its basic principles (needs an example). Eventually, once there is nothing left to discover, or when they simply become bored, they will follow their curiosity and find a new topic of interest.

Many IEEs require a certain degree of freedom from obligation in order to do their work and pursue their sometimes idiosyncratic interests, to the point where they may dramatically eschew conventional lifestyles. Some IEEs may have an irrational dread of working at a desk job or an office where they do not have the opportunity to pursue their whimsical hobbies. However, they often overestimate the torturous ordeal of having to perform specific chores that are not in line with their interests, and many IEEs that are acclimated to the reality of their obligations may not share this trepidation at having to fulfill them.

IEEs are often spontaneous and sometimes quite distractible individuals whose natural energy level leads them to be working on something or doing something most of the time (in contrast to Ni dominant types whose natural state is one of inertia and contemplation). However their work is often periodic in nature rather and tends to be on whatever projects they have involved themselves in at the moment, or whatever they are interested in doing at the moment, rather than a consistent schedule or routine. Many IEEs routinely have spur-of-the-moment ideas or curiosities, and may be inclined to look up random information or do arbitrary things that have occurred to them in lieu of whatever they might have been working on previously.

IEEs, perhaps more than any other type, often have a tendency to seek out multiple perspectives and viewpoints on controversial matters. They are rarely tied down to any particular ideology and often have an implicit sense of faith that others are as intellectually open as they are. IEEs frequently have a innately optimistic disposition (despite how bleak they perceive the facts of any situation to be), and often earnestly believe in the value of a process of thorough, respectful, and politically correct discussion of controversial matters, and often that through a such due process of formal exposition of viewpoints, most reasonable people will come to a consensus as to the essential facts and truth of the debate.

IEEs often tend to mentalize and verbalize matters of personal development, individual qualities, and significant personal experiences, and often develop connections best with others through disucssing matters of personal development that are close at heart to them. They may have a sort of innate tendency to spontaneously try to help others find an appropriate outlet for their particular talents, focusing on the potential positive aspects of their character; they may become engrossed over what people might become rather than what they are currently, and thus have a tendency to be able to see the positive side of everyone.

Creative introverted ethics

At first glance, IEEs are usually friendly, propitious and accepting people. They often enjoy interacting and learning from all types of people and tend to enjoy cultivating a sincere atmosphere of passive good will, where others can feel comfortable and accepted for who they are.

Like SEEs, IEEs are usually aware of and highly influenced by their emotional responses towards other people, things, or situations, but unlike SEEs they are less likely to be driven by their emotional reactions quite as viscerally; instead, their emotions are more likely to drive them to be a bit avoidant. They are often disturbed by conflict or aggression, and rather than espousing a confrontational or accusatory attitude, when possible they often prefer to politely smile and avoid being drawn into contentious arguments. They may be also somewhat fettered by and avoidant of situations replete with feelings of social awkwardness or situations in which their autonomy over their activities or choices is threatened.

They may be inclined to keep track of a large network of social acquaintances with whom they feel a significant connection. Many IEEs share a common pattern in that for them mental stimulation is often interpersonal; they may extensively enjoy interacting with many different people and find a situation boring if there are no interesting people with whom to engage in conversation. They are typically more oriented towards building relationships than maintaining them, and can seem somewhat transient and sporadic in their presence, but they may see the role of building their relationships as principal in their lives.

However, for all that IEEs focus on collaborating and building relationships, they are nonetheless internally independent and sometimes unwilling to develop connections with people in such a way that would restrict their ability to follow their own interests. As a result, for all the connections they have built, they may sometimes feel that they are not sharing the important things in their life. IEEs choose their own interests and have a somewhat hands-off approach towards what other people choose to do. It can be a point of growth for IEEs to be able to impose themselves just enough so as to include others in their interests and activities.

