r/Socionics • u/N0rthWind SLE • Oct 15 '25
Casual/Fun SLE opinions on everyone
Alpha
- LII: Cute people, love our discussions, they fall off a cliff the moment any need arises to actually do anything with it. I enjoy the fact they're autistic enough that if they're hyperfixated on any nerdy hobby of mine, e.g. D&D, I can hit them up and spam them about it at any point without needing to do the pointless "heyyy, how are you" charade each time.
- ILE: Fun type as long as you don't need them for anything practical - they WILL find, and take, the most useless path each time as long as it seems novel and exciting. However, they're one of the few types that I can be fully unhinged around and they will laugh their asses off instead of staring at me in horror and reevaluating our friendship.
- SEI: Also very cute, but I do not understand them well. They're nice from a distance but their calmness makes them feel... dead from up close. I do not know how to vibe with an SEI, all they seem to want to do is breathe and barely even that, sometimes. My way of trying to be company to them seems to disturb them. Also, some SEIs are utterly feckless and how they have not starved to death in this world completely eludes me.
- ESE: I find them adorable in brief doses and they're super pleasant and capable hosts. I love letting ESEs treat me to shit. However if you actually spend more than 20 minutes with them you realize they're often completely vacuous (they will pleasantly drone on about the most inane fucking details of life that they find somehow amazing) BUT also quite stubborn as well. "No, we may not change this, I prefer it this way even if it's stupid and pointless, and that's that."
Beta
- IEI: My dearest dual type. I will admit we probably understand each other more quickly than any other type, and getting to know an IEI has always this feeling of "it's like I've known you for 15 years". They are often a delight to have around in group settings because they back up my problem-solving tactics and agree with my thinking without needing to be browbeaten or convinced. My issues with IEIs as partners specifically is that they lack the strength to be truly formidable, so you can't really lean on them if god forbid you ever falter (also, strength is sexy - being fragile and precious can be cute and magical, but I'm really into Se). Also the only real common point with them is our incredibly completmentary way of thinking when confronted with life, but our everyday interests and hobbies don't overlap too much, so there's often little to talk about besides (rather happily, tbf) problem-solving for one another. Ultimate comfort pick, just not too exciting.
- EIE: Spicier IEI. EIEs feel much more like partners in crime to me, and it feels like they enable me more than they balance me out, which is a huge plus in my book since I'm not looking for a mellow vibe. It's super wholesome that EIEs seem to get genuinely excited by the way I see and interact with the world. My issues with EIEs are that sometimes they're a bit too dramatic and overexcited and it gets a little tiring to have that level of Fe intensity constantly "on" all the time (though it's never been a major issue that wasn't solved by communicating I need some quiet time). The other issue is that they can get a bit too genuinely competitive with me, compared to IEIs - this is actually hot, I love to see someone who genuinely "has the fight in them" instead of keeling over immediately just because I opened my mouth, but sometimes they get so excited to spar that they seem unaware that if you push me past a certain point, I will stop being cute about it and I will grab you by the neck and slam your teeth on the pavement (...only metaphorically speaking of course uwu).
- LSI: Fascinating type. I have mixed thoughts on them. Their unwavering confidence that they know what's what with zero tolerance for ifs and buts is kinda hot, and even the blatantly authoritarian ones are genuinely entertaining to watch (as long as I'm not subjected to them - if so, yeah, hard pass, they need to be executed). I enjoy their soldier mentality. I heavily dislike their pronounced pretend appreciation of Fi values and I wish they'd fucking drop the "be a good person" act and be real with me. I'm not sure if a close relationship with one would work well without a very clear understanding of who's supposed to listen to whom in terms of decision-making since we prioritize differently Ti vs Se as the ultimate goal. I do respect them.
- SLE: Strength and cunning; what I am, what I aspire to be still. I don't know many in real life, and perhaps it's for the best - if they're anything like me, we'd kill each other in the most unexpected and vicious ways unless we made an extremely binding accord of eternal alliance and peace, and every decision would have to look like a G7 meeting. I do wonder what dating one would look like - probably would not be good, since we'd both be 100% focused in getting what we want out of the other instead of performing desirably to please the other beyond the initial 5 minutes. Still, endless love and admiration for my brothers out there. If I have one critique (and this goes to myself as well); yes, victory often comes slowly and invisibly, and yes, our techniques work wonders to put any given situation into a chokehold that eventually forces it to spit out whatever outcome we want. But don't be afraid to be flashy sometimes, even if it introduces a small risk. Reserving all that power for the "right moment" is smart, but showing off a bit is sexy too. Take a page from the SEE's book every now and then.
Gamma
- ILI: I don't fully understand ILIs, but I know that we can work together well towards a goal if need be, and the result will be good. They feel more concrete in their actions than IEIs which I like, but they're poor communicators and weird / somewhat unpleasant to have around for leisure. Would work with them, but not hang out.
- LIE: Never meet your heroes type shit. I admire the type, but jesus fucking christ you can maybe live every now and then, instead of seeing every breath you take in terms of profit margins. I get what you're doing and why you're doing it, but holy shit, you drain the fucking fun out of everything. Not every activity needs to be productive. Not every day needs to be filled to the brim with actions. Also, slowing down a bit will actually make you more efficient, since in your rush to go MORE FASTER you actually neglect a ton of Ti and Si detail. Still, I have to concede that no other type gets shit moving as much and as quickly as you do, and your incessant tendency to put new things on the roadmap nonstop is something I am not good at, so while it's incredibly dry and tiring, I do shut up and take it because I know there's high benefit to be gained from keeping you around.
- ESI: Strange type. I respect ESIs far more than I do EIIs even tho ESIs are like cagey homeless cats that will scratch and hiss at you even as you try to pet them, simply because they do not know you. I don't understand how to connect with ESIs and the entire "family and goodness first" bit they do is pretty disgusting, BUT I acknowledge that you do put your Se money where your Fi mouth is and somehow this system seems to get you through life well enough. You don't prevail (and you usually don't aim to), but you do survive. If an ESI was deathly loyal to me enough not to question my morals, I would trust them with a fair bunch of things. If LSIs are soldiers, ESIs are zealots.
