The Characteristic of EII

Author: Aushra Augusta

The characteristic was written using the advice and help of Antonina Volkova-Obozova, Ph.D in psychology

Disclaimer: the following text is a machine translation and is not fully revised.

Ego Block

The intellectual strength of this type of IM is his ability to establish relationships with other people that are desirable to him and his loved ones. (He is sure that the feelings of sympathy – antipathy that one person evokes in another () are determined by the inner qualities of the person (), so shapes those qualities.) The fact that people want to get hold of a thing is also determined more by its internal qualities than by its external appearance. The appearance, the form of both the object and the subject should not be conspicuous, should be rather inconspicuous and at the same time of utmost quality. A person’s spiritual qualities are the main means of influencing other people. But such means of influence can also be gifts, and such gifts in the inner qualities of which there is no doubt. The EII knows what his loved ones want and what they do not want, who they like and why, who they dislike. Always able to understand the real and seeming feelings of people.

The EII is interested in the moral aspect of human culture – honesty, conscience, dignity, how cultured a person is. Although he makes new acquaintances easily, his circle of interest is usually limited to close and familiar people. He loves them, cares about them.

EIIs are usually quiet people who are more silent and observing in the new group, not showing any particular activity. But they can not be called too shy, because they see how they are treated by others, and know how to improve this attitude. A perfect illustration of this is Prince Myshkin in Dostoyevsky’s novel The Idiot, Alyosha Karamazov or the main character in The Adolescent. On the one hand – modest, calm, and on the other – easily imposing relationships, achieving mutual sympathy, easy to enter new groups of people.

They regulate relationships with people, bring them closer or farther away, not so much with words as with gaze and tone. Tension in EII’s voice, which is often completely inconsistent with what is being said at the time, returns almost everyone to “their place.” Even their silent presence can improve, warm or – on the contrary – cool the psychological climate of the space in which they are.

In understanding which feelings towards people and relations with them are good and which need to be corrected, the ethical-intuitive introthyme is categorical, demanding, and intrusive. He tries to subordinate all people around him to his understanding of the ethical and unethical. (Of course, every EII acts at the level of their own culture.)

He categorically corrects his loved ones in the area of their feelings towards other people, demanding strictly selective relations. This has a particularly beneficial effect on his logical-sensoric extrathyme dual, who, unable to critically evaluate the ethics of others, usually keeps his soul wide open and makes too many concessions, as a result of which he may lose confidence in people and become a sullen misanthrope.

Id Block

Self-subordination, empathy, helping others

When communicating, the ethical-intuitive introthyme completely identifies his emotions with the emotions of the other person. The EII is sad when near a sad person, cheerful when near a cheerful person. It is as if he enters the mood of the other person with his own emotions, and identifies himself and his state with the emotional state of the other person. He follows the emotions of others, submits to the emotions of others, and never imposes his own emotions. He demonstrates his sympathy to the other person by demonstrating his presence and a peculiar “emotional freeze.”

However, the EII does not want to take care of any person in this way – he only wants to do it for those whose emotions can be trusted and are worthy of his sympathy. However, the EII is not capable of making such a choice himself. It is necessary for him to be corrected by the LSE, who understands the emotional life of people better than the EII, more objectively. And therefore saves him from wasting his energy on empty empathy to every single person. This may give the impression that the LSE is jealous of his partner, but in reality the LSE merely protects the EII from participating in the emotional life of superficial people, and from possible trouble.

How does the EII get information about the state of the other person? By facial expressions, intonation, depression or excitement. He senses the general emotional tone. And when the intonation does not match the words, he hears only the intonation, not the words.

Wanting to help the person, to be useful to them, the EII freezes, tries to catch their gaze, asks why they are like this today, what happened. He gets immersed in the grief of the other, sympathizes with them, the emotional state of the EII and the other person becomes the same, and the possibility of contact appears. When the EII manages to enter such a “unison,” he sees no difference between himself and the other, his own physical state disappears, the feeling of his own body disappears. He does not try to cheer up the other person, and helps through understanding and sympathy.

After that comes the search for the cause of depression, longing, fear, discouragement, or any other negative emotion. When people pour all of their personal emotions at him like that, he feels more at ease than ever. The EII tries to console the other person, to give them countenance, to bring them into an even, calm state, to even out their mood. In general he finds it shameful to pass by a depressed person, even if it is a complete stranger on the street. And if this happens because of the hustle and bustle of life, it leaves a bad taste in EII’s mouth.

The demonstration of the “I’m ready to take care of you” occurs as a demonstration of his complete calmness, passivity, trust in the other person. He is always convinced that others need him to be calm, even, serene. He wants to be a kind of “poultice” that others can apply to their wounds.

Ideally there should not be too many people to whom this role is performed, that they should be valuable, worthy people. But the EII cannot live completely without people to empathize with. He feels truly needed only in such situations. It is only thanks to them that he comes alive, becomes able to work and to feel emotions. Without subordinating his emotions to the emotions of another person, he could not so easily get the spiritual excitement necessary for any activity, and especially for manifesting an active position in life.