Role extroverted sensation

IEEs are able to focus themselves on matters of willpower and can be resolutely focused on achieving goals, but they have a somewhat philosophical attitude towards goal-oriented behavior and material pursuits. They are capable of being drawn to exhibiting aggression and sometimes feel it necessary to act in a territorial and confrontational way (especially in unfamiliar situations where they feel threatened by others' expectations), but usually tend to avoid aggressive or confrontational behavior and are more often drawn to more informal environments where they can express their frivolity, spontaneity, and engage others. They are typically difficult to anger and prefer relaxed and non-confrontational environments to competitively charged ones.

IEEs are usually not very materialistic and are rarely motivated by or attached to material possessions. They are much more deeply driven by their peripatetic interests, and by their relationships with other individuals.

Vulnerable introverted logic

IEEs are inclined to be sensitive to and to reject in their lifestyle societal or social rules that limit their freedom to expand into whatever interest draws their attention. IEEs may feel as though they require complete autonomy over their life circumstances, and may expect the ability to lead a lifestyle that would afford them the ability to move to China at a moment's notice. They are inclined to avoid structuring their lives much and are especially mindful of rules and regulations that they believe might limit their future actions.

IEEs can express contemptuous attitudes towards individuals who they perceive as narrowly focused on the world, without taking an appropriately multiperspectival approach. With Ne + Fi values, IEEs are inclined to be principally forgiving of others -- concerning themselves more with considering the possible causes for others' misdeeds than with condemnation. Though not normally deeply irritable people, IEEs can become suprisingly irritable when dealing with people that flagrantly reject the multiperspectivality which they find obvious -- people who narrowly focus on essential facts without taking contexts into consideration, or people who have strict and unbending viewpoints on everything.

Suggestive introverted sensation

IEEs are neglectful of their inner needs. Stereotypically, this deficit is described with the somewhat hackneyed idea that as Si suggestives fail to notice when they are hungry, or too cold, etc. While this stereotype contains a certain amount of truth, it is overly extreme, but it captures in a more easily accessible way what it means to lack attention to one's inner physical needs. While IEEs may be so unaware of their internal physical state that they will not realize they need to eat in the moment, what is more realistic is that they will not attend to their internal physical state somewhat in advance. For instance, they may be so attentive to their projects and the ideas they have about what to do, that they may forget to bring with them a bottle of water and much later realize that they are thirsty and have put themselves in a position where their physical needs cannot be easily attended to.

More generally than physical needs, IEEs are unaware of their environment. While they can often be drawn to and relaxed by natural settings, they tend to have so much going on in their heads that they forget to give themselves time to appreciate such places. IEEs naturally underestimate the extent to which their surrounding environment and their physical well-being has an effect on them, although they can learn to adapt to this state of affairs very well. When they become aware of their environment, or when they are made aware of their environment, they are able to identify necessary changes (expansive possibilities) to the environment to improve their lifestyle and well-being (For instance, Rick DeLong speaks of things such as his propensity for addiction to puzzle games which eat up his time and limit his productivity, so consciously altered his living environment to make those puzzles difficult to access). Being aware of the impact of the environment is the principal deficit of attention.

Mobilizing extroverted logic

IEEs can have a tendency to play the role of an information gatherer. IEEs are motivated by their transient interests, and may express these interests by quickly gathering a large amount of information on a particular topic that strikes their fancy, before moving on to something new.

IEEs, perhaps moreso than most other ethical types, can be unattached intellectuals. Their approach towards the intellectual realm could be summed up as being open-minded and politically correct. They can have an orientation towards collecting and disseminating objectively measurable and observable facts. Moreso than most types and much like ILEs, IEEs often view knowledge advancement as a collaborative process, about which they might invite dialogue and discussion. As IEEs are oriented towards Ne and others' potential, in the intellectual and factual realm IEEs' basic attitude is the opposite of cynicism; they embody the principle of valuing others' contributions as made in good faith, and they can tend to believe that other people are persuaded by facts (whether or not this is true). Ironically, for their big-picture orientation, IEEs may end up doing important intellectual dirty work; fact checking, examining primary source material, etc.