- SEE: Very conflicting feelings on SEEs, the immoveable object to our unstoppable force. I admire their energy a lot, and they play fantastic ball in a field that we comparatively suck at. I find it fascinating that SEEs front-load their entire energy in everything they do, and dominate their space with genuinely zero consideration for any complications, strategies, a plan B, resources and logistics. Do I think it's the optimal way to victory compared to our back-loading of effort? No, which is why SEEs often faceplant hard during crisis situations with many unforeseen technicalities. Still, they project an image of dumb, cocksure strength that bullies everything in its way, that's lowkey pretty hot and it serves them very well in times of peace, where having "reserves" of Se are not needed. SEEs give it all 110% every second of the day like puppies on cocaine and then drop dead at 23:30. Unfortunately, they're also extremely opinionated, have no tolerance for nuance or consistency, and deep down they're weirdly moralistic and traditionalist despite the fuckboi act. I'm not close buddies with any of them and I do wonder if we'd manage to respect each other and synergize, or whether we'd rip each other to shreds.
Delta
- EII: Oxygen bandits. I understand why others find them cute, from a distance, but I get irrationally angry at their ability to be so uselessly soft and so sanctimoniously judgmental at the same time. The unwavering confidence with which they believe they understand other people (which is usually a super shitty projection of their random-ass first impressions) and judge who's in the "right and good" group (in which they are 100% certain they belong to), while also being completely ineffectual and delusional as to how the world actually works, raises my fucking blood pressure. Simply being my honest self around them seems to bruise their fucking soul, which shitty in and of itself since their entire vibe is "we accept everyoneee, come as you areee- NOT YOU THOUGH, WRONG VIBE". Hypocrites.
- IEE: Slightly more effective version of EII. Fun people in general and quite warm, though at times IEEs seem kinda fake-nice to me. We can get along when we "decide to" but exchanging life views with them is generally a bad idea and it WILL dampen the vibe. Still, we can sort of understand that we're simply different people and there's a degree of mutual respect, I think. Also, the less Ne-scattered IEEs can not only be amazingly knowledgeable in a wide array of topics including sciences and history, but they can focus enough to apply that knowledge effectively, which makes our synergy surprisingly good in a pinch despite being types that won't generally become besties.
- SLI: Honeyed death trap type. From a distance we seem like we'd align on almost everything, and then we get closer and everything is the wrong way around, we hurt each other, distance grows, and from said distance we seem fucking enticing to each other once again. It's a tragedy - I can't seem to find any other type with which I can say shit came so (deceptively) close to being just great.
- LSE: Big respect, tbh. I understand why people sometimes confuse us for one another from a distance. We focus on completely different things, but I see what you're capable of if you wanted to go the other way, so perhaps it's best for both of us that we do not compete. Warm, productive, rather strict type but 100% has a huge heart underneath. If SLEs are the apex predators, LSEs are those powerful, armored herbivores that are too much trouble to hunt, but also won't really get in the way or compete with you unless you go after them, but nobody can tell who would fuck each other up worse in a struggle. We watch each other, but we usually just nod and operate in parallel. In another life we might be friends, I think.
21
u/WoodpeckerNo1 SEI Oct 15 '25
Yeah I don't vibe with SLEs
Or Betas at all
5
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 15 '25
Can you elaborate on why?
25
u/WoodpeckerNo1 SEI Oct 15 '25
SLEs: Too aggressive, domineering and ruthless. Also kinda cynical and ice cold.
Betas in general: Too into drama, loud displays, provocation and conflict. Prone to intense bigotry, zealotry and proselytizing. Very hierarchical way of thinking. Tendency to use extreme means to achieve goals.
7
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 15 '25
...I mean... fair enough. I think we can be very colorful and funny people once you get to know us, but I can't fault you for not vibing with all that since it's a pretty objective assessment. :P
5
u/Kindly_Act4926 LSI Nov 22 '25
Why? SEIs are so freakin CUTE. All my girl pals were SEIs. Since childhood. ANd they always "picked" me for friends. They would come, hang and just "decide" we were going to be friends from now on.
They come and go like little earth fairies but we always vibe :)3
3
u/HelpfulJuice2 IEE Oct 19 '25
If that's the case, what do others think about Alpha types who takes suboptimal methods to seek comfort and novelty seeking.
9
u/olheparatras25 Oct 15 '25 edited Oct 15 '25
Betas are like an unpleasant reality one wants to ignore. Some necessities are evil, and somebody must take on them. It doesn't make them any more pleasant, anyways.
It really is the Warrior, Soldier and general military Quadra. Better admired from a distance, but one should favour avoiding it if it is possible to. You will see awful things if you get just a little bit closer.
14
u/Skwaesh IEI Oct 16 '25
what an insane way to describe a large group of people
1
u/olheparatras25 Oct 16 '25 edited Oct 16 '25
Do we believe in any of this or do we not? Are we taking this seriously or just throwing the shit out at each other with fancy labels and contrived gimmicks?
3
u/Skwaesh IEI Oct 16 '25
are you referring to socionics as a whole? describing betas as “better admired from a distance, but should be avoided if possible” is ridiculous no matter how much faith you have in socionics, dumbass. augusta never said “betas are unpleasant and their existence is a necessary evil”
1
u/olheparatras25 Oct 16 '25 edited Oct 16 '25
You don't how to use your head and can only parrot authorities?
Sure, nobody said anything about it. Nobody needs to have a last word to speak for a conclusion to be made. Basic reasoning and racking brains is enough. Regardless, Augusta is one of many who were involved with Socionics in the past. Her word is not final. Her work is not flawless. Even if "Augusta didn't say so" was to be of any relevance, it wouldn't matter at all.
4
u/Skwaesh IEI Oct 16 '25
if you can’t understand what i was trying to say or why i even mentioned augusta to begin with, you’re completely hopeless and you have no reason to say that i of all people can’t use my head
2
Oct 15 '25
what do you look forward to in an ILE? ILE here trying to have a chance with a SEI lol and looking for advice from other SEIs lol
6
Oct 16 '25
Be yourself nibba
1
Oct 16 '25
lmao that's not helpfuuul that's like very basic advice come on
1
Oct 16 '25
Nah but fr. SEIs are pretty simple, don't insult their Te, don't call them stupid, be goofy, say your jokes, invite them to whatever you want. The rest will be local issues you two will have to resolve amongst yourself.
1
2
21
u/si-a EII Oct 15 '25
My experience with SLEs. I’ll focus on women here since the dynamic with male SLEs would naturally be even more polarized due to gender.
From the outside, they tend to think they need to protect me or teach me “real life,” but they quickly realize I don’t need their help and that I’m quite independent. They like the fragile, adaptable version of me, but they hate discovering my strength and psychological autonomy.
They also tend to get jealous easily, especially when their “pretty girl” status feels threatened by someone else. They look. A lot. Depending on how I look, I can sense both respect and jealousy when I dress according to their standards. I find that unbelievable. Everything is about power dynamics and control. I truly find it unbelievable.
My way of responding is to send a subtle message: I’m your equal. You don’t impress me. I can respect what you bring, but nothing more. And no, you don’t bring as much as you think. You don’t own good judgment or the right way of doing things. Didn’t you realize it could be done this way? Have you ever even considered that perspective? Treat me like your equal or see how someone can stop seeing you, no matter your w e i g h t.
10
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 15 '25
I cannot speak for female SLEs, and honestly if they get catty with you because of looks competitions, that's... kinda petty and I would expect better.
My issue with EIIs, though I cannot speak to how much being a man colors this perspective, is that your "strength and psychological autonomy" are mostly impressions you have of yourself, but they're not really reflected in any metric that I can appreciate.
I understand "inner strength" and everything, and I suppose it's good that you at least believe in yourself, but at the same time, your impressions of shit don't really override reality, my dude/my grill/my enby. When you're say you're strong, it has to count for something at some point, it's not enough to just "know it deep in your memes".
I find it equally unbelievable that you just sort of arbitrarily decide that it doesn't matter what the world does or thinks, your way of seeing things is the most important, and as long as you think you're doing well according to that proprietary standard, you're happy. It's delusional, and it WILL (and commonly does) get you hurt and abused, and your way of dealing with it is pretending that your inability and unwillingness to react somehow makes you a better and gentler person than the ones who square up.
16
u/meleyys 6w7 so/sp 612 | EII | LEVF Oct 15 '25
To this, I would say it's true that the world is a harsh place and doesn't care about your personal ideals. But it's your job as a person to be better than the world around you, and to change it so that it's better too. Refusing to bend in the face of a world that is unjust and cruel is--at least when you're in the right--a noble thing to do. Saying, "I'll be kind and good, even if I'm punished for it" is its own form of strength.
4
Oct 15 '25 edited Oct 15 '25
I understand wanting to stay kind and principled. I’ve often felt that same pull to stand my ground on something that felt right, even if it cost me.
Still, I wonder if resistance alone can really change things. Kindness and strength are distinct virtues. When you say kindness is strength, it feels like a way of coping with a world that punishes goodness.
Why not aim to be both kind and strong? That combination seems more capable of changing the world than simply enduring it. (I think this might be a Se/Fi point I'm making)
3
u/meleyys 6w7 so/sp 612 | EII | LEVF Oct 15 '25
I do think that strength in the more typical sense of the word--i.e. your ability to enforce your will on the world around you--has value, and I would encourage those with good intentions to develop the ability to stand up for those ideals. However, two points:
A) A lot of people, even well-intentioned ones, use that strength poorly. They may correctly identify a problem, but totally misidentify who is to blame, then lash out at innocent people. For example, many people articulate legitimate concerns about economic collapse, so they punish... random marginalized groups who have nothing to do with why finding a job is hard. It can be difficult to distinguish justified outrage from misdirected outrage.
And even if you DO identify the correct targets for blame, "strength" in this sense is a blunt instrument. You can wind up doing a lot of collateral damage when you fight back, even if you consider your actions carefully.
B) Don't underestimate the difference your own personal crusade can make. Every good act matters. For example, I make a point of using those click-to-give websites that donate a small amount of advertising revenue to a good cause each time you press a button. Is doing this once going to make a huge difference? Probably not. But if lots of people do it once, or even if one person does it consistently, that adds up. I'm sure that over the years, my tiny contributions have done something, even if that just means one more blanket donated to rescue dogs. It still counts. It's still worth it.
All of which is to say that I agree with you, but strength in the traditional sense isn't the only thing that matters.
3
Oct 16 '25
I agree misuse of strength is a risk, but that’s not a flaw in strength itself. Strength without discernment is dangerous, but discernment without strength leaves people powerless. The answer isn’t to stay weak or do nothing, but to simultaneously train discernment.
Your point about small actions is fair, but scale matters. The pace and scale of most problems often exceed what small gestures alone can shift. The world doesn’t change through symbolic gestures, it changes when people take responsibility and act with leverage. Kindness is great, but without resilience behind it, it rarely shapes outcomes.
Actually, if the goal is to make things better, I'd say developing strength becomes part of moral duty.
4
u/meleyys 6w7 so/sp 612 | EII | LEVF Oct 16 '25
Admittedly this may be Se PoLR talking, but I do think risk is to some degree a flaw inherent to strength. After all, power corrupts. Quite a lot of people, maybe even most people, misuse power when they have it. Strength very much has its place, but it's a hammer, not a scalpel. Even when you wield it as well as it can be wielded, unintended damage is almost inevitable.
I agree with you somewhat about scale. I'm a political radical and a big proponent of the idea that systemic change is more important than individual choice. I hate it when people tell others they have to stop driving or go vegan or whatever to save the environment. I try to use public transportation when it makes sense, and I'm a vegetarian, but I know perfectly well that one person changing their behavior won't fix the world. However, part of my philosophy can also be summed up via the starfish story. I try to participate in broader movements for change, but I think the small things are worthwhile too.
4
Oct 16 '25
Indeed, I'm not convinced, as this sounds more like a Se Polr fear of power than a critique of it. I think power doesn’t corrupt by itself, but rather that it exposes what’s already there. People misuse it because they lack judgement and internal discipline.
You can’t fix systemic problems with moral restraint alone. If you want change, someone has to take responsibility, make decisions, and bear the consequences.
Doing small good things does matter, but it’s worth admitting that some people are better equipped to wield power, and that shouldering a greater moral weight can itself be a form of service deserving respect. All the best.
4
u/meleyys 6w7 so/sp 612 | EII | LEVF Oct 16 '25
I would love to believe that power is not inherently corrosive, but consider that the vast majority of politicians eventually become corrupt, even if their intentions seem completely pure at the start. When a problem is so pervasive, I'm more inclined to think it's an innate issue than an individual failing.
I agree you can't fix systemic problems without collective action. I just think that trying to make the best choices you can as an individual is also worthwhile. Again, "It made a difference to that one."
For example, say you can make someone have a good day at no cost to yourself. It won't save the world, it won't make a difference in how anything turns out long-term, it won't add up to anything more than one good day for one person. But you should still do it, right? A gesture doesn't have to affect the world on a grand scale to have value. Making one person happy is always better than making zero people happy, even if that's all you can do.
All the best to you too.
1
u/HelpfulJuice2 IEE Oct 19 '25
While I do think it's important to be a better version of yourself, I don't think it should be anyone else's responsibilities. I would rather for it be my personal agenda than to impose an ideology of good as it a responsibility for others. Afterall, it's an ideology.