Despite their factual and open-minded orientation, IEEs are not unattached and, as Te estimatives, can have a bit of a sore spot towards criticism of their process of information gathering, although this soreness is alleviated by open-minded and factually oriented criticism, and exacerbated by the appearance of stubbornness and certitude.

Ignoring introverted intuition

IEEs are constantly focused on novel activities, ideas, insights, and events. Because they are always interested by something new, they do not spend lots of time on the same topics as Ni types do. They typically do not spend much time in a dreamy, laconic, or reflective state; they prefer to be on the move and doing something new and different and find it very dull to be focused on the same ideas for too long. They may find such inertia and limited scope in life focus a little bit unsettling in others.

IEEs' interests tend to be directed towards practical problems rather than completely abstract or theoretical topics, reflecting their fundamental orientation towards acceptance and improvement of the world around them. To an IEE, the question "What if?" usually applies to something that the IEE can do to change his future, not some sort of alternate reality, such as "What if I bike instead of drive to work?" as opposed to "What if gravity didn't exist?"

Demonstrative extroverted ethics

IEEs are partially attentive to the exterior emotional atmosphere surrounding them. They may freely enjoy atmospheres where people are cooperating well and having fun, and is moderately affected by the miasma of toxic individuals who mordantly disrupt a pleasant atmosphere. However, they also see an excess attention to creating a pleasant atmosphere, such as by an individual who can't handle an unfocused group discussion, as overkill.

Ultimately, instead of being strongly affected by the exterior emotional space, IEEs are affected by their inner emotional experience. While they are affected by conflict, they may see it as more important to value the individual and are able to see multiple perspectives when dissensions arise. They tend to devalue affiliations and ideologies and view others based on their individual personal qualities.

Interestingly, IEEs may resemble IEIs in their emphasis on individualism and acceptance of others' perspectives. However, IEIs emphasize individuality for much different reasons -- they are not fundamentally disinterested in ideologies and affiliations, and they sometimes preach the virtues of the individual primarily because they wish their presentation in exterior emotional space to be genuinely their own, different from IEEs' attention to individual potential.

SLI description

Dominant introverted sensation

SLIs are focused, in principle, on their personal experiences in the world and exude a sense of calmness. Calmness in this context refers to the orientation of SLIs to attend to the internal demands that affect them, and to avoid being perturbed by the external world, especially the aspects of the external world that are outside of their control. This calmness is often outwardly visible -- they ignore the superfluous experiences that worry others, avoid speculating about things which cannot be known, and do not see the point of worrying about things outside of their control. While this calmness can sometimes be tangible and visible in SLIs, its existence is more as an abstract ideal of than a pervasive reality. Which is to say, SLIs also are susceptible to be ill-tempered and overwrought (within the moment) about the external demands in the world that face them.

The aesthetic ideals of SLIs tend to be a bit eccentric and in some instances are outright bizarre. SLIs are often not concerned with maintaining appearances or upholding the aesthetics of others. They can be rather spartan in their living needs, requiring little luxury as opposed to functional items -- although if they decide an item is necessary, they often do not hesitate to buy the best product possible. They often have very moderate, comfortable dress. They are, however, often proactive in matters pertaining to the functionality of their living conditions. SLIs are stereotypically apt at do-it-yourself mechanical matters. SLIs commonly engage in personal mechanical projects and do not shy away from the use of their own hands. They are typically in tune with the physical experience of their environment; many SLIs are constantly aware of physical sensations that surround them and how they affect them, and SLIs often seek to surround themselves with nature, eschewing the unsightly morass of industrial society.