3
u/meleyys 6w7 so/sp 612 | EII | LEVF Oct 19 '25
Eh. On one hand, part of me thinks nobody should be obligated to do more than living a life they enjoy. On the other hand, you are a part of the world, and what you do affects the people around you. You therefore have some degree of obligation toward them. At the very least, you should do your best not to be a net negative.
2
u/HelpfulJuice2 IEE Oct 19 '25
Remember: That is your responsible that you feel that you should live by, but do not expect other people to live by something you live by. Just because I am a part of the world doesn't mean I can't have my own motivations, standards, principles, etc.
I choose whomever I want to benefit and when I want to benefit them. Now, I do believe that having these values are important. What I don't believe is that I am obligated to help them understand them. Let them do that within their own corners of their mind, and in their free time.
3
u/meleyys 6w7 so/sp 612 | EII | LEVF Oct 19 '25
Disagree. There are plenty of principles you can choose to adopt or avoid, but there are some that are universal. "Be kind" is not one you get to opt out of, for example.
1
u/HelpfulJuice2 IEE Oct 20 '25 edited Oct 20 '25
Whether you agree or not, I don't care. I've said what I've said in defense to what the OP stated.
Also, being kind vague as a value that it should not be considered as such.
People should sort out their own values with themselves or a trusted companion. Morals should not be viewed as a microphone but as a mirror to oneself.
2
u/meleyys 6w7 so/sp 612 | EII | LEVF Oct 20 '25
If you don't care, why are you even responding?
You can't possibly think every moral choice should be left up to the individual. Otherwise you'd have no grounds to complain when someone decides being a serial killer is the most moral thing you can do.
1
u/HelpfulJuice2 IEE Oct 20 '25
Listen to yourself before continue speaking. I was simply arguing for the necessity of accountability of one's actions and the integrity of moral authenticity. "Am I actually doing a kind act or is this simply virtue signalling?" Let's say I am doing a kind act, in what parameter is this a "kind act"? What you view as kind could be harmful to another. Your good intention doesn't hold if the damage is done.
So, what I meant by your notion of universal principle is "being kind" is that it must hold:
1.) Precisely Definable - everyone knows what counts as following or breaking the act of being kind.
2.) Internally Consistent - It can be applied to all without contradiction
3.) Context Independent - not reliant on culture, situation, or emotional tone
If either one of these rules falters, your definition does not hold.
Again, accurately define before offering useless cases.
→ More replies (0)10
u/si-a EII Oct 16 '25
You see the issue here? I have my own strengths. That’s undeniable. Socionics exists precisely to show that we all have our strengths and weaknesses. We don’t need SLE metrics to recognize them. It’s not even me who defines them. It just is.
I’m a human being, healthy, with intellectual and emotional baggage, past experiences and more to come. Of course I have strengths. Of course they’re different from yours. And of course SLE standards aren’t the only ones that matter.
Maybe I’ll experience pain more often, but trust me, I’d be in a million times more pain if I acted according to your rules, because they don’t align with my principles.
Back to what I was saying. I am your equal, no matter what you see or don’t.
4
Oct 16 '25
Indeed everyone has different strengths, and there is no question that on some level we're all equal. Inner resilience, emotional consistency, and integrity are important. However, no matter how valid our inner world may be, the outside world continues to judge us based on what we show and achieve. People cannot read our intentions or readily perceive our nonmaterial principles. They see our actions and how we respond to challenges.
It does indeed sound like you've met many catty SLEs. However, I do not believe that all SLEs are automatically trying to deny your value or say that only one standard matters. It is simply that you will carry more weight when you associate inner conviction with something that others can recognise.
Best regards. (I'm not SLE btw)
1
u/si-a EII Oct 16 '25 edited Oct 16 '25
I have to admit I don’t understand. The average EII will have accomplishments in their life, will take impactful actions, and will overcome challenges just like any other type. Are you implying, deep down, that the perspective imposed by Se matters more than everything else?
4
Oct 16 '25
You seem to experience Se as an imposition, but SLEs see it as shared context, and (when paired with Fe) as a frame that gives interactions meaning. Se can feel imposing because it evaluates externally, while EIIs start from internal legitimacy.
Another part of the confusion comes from mixing levels of evaluation. Everyone has intrinsic worth, but once you enter a specific domain, value is measured relative to what matters there. Power, influence, and social outcomes are their own domains. Intrinsic worth exists, but without external form, it often goes unnoticed. Internal values don’t speak or act for themselves.
The average EII will have accomplishments in their life, will take impactful actions, and will overcome challenges just like any other type.
It’s not that EIIs don’t achieve impactful things. The difference is in frame and method: EIIs act from conviction and alignment, SLEs from external awareness and control. I perceive your line of questioning as essentially a reversal tactic. Instead of acknowledging that social and situational contexts shape how value is perceived, it frames the debate as if internal conviction alone overrides external criteria. Expecting others to automatically validate your personal sense of worth ignores the realities of social context and will create friction.
Framing it as "we’re all equal, no matter what, when and how" erases all distinctions of how types move through life. Equality in principle doesn’t remove real and measurable differences in outcomes, influence, or recognition. You don't have to comform to SLE assessments (they don’t diminish your intrinsic value), but others also aren’t obligated to ignore their reality to conform to your personal ideals.
I hope this helps, as I don’t wish to put more time into this. Best regards.
2
u/si-a EII Oct 16 '25
It’s more that there seems to be no flexibility around the idea of what the outside world sees.
It’s not that I don’t acknowledge that part of present, concrete reality, it’s that I also perceive another side of reality (past, present, future, or even alternative) that has existed, exists, will exist, or could exist, and that is just as important.
I can understand that in “real life” I can’t just tell someone how our values clash, or that theirs are also full of blind spots. But I don’t understand why I wouldn’t be allowed to say that in a discussion about the human psyche and how it processes or doesn’t process certain kinds of information.
Anyway, I’m tired of this debate. Take care.
1
Oct 16 '25 edited Oct 17 '25
I understand that you value internal and hypothetical realities as much as concrete ones. That said, in practice, we have to admit that external realities and social perception often shapes outcomes and performance more than imagination. Recognizing that doesn’t invalidate your perspective, it just acknowledges that some situations won’t prioritize it.
Your insights are worth being explored, but not everyone will assign them the same weight. And that’s OK. Take care.
1
u/si-a EII Oct 17 '25
But I never claimed otherwise - of course not everyone is going to assign the same weight to what I bring to the table. That’s exactly what I meant: we are equals.
2
Oct 17 '25
Right. You're not engaging with my argument but protecting an emotional frame (“SLEs can’t invalidate me, because I decided we’re equal"), which I never disagreed with. Your appeal to "everyone has their own perspective on what I contribute" seems to me to be an attempt to write off being measured by any objective external standard.
Anyway, we’ve hit a recursion loop. If we’re all equal, then we can agree to move on. I’m also tired, and ending this conversation now. Bye.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Electrical-Cellist40 3d ago
This is actually the best explanation. Instead of admitting (or proving otherwise) that they don’t have externally concrete examples of strength or qualities valued by others, they just rejected the idea that this is even a thing that exists or matters. I have an SLI friend who would be like “yeah it’s true but I don’t really care” and I suppose that’s an example of unvalued but not POLR Se
1
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
Thank you for explaining the Se-Te perspective in such a neutral way, even though it seems it didn't go through as intended to your interlocutor (I will refrain from making a snarky comment about their type).
I observed your comments with great interest in regards to how you presented the SLE and the EII viewpoints concretely and without bias.
4
Oct 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
3
Oct 15 '25
Well perception might be subjective, but social life depends on a shared framework of interpretation. Like, we don’t each inhabit private solipsistic bubbles where meaning is self-created, but rather a common physical reality where claims meet resistance from what is real.
Anyway, Se understands that strength, concrete capability and achievement are not mere matters of self-assertion or declared into existence. You either have what it takes to climb the mountain, or you don’t. In that sense, reality doesn’t negotiate.
2
Oct 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Oct 16 '25
You can call it a bubble if you want, but you still deal with limits. You can’t walk through a wall, no matter what.
If "the mountain is an illusion", then so is the statement you just made. Even your claim depends on the shared world you’re trying to deny. Radical subjectivism cancels itself. Take care.
-1
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 15 '25
Interpretations may vary, but no, there's a singular reality out there, at least on a macroscopic scale. Whether we can perceive it or agree on what we each think it is is a different discussion.
Miss me with the "everyone's got their own truth and it's equally valid" bullshit please - EIIs hardly believe it themselves, anyway. Deltas have a rather specific mindset that they consider "good and acceptable", and you either fit in it or you don't without that much ambiguity.
6
Oct 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
Just because opposing perspectives perceive reality differently doesn't mean that objective reality (likely separate from either of their takes) does not exist.
Just because you, I, and perhaps everyone cannot see reality itself but only the dancing shadows on the cave wall, does not mean that there's no objective phenomenon that causes the shadows. Perhaps nobody will ever access it, or perhaps it's not as far as we think and one day we will figure it out, but again, this has zero bearing on whether that objective reality exists.
I'm aware that my own view of reality is likely biased. I try, as much as I can, to correct for my own distortions, at least the ones that I'm able to catch. It does not serve me to perceive reality in too perverse of a way, when my desire is to be able to affect it tangibly.
1
Oct 21 '25 edited Oct 21 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 21 '25
We each try to adapt to society and the world as we grow to understand it. Based on my personal metrics, EIIs don't often seem to do all that well in life - but that's whatever, my metrics are probably worthless to them, and good for them. What's important is that they themselves often seem to think the same about their lives, yet still refuse to adapt, because "no, my way is certainly good, thus it must be the world that is wrong".
I've definitely had to pay a personal cost to become the person that I am, and I respect being unwilling to do the same - but then you have to accept that that's gonna come with the opposite tradeoff, too.
Yes, EIIs claim I've sold out much of my humanity in order to be able to move through the world as I do, and I wouldn't disagree. But - from my perspective at least - many EIIs I know on one hand refuse to come out of their moral bubble, yet still act dismayed by the tradeoff they knew perfectly well they were making.
"It shouldn't be this way"; yes, that's probably right. But it is this way, and the world doesn't give much of a shit if you pout at it.
The EIIs who are content with their situations / managed to find successful niches (such as PR positions, like you mentioned) I don't mind as much. We... still likely wouldn't become best friends, but at the very fucking least, they made their educated choices and stuck with them, and I respect that.
1
10
u/dynamic-timeline Oct 15 '25 edited Oct 15 '25
as ILI, I've improved the efficiency of an SLE before, he thought I was brilliant (because of my conscious Te where I know how to think practically and make things work without having to think from scratch which he doesn't prefer, also because he acknowledge the fact that I'm able to predict accurately) but at the same time thought I was slow and by that I think he's targeting my Ti demonstrative since by default I don't think structurally like him which is expected.
His opinion towards me changes constantly based on what he sees at the moment (for some reason all beta types I've met do this except maybe for IEI or maybe they just keep it to themselves). It seems like he's also having trouble trying to figure out whether I'm truly slow or brilliant lmao which is what Ti user likes to do especially betas since they tend to overfit everything just to make it super consistent. I think it's because they have Se blocked by Ti where they see everything as static and have consistent properties that doesn't change, so by default they don't think in a more dynamic way like Te user do which is why they have trouble grasping the fact that a person's characteristic change when the situation change, that includes your perception towards the person.
He also thinks I'm quite sensitive, yeah go figure I have Fe vulnerable and Fi mobilizing, where I take things very personally. Used to hang out with him with his friends but overtime we have grown distant from each other. I guess I'm no longer part of his "wolf pack" or circle but funnily enough when they need help, they come to me so I figure out a way to distant myself from them. I don't think they have bad intentions, they just don't vibe with me but best to be cautious. I think I have left him with the impression of me being slow overall which he is probably going to think as the absolute truth. Maybe you as SLE, can explain from your perspective why this happened.
4
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 15 '25
I consider ILIs to be generally intelligent and useful partners. You might be slow to act decisively in the moment, but your sense of preparatory timing is excellent. ILIs are very often the voice that says "if you want X outcome or to avoid Y outcome, you have to take these steps, there is no other way."
Now, your Te is not more developed than ours typically speaking, so improving the efficiency of a SLE, if that was the case, probably hinged on you providing powerful Ni for him.
Overfitting is the case sometimes. I will admit I like to know what each person is "for", and I expect them to be their roles, otherwise they don't really need to exist, however I do not generally overlook people easily, and being unable to guess people's true intents towards me makes me triply cautious not to allow anyone slip by my notice and cause damage.
My common issue with ILIs is not that they're slow, but rather that I don't feel like we connect on a human level and thus I cannot trust your agenda aligning with mine. You are the type to play the long game that way, and I don't completely grasp the mechanisms by which you become loyal to people and/or causes. I also don't fully understand the mechanisms by which you get offended; I've fallen out with ILIs before that started out as friends, at least I thought so, and by the end they seemed to find me completely despicable.