SLIs can sometimes seem to have a very personal and quiet attentiveness to their own well-being and understand the signals that their bodies send them. This does not mean that SLIs are always well versed in medicine or medicinal remedies, but rather that they are attuned and responsive to the natural self-regulatory messages that their bodies send, such as stress, which SLIs do not often appear to suffer from (rather their lifestyle emphasizes "calmness"). Nor does this mean that SLIs always make entirely healthy decisions; sometimes the demands of their internal state can outweigh health concerns, such as in the case of a craving for potato chips. It is, however, not uncharacteristic for an SLI to self-correct aspects of their lifestyle in order to improve their physical state. In contrast to types, this is rarely motivated by a forcible desire to improve one's health, but is instead merely a response to greater attention devoted to the effect of environment on the SLI's internal physical state (One SLI I know refused to use a loud graphics card in his computer, because its fan was too loud and he was unwilling to tolerate such an environment. He eventually replaced the card with a quieter model, although not at all quickly or with a sense of urgency to fix the problem). SLIs can communicate their physical experiences and take concern in the health of others, but often tend to be somewhat reclusive in their interests and do not usually spontaneously do so unless requested.

SLIs can be good at mapping out their environment. They have a tendency to explore and pay attention to their surroundings and sometimes naturally know what is located where. Once they've developed a functional lifestyle, they can be hesitant to change it, but they have the ability to exhibit a detailed awareness of where different goods and services can be procured in the surrounding vicinity.

Creative extroverted logic

SLIs are often practical, direct, and formal in their demeanor. Typically SLIs possess a dry, matter-of-fact method of discourse, and value clarity and directness of communication. SLIs generally focus on communicating accurate information and neglect dealing with emotional aspects or motives in conversation.

SLIs are often very pragmatic. They often possess a great deal of practical knowledge, potentially including mechanical knowledge, skill with tools, managing one's finances, technical abilities, historical knowledge, medical/scientific knowledge, or a myriad of other topics. Often SLIs focus extensively on developing practical knowledge that facilitates functional, efficient lifestyles and often take an active role in crafting their own living environments. They enjoy such processes as analyzing and comparing of different goods and services and generally do not delegate such tasks to others, instead preferring to take an active, personal role in their decisions.

SLIs are generally uncomfortable taking no action if their living environment or their immediate surroundings are not operating with a sense of efficiency. An SLI might be inclined to see unnecessary waste of resources (such as energy, water, money, or living space) as an unacceptable circumstance. Some SLIs strive towards a lifestyle in which everything operates smoothly and waste is eliminated. Even SLIs that are not so extreme usually are disposed to acting on their internal concerns, and have a deeply subject-oriented relationship towards effecting tangible and effectual changes to improve or make satisfactory their surrounding environment.

Role introverted intuition

SLIs are capable in the areas of mental abstraction, the use of their imagination, and making sense of patterns and phenomena around them. Usually, however, SLIs do not spend much time in fantasy worlds or inside their own heads, instead preferring to focus on the richness of their physical experience.

SLIs often feel a need to maintain some amount of autonomy over their lifestyles so that they are not bound by others' schedules or demands. They generally dislike hurriedness and prefer to operate on their own terms. They dislike relying on others or on the outcomes of various surrounding events that they have no control of; they instead often prefer to take an active, personal role in projects of importance to them.

In general, SLIs are less interested in information that is abstract or removed from their experience; they instead focus on what they have experienced or what has affected them directly. In some cases this can lead to overanalysis, misrepresentations of relative importance, and scattered understanding. They are prone to occasionally harbor doubts about the fullness of their mental representations of abstractions, hypotheticals, or situations that they are not directly involved in, which they do not really know how to resolve.

Vulnerable extroverted ethics

SLIs are generally somewhat reclusive and fairly emotionally stoic. In situations where they are expected to engage emotionally, they can appear cold, dull, or antagonistic. In many cases they do not see the point of and prefer to avoid such situations as those with loud, rowdy behavior and prefer to subsist in more relaxed environments.