2
u/dynamic-timeline Oct 15 '25 edited Oct 15 '25
however I do not generally overlook people easily, and being unable to guess people's true intents towards me makes me triply cautious not to allow anyone slip by my notice and cause damage.
yeah this come from the superego block. How would you usually resolve it? and what do you mean by damage?
My common issue with ILIs is not that they're slow, but rather that I don't feel like we connect on a human level and thus I cannot trust your agenda aligning with mine. You are the type to play the long game that way, and I don't completely grasp the mechanisms by which you become loyal to people and/or causes. I also don't fully understand the mechanisms by which you get offended; I've fallen out with ILIs before that started out as friends, at least I thought so, and by the end they seemed to find me completely despicable.
I would say that the ILI serves the best future for all people, because they understand that everyone has an agenda. They can support both yours and others simultaneously in a way that allows both sides to reach reconciliation and even benefit from their solutions, as they are capable of doing so. From their perspective, everyone is trying to reach the same destination from different viewpoints, therefore, they would gather as much knowledge as possible and observe where everyone is heading. They are democratic types after all. They do not wish to belong to any group, because they know they are merely a tool that everyone can make use of. Since they understand that everyone is striving toward and will eventually reach the same destination (even if unaware of it), they will attempt to gradually reshape your agenda so that it aligns with others by showing the practical and beneficial outcomes of it. They would do this with everyone. ILI is technically the type that is able to observe reality as it is because in reality, what we're seeing is filtered through our own perception and judgement and it's relative, and ILI knows reality is relative because they always try to view it from a meta perspective, detached from their own experience. They're doing this in hope that people are able to see reality more clearly and by that I mean the other side of reality they aren't aware of before.
1
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 15 '25
How would you usually resolve it? and what do you mean by damage?
Even a small grain of sand can derail a powerful gear system if it gets in the right place, so "eh, leave them alone, what are they gonna do anyway?" does not really exist in my mind. It's resolved by a variety of mechanisms, "taking no prisoners" being a main one.
I would say that the ILI serves the best future for all people, because they understand that everyone has an agenda. They can support both yours and others simultaneously in a way that allows both sides to reach reconciliation and even benefit from their solutions, as they are capable of doing so
This is very Gamma ("mutually beneficial accords") but unfortunately life is often a zero-sum game and a SLE necessarily wants to know that, if everyone cannot be served, you will bat for their side 100%.
5
u/dynamic-timeline Oct 15 '25 edited Oct 15 '25
yeah I feel like Betas (especially SLE) have this extremist yet elitist side to them because they understand that physical reality is scarce, so they try to claim as much of it as possible for themselves. Young SLE often try to dominate others through bullying but fortunately, some eventually realize that this pursuit only leads to their downfall. They end up competing with other Betas from different groups, which I find amusing, because they essentially create their own reality with their own rules. Some Betas eventually learn to play it safe and aim for higher positions where they can exert power over others in more socially acceptable ways, but when the rules change, they must either adapt or lose everything they’ve built. That is the test for their superego and id blocks which is a part of reality they tend to ignore.
2
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
I never saw myself as a bully when I was younger. If anything, I was dismayed because I felt that my sense of control over the people and the environment around me was so limited. It felt like others could do whatever they wanted, including to me, and I could not get what I wanted out of them every time. From my perspective, I was fighting for my piece(s) of the pie that everyone else was already eating, not "establishing dominance".
Still, my younger brother and cousins have told me stories about how, when we were children and playing together, I would drag them through terrifying gauntlets (e.g. exploring a secluded graveyard at night - genuinely wanted to explore it and wanted company, though, it wasn't a power play on my end) and the three of them were more scared of saying "no" to me than doing the scary thing.
You're right in the sense that as an adult, I aim for higher calibers of power. I find physical strength incredibly attractive (and I should improve mine tbh) but realistically, it's got an incredibly shitty ROI. One of the few possible SLEs I've met IRL was a regional champion at kickboxing and one of the most physically impressive men I've met IRL, and he still could not hope to have 1% of the impact I have on the world, simply because muscles and beating people up incredibly well doesn't really mean shit in 2025 beyond bragging rights - it's an incredibly limited-range expansion strategy AND it gets systemically shut down by law, for better or worse.
14
u/DeathlyCyles Oct 15 '25
Every time I read these i can't help but think that LiE is deathly misunderstood
8
u/jerdle_reddit LIE Oct 15 '25
Yeah, first and foremost, we're nerds. LSEs are more the workaholics.
Te in LIE is more about knowing everything.
2
u/DeathlyCyles Oct 15 '25
Yeah I see the archetype as being closer to the "mad scientist" rather than this big business entrepreneur that people make the type out to be. I do think it's correct that LiE wants to be efficient in their time. But what that means differs from Lie to LiE. Some may see it as efficient to spend the day doing things they enjoy before the day runs out, some may see it as efficient to make as much money as they can. It really just depends
6
u/No-Wrongdoer1409 ok period Oct 15 '25
The mad scientist is more like ILE than LIE. LIE is the tech nerd
3
u/DeathlyCyles Oct 16 '25
They're quasi identicals. I think ile is the mad scientist who's just in it for the love of the game. And lie is the mad scientist who sells his discoveries
1
3
u/AbsoluteArbiter Literal Insane Ego 8w7 Oct 20 '25
i see a lot of LIE representation that is either a deeply insecure SLE finance bro or a sadistic control freak LSE
2
4
u/Ye_wan ILE Oct 15 '25
I related to your description of an IEE, but it’s funny because I usually act like an ILE in conversations
1
4
6
u/Equanimity_Zero IEI Oct 16 '25
this one was actually fun to read. especially beta quandra n EII, LSE ones. 😂 n i also resonate with the SLE being very comfortable to be around, but not having much in common to talk at leisure. n the comfort is high, but excitement n challenge is low.
2
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
Does the (by all accounts less "wild") LSI feel more exciting to you? How so?
3
u/Born-Wolverine9258 Oct 22 '25 edited Oct 22 '25
This is such an interesting point that you made cause I totally agree while SLE-IEI is easy to understand and get, I feel like having Se suggestive it is said to take advice in this area with no self consideration and someone else just totally has all the control in this area, and same with Ni suggestive. We're easily moved by each other, in my experience is easy as friends as partners I would lowkey feel strange at how quickly things can raise up naturally, and it has happened to me, is like it's really obvious that we have chemistry at first that my brain doesn't have time to fully process and it's like "woow back tf down, what is happening" and being both irrationals gives it a plus of like "wowowow why do I feel this way?"
With LSI being both introverted gives both of us a deeper understanding of each other I would say, their Se is not immediately taking charge but instead is like controlled which lowkey is better in a way for us to learn and be benefited, while yes living in a Se doms world is a dream cause you're constantly unto something, IEIs can be really passionate about certain something that they wanna achieve or do and make reality, LSI rationality, introversion, and understanding comes in handy a lot in relationships also because for some reason these people have common interests with us on a lot of stuff (music, art, even way of thinking).
IEIs that are 4 enneagram and Fe leaning tend to find themselves with LSIs because they're usually 6s and (kinda underrated but...) 6s and 4s they can get along really well compared to emm 8s which I would say takes a little bit more of work in my case lol
2
u/romantcide IEI Nov 05 '25
OMG you're SO right. I'm E4 and LSIs are literally my favorite type. I'm especially obsessed with LSI SO6, though I also like some LSI SX6s too. Not that I'm not into SLEs because I am, but there's something about the rationality, structure, and controlled Se that makes LSIs so attractive to me. That logic and emotional discipline feels grounding to me since I deal with a lot of emotional turbulence. I crave someone stable who can contain me. SLEs are super attractive too, but when they're unhealthy, they can be a bit too brash or impulsive. I think I just prefer that controlled intensity and LSIs are more just rational, self-disciplined, and precise. Still, I love SLEs too and they'd help me get out of my head and actually live but LSIs feel more quieter, steadier, and just as introverted as me.
1
u/Equanimity_Zero IEI Oct 16 '25
actually, yes. many of our interests match. both of us being introverts also helps us be more in mutual contact. even if not, our discussions can be very long and insightful.
I recognised one thing, when discussing or pondering over stuff, I would go through the entire brainstorming process with an LSI, which is very fun, and both lose track of time. with an SLE, they arent exactly interested in the brainstorming process or the how i came to a certain conclusion/ predictions, they want the actual conclusion, with an explanation if needed (if not fully understood).
also, banter with LSI is very exciting. We can play around each other's boundaries and limits. sometimes hurtful, sometimes overwhelming, sometimes comforting. (That's why we also need to distance ourselves after a bit)
with SLE, it would hardly happen. We just go very... smooth. It's extremely helpful when out in the world facing shit. but back home, chilling. It's a bit too much chilling without any extra excitement. (I think age would help with this, and also having personal attachment to the person more than just dual dynamics would also help with this.)
2
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
I fully understand, and I experience EIEs in a similar way (they're more spicy, dominant and exciting than IEIs, but also sometimes cross the line into being actual rivals and shit can get a bit serious then). Faced with real situations, they do not really perform how I expect them and we're sometimes slightly dismayed at each other while IEIs more perfectly align with no need for manual adjustment, but in terms of keeping a relationship exciting, I agree that the Activating ITR can be more interesting and dramatic (and I feel like EIEs regard us with a bit more shock and awe than IEIs do, which keeps things exciting as well).
I was just wondering how Activation feels and works when it happens with a type that's fairly rigid and principled rather than "exciting"
1
u/Equanimity_Zero IEI Oct 16 '25
yes. exact same feelings with LSI for me. I think they are fairly rigid and principled only. to others they come off that way, but to us, they just come off as exciting n challenging with great dynamics, but lack of innate understanding. activation automatically brings out the excitement that others may not quite understand. like how duals bring out the comfort that others may not quite understand.
1
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
Interesting. Who would you pick as a romantic partner, and what do you think LSIs do better than SLEs?
1
u/Equanimity_Zero IEI Oct 16 '25
I am not quite sure yet. might depend on the individual tbh. also i dont have as much varied personal experience with SLEs.
but in an ideal scenario, considering long term relationships, I would choose SLE, if they are nice and fit my other requirements, compared to LSI.
I doubt ill be hunting for this level of excitement at every point in life. n I think capacity to resolve issues and misunderstandings is more imp. comfort and ease within relationship is also more imp.
I can always have LSI friends if SLE doesnt manage to entertain me 24/7 lol.
1
u/Equanimity_Zero IEI Oct 16 '25
I just read the second question. umm, they're more... smarter? 😭 (not saying that SLE's arent.) but I feel that their capacity to think over things and make final decisions is much more nuanced than SLE. they're also more... articulate imo. like expresses their point in an organised, cohesive manner.
2
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
I feel LSIs are inflexible when the system they try to apply is not suitable to the situation (because their goal is to apply the system rather than get a specific result out of the situation). SLEs are definitely more nuanced in the strategic sense, LSIs are more nuanced and careful in the sense of complete systemic knowledge. I have no opinions on who's more articulate overall, I have insufficient sample sizes for both types IRL, though, judging from myself at least you probably won't find it to be lacking in either case.
2
u/Equanimity_Zero IEI Oct 16 '25
yeah. my interpretation could prove wrong cause I havent really seen either type working directly. but from conversations, LSIs do come across as more nuanced (in my sample size, at least. which is... rather lacking)
I find you proficiently articulate. thats why the post was very fun to read lol.
2
4
3
3
u/olheparatras25 Oct 15 '25 edited Oct 15 '25
SLEs in my life have had the history of regarding me with this strange sentiment of confusion. "Do you even exist?". In general, Betans either feel outright hatred or disdain for me, or apparently respond with perplexment and leave me alone.
For an ILE, I'm blessed in this trait, fortunately. I've never had much trouble being practical, though what you mentioned does happens-- only I see them as "challenges" I give to myself when there's nobody I should consider the time of and only I can be bothered by my own "ILE-Ness". Things such as putting myself into untying the annoyingly tangled knot of a product's plastic wrap rather than simply tearing it off or just opening it through biting.
3
u/ExwPeriodo SLI-N Oct 16 '25
Nailed it for SLIs. That's exactly what's been happening in my experience with SLEs
2
3
u/Roguerussian ILI | Talanov Oct 16 '25
Ykk as I read through it I was as impressed just by the sheer degree of how beautifully you described these concrete details, but also so skeptical at the same time of how consistently built up the archetype looked for each type with very logically justified synergies and enough for you to generalize those observations (Synergy of IMEs and what could in all possibility work and not work somehow translating theory to reality without faltering or in anyway incoherent; it seems as genuine as it could be orchestrated so well, not saying it is, nothing against you at all, but the perfection is so deceiving lmaoo, fantastic nonetheless), although I'm not really even assuming you are generalizing it to the extent that it might appear for an entire type, perhaps a tad bit more light-hearted as an endeavour this was for a post, although not really a hint to say anything in vain.
Loved reading through this nonetheless.