SLIs can be largely oblivious to social conventions. They generally do not try to follow the crowd unless there is some practical reason to do so. They are prone to dislike the spotlight and to prefer to travel on the less beaten path. They are often quite individualistic; they do not naturally seek the approval of others and are mostly self-subsistent in their activities. Much of the time they do not necessarily dislike spending time with others, but are perfectly content to do things that do not require interacting with others and are prone to somewhat neglect the importance of emotionally-based interaction. For this reason they can be perceived as exhibiting antisocial tendencies.

SLIs' are minimally aware of others' emotional responses and tend to speak in straightforward language. Sometimes they can appear aggressive and respond critically on issues in which they hold strong opinions. This can lead to the perception of SLIs as hostile and, on occasion, arrogant or uncompromising. Often, however, SLIs do not act in such a fashion; such aggressiveness is usually limited to issues in which SLIs are very opinionated -- these can include events in which their lifestyle has been threatened, or if something they require is functioning improperly in a way they do not fully understand.

Suggestive extroverted intuition

So is the suggestive function important or isn't it? SLIs typically depend most extensively on firsthand experience to learn about things around them. They often seek to be pragmatic individuals who are generally down-to-earth and unaware of hidden meanings. They often do not emphasize unique aspects of their character, instead preferring the background and directing their attention towards the goings-on of their immediate environment.

SLIs can tend towards an overly bland and conservative lifestyle. They often lack spontaneity and may exhibit the sentiment that something is missing and that little in their lives is novel and interesting. They appreciate people who exhibit a well-developed imagination, spontaneity, and new ideas. Such people often broaden the SLI's perspectives and give them a myriad of new experiences to draw upon. They are often recruited as willing collaborators into the constant unusual pursuits of IEEs.

Mobilizing introverted ethics

SLIs are usually not focused on and are often unaware of emotional considerations in conversation. They are generally not good at reading people's emotional states and are often not inclined to perceive or speculate about others' underlying emotional states or motivations that are not obvious from their behavior. This can sometimes make them appear uncaring and insensitive.

Some SLIs do not consciously acknowledge the importance of their own emotions, and many try not to allow their emotional states to influence their decisions or pragmatic focuses. Nonetheless, SLIs are not immune to emotional influence, but they often do not realize how strong their emotions can be until they experience them.

SLIs are usually not very gregarious and have difficulty establishing new interpersonal connections. They tend to value established attachments very deeply, but often they are not focused on emotional bonds; instead, their lifestyle leads them towards a path of relatively peaceful seclusion, and they may understate the importance of people in their lives or be disinterested in trying to pursue connections with others.

Though SLIs are usually respectful and good-natured people, they do not always show this side of themselves. Depending on circumstances they can appear self-righteous and stubborn. This most commonly happens when they perceive that someone is behaving in an obviously insincere manner or hindering their goals or their lifestyle.

Ignoring extroverted sensation

SLIs are not usually extensively focused on power politics or hierarchies, exercising control over others, or outwardly flaunting their status or strength. They usually regard such matters with utter disinterest, and may feel bothered by environments where such expressions of power are the norm.

SLIs tend to be very placid and demonstrate their aggression on infrequent basis. Usually this aggression is not spontaneous or pent-up, but rather a response to something or someone in their environment that is violating their expectations or causing damage to the immediate environment, such as a malfunctioning piece of equipment or a person who is carelessly interfering with existing resources. Mostly, however, SLIs are fairly laid-back and accepting of events around them. SLIs may feel a need to control their living environment with a fair amount of autonomy, but rarely are inclined to exert control over others with whom they interact.

Demonstrative introverted logic

SLIs often like to philosophize and analyze life, but they use logical categories situationally rather than searching for a single cohesive structure for understanding the world. They tend to feel that life is difficult to categorize and should simply be experienced for what it is. Often the information that they focus on is loosely structured and instead falls within such disciplines as the realm of current events, science, practical knowledge, or the SLI's field of expertise.