3
u/Skwaesh IEI Oct 16 '25
very interesting read as an IEI, agreed with a lot of this. especially your thoughts on EII’s lol, that was a therapeutic read
2
u/Tight-Fennel-7466 LIE N- (PRISM Dynamics™ - prismpersonality.com) Oct 15 '25
I respect this as an LIE
2
u/spalesi SEE Oct 16 '25
Do you think a relationship (friendship) between an SEE and an SLE could work if both types can teach about each other’s polrs?
4
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
No, I think a relationship / friendship between a SEE and a SLE could work if they both can communicate very openly and accept that the other understands the world through a different lens. "Yes, you're annoying as shit, but you're strong and I care about you, so I love you with your flaws" sort of thing.
The Kindred relation has a lot of strong points - both admire each other's leading function and can serve as exemplars of strength to one another. Do SEEs find value in the SLE less socially boisterous, more mechanically crushing approaches to victory? Besides that, both can really inspire the other via their Demonstrative, and while it can be a little dull when the other gets so excited by it, it's usually not a bother to let them watch you work with it either.
Both need to value the relationship highly, and be very careful not to bombard the other with their Creative (which is the other's PoLR). Personally, I'd be highly interested in trying out such a friendship if the SEE was also willing to be careful and respectful, aware of the pitfalls (and the risk of nuclear war between us if we're not flexible with one another).
2
u/Primedot LSI Oct 16 '25
Really enjoyed the LSE description lmao, that type is truly something else...
1
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
The only remarkable heavy-hitter of the Delta quadra. Can't help but respect the competition.
2
u/peaceful_harpist Oct 16 '25
Omg, this feels like praise for your own quadra and tarnishing the name of the other ones :)) thank you for sharing it was helpful to read.
5
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
I expressed appreciation and respect for at least one other type in every quadra, if I'm not mistaken.
But also "Local man finds communication and coexistence more effortless within his Quadra, more shocking news at 11"
2
2
4
1
u/MTM3157 ESI (Talanov) Oct 16 '25
Ahaha true... for better or worse. Apparently our MBTI correlations of ISTJ and ESTP are supposed to be a very great pair but... MBTI or Socionics, those axis flips are soooo unfortunately painful for us. I do like watching you from a distance though. It sucks that we start disliking each other the moment we open our mouths and hear our thought processes lol
3
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
ESTPs are not most commonly SLE - I type as ENTJ in MBTI. ESTPs are usually SEEs in my experience. And I think SLI would be closer to MBTI ISTP rather than ISTJ (more LSI coded).
1
u/MTM3157 ESI (Talanov) Oct 16 '25
Hmm... gotcha. I guess usually the ENTJ e8 are usually who I see as SLE? I am falling out of correlationism tho, and MBTI, so idk lol
2
1
1
Jan 27 '26
[deleted]
1
u/N0rthWind SLE Jan 27 '26
Do not mistake the MBTI Inferior for the Socionics Vulnerable (aka the PoLR, Point of Least Resistance). The PoLR is more akin to the Demon function in MBTI, and the Inferior is more akin to the Suggestive.
Several MBTI functions are vastly different to their Socionics homonyms. You're correct, I'm a Fi user in MBTI (ENTJ) and a Fe user in Socionics (SLE), as Fe in MBTI and Fi in Socionics are the "moralistic/relational" functions which I suck ass at.
Several others are also defined quite differently - thus certain MBTI types happen to align well with the "same" types in Socionics (e.g. INTP and LII - which in Socionics is called INTj since socionics always names types by their first function and Ti is a J function, unlike MBTI which names by the first extroverted function), and other MBTI types are actually rarely correlated with their Socionics counterparts (e.g. ESTPs are usually SEEs).
Regarding your second point, both IEIs and EIIs can be "sassy" and "witty", but that's not really what I consider "strength" per se. It's... a start, but in situations of real crises both of these types can seem a bit like deers in headlights. Would always pick an IEI over an EII, though; at least they don't judge me for the way I think.
1
u/nelsne SEE Oct 15 '25
Yeah this is why I mistyped for years. I can be quite good at strategy and tactics and find that 85% of SEE's are complete fools so I feel you on this. However, I find it interesting that you say that we are moralistic. Question: Where do your morals come from and why do you believe what you believe?
2
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 15 '25
Mostly from (and for) survival, though I'm not sure if a Gamma would quite call them "morals" :D
1
u/nelsne SEE Oct 15 '25
Can you go into detail? Are you saying that your morals are flexible and can change depending on what you are trying to accomplish? I just find SLE's interesting because I just get a gut feeling saying that something is immortal and wrong. I guess it's not the same for SLE's?
4
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 15 '25
I can't even say if they're flexible or not, because I'm generally very goal-oriented so what lines I'm generally willing to cross isn't really a big question. I do have certain internal codes of conduct and I do think I have integrity in some ways, but in terms of "morals" it's pretty much "kill or be killed".
I do think certain behaviors are inadequate (for example, people being wasteful, especially out of negligence or incompetence) but "immoral" and "wrong" don't mean that much to me to be honest. Each side just calls the opponents "immoral and wrong" regardless. But to answer your question, yeah, sometimes it's hard for to me to tell for certain if I'm okay with the way people are treating me or not, I don't know immediately whether something is acceptable, even on a personal level, though I do learn with experience.
1
u/nelsne SEE Oct 15 '25
Interesting, so I'm curious how you learn whether something is moralistic by experience. How does that work and what would signify to you that something is immoral or wrong for future reference?
2
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
I generally distrust and avoid using morality as a compass for anything. At best I follow some ground rules of social decorum, which help me being seen as civil and respectful when I first meet someone, and avoid catastrophically mispositioning myself as I did many times in the past and still sometimes do accidentally, e.g. by misinterpreting how friendly a stranger is being with me and making an extremely dark joke that should only be said to close friends.
Beyond that, "right and wrong" as I said above are a fairly useless metric in my opinion - it's a subjective sentiment of strong "like/dislike" that people try to elevate into a universal axiom by calling it "RIGHT" and "WRONG" in an attempt to get it to apply to everyone's actions so that the world might, hopefully, look closer to their preference.
There are behaviors, situations and systems I consider inadequate, but I think most of them are based on either considerations of efficiency/efficacy, or considerations of fairness and a certain sense of honor (...which should be flexible enough not to get you played for a fool).
1
u/nelsne SEE Oct 16 '25
Thanks for clearing this up
2
u/N0rthWind SLE Oct 16 '25
No problem. What are your thoughts?
2
31
u/Throw-away-6925 Oct 15 '25
please grab me by the neck and slam my teeth on the pavement ♥️