While the ethical-intuitive introthyme is willing to work with everyone’s grief, he is very sensitive to the sense of loyalty that others feel toward him. Finds himself in a very difficult position when people to whom he has shown a sense of complicity and loyalty behave ambiguously, as for example Prince Myshkin did with Nastasia Philippovna, toward whom he felt obliged even though he loved another woman.

The LSE, through his special awareness of the constancy and impermanence of emotions, of people’s loyalty and disloyalty, identifies the people of whom his dual can and should take care emotionally.

Being in a group, the EII sees who feels good and who feels bad – that is, whom others “bring down.” The EII adjusts himself precisely to this person, looks for threads, tries to identify their bully. He forms an understanding of the person through their relationship with other people.

Note. A person’s attitude to another person is the sum of the feelings they have for each other.

Because of their ability to sympathize and empathize, EIIs can be good therapists. However, because of their complete identification with the other person, it tires them out quite a bit. Helping others is something that the EII cannot live without, but if it is not limited, if there are too many people to help, the EII gets atomized, depleted, and simply does not have time to “get immersed” in everyone. Therefore, although they are good therapists, it is desirable that the number of people they serve be quite strictly limited.

EIIs cry and get angry very rarely, and only with really close people, those whom they trust. Anger and tears are a demonstration of trust. Crying and getting angry means allowing themself to be themself. It’s different when they identify their emotions with the emotions of the other person – when someone is crying, the EII too gets the tear of compassion. When watching movies, EIIs cry if someone hurts a character who, alas, cannot be helped. These are tears of compassion.

The contrary type of IM, the ethical-intuitive extrathyme, also sympathizes with people and tries to help them. But, as observations show, one can call the EIE in search of sympathy even at night. This is not the same with the EII. It is hard to say how it happens, but when asked, “Did I wake you up?”, the EIE says, “Yes, you did,” but says so in a tone that refutes his words. The EII replies: “No, it’s okay,” but in such an indifferent tone that the troublemaker realizes their tactlessness.

When communicating with an unpleasant person, the EII forces himself to forget his true attitude, true feeling, and to be polite. That is, he imposes social restrictions on himself. But all the bad, as well as the good, is remembered. Not for a minute does the EII forget that he hates or likes someone. The EIE is forced to remind himself of his true negative feeling in order to not forget and not go along with the communication.

In his ability to even out the emotions of those around him, the EII seeks the recognition of society, through this he shows his usefulness to society. If his emotional compassion is not needed, then he himself is not needed either.

The EII cannot “hurt the emotions” of another person, spoil someone’s mood. That is why he leaves an unloved partner only when he is sure that his partner does not need and does not love him.

The way in which this type of IM identifies his emotions with the emotions of his social group can be examined through the example of F. Dostoevsky. As long as his emotions were identified with the emotions of revolutionaries, he was a revolutionary. When he identified these same emotions with the emotions of another social circle, he became conservative.

The inner life of the individual, problems and worries

The inner problems, doubts, and worries of the ethical-intuitive introthyme are related to his contact with the objective world. Every ethical type feels powerless when faced with objective forces, and therefore doubts their own social value. But an ethical type is brave with people, and so they try to come into contact with this objective reality through other people rather than directly. This is the reason for which ethical types do not hide their “weakness” and helplessness, and even demonstrate it to some extent. In order to feel good in the world, they need the cooperation of a “strong” logical type, who does not admit their weakness out of fear. It is a fear of being not needed by anyone, i.e. by a “weak” ethical type.

Superego Block

The search for those who submit and emphathize

A person does not only empathize with others. He needs others to empathize with him in an aspect of the Superego block. But this happens only if the Superego is rich enough in information, i.e. if it is a socially valuable Superego. At least this seems to be the case for the individual himself, so they try to raise their value for society precisely in the aspect of the Superego block. And when this fails to be achieved to a sufficient extend, they feel pangs of conscience.

For the EII, this value is his awareness of the relations between the objects of the external objective world. Therefore, if in relations with people his interests are limited to a certain group of people, in the objective world he is interested in literally everything. Complete omnivorousness at the level of his intellect and abilities. For example, a well-known specialist in psychology is interested in literally all areas of human knowledge. He can read monographs on physics, chemistry, geography, etc. And what they read is almost never forgotten, EIIs with pleasure tell about it to anyone who asks. Such reading satisfies the need of one’s own sense of logic – to gather and process as much information as possible about the properties and relations of the surrounding objects. To find connections between objects, to be able to manipulate this information. To learn about how the world around is arranged, to learn the regularities of the arrangement of this surrounding world. To collect information about all kinds of logical relationships between objects in the external world, about the order in the universe.

By comparing the relations of objects and the regularities of these relations to each other, EIIs draw conclusions about the pragmatic and aesthetic value of these objects. When all is well, this conclusion must coincide with what the surrounding society thinks of these objects. It is especially important that what society allows to the EII as an object (i.e. how much the EII is allowed to demonstrate will, beauty, etc.) coincides with the EII’s own conclusion on this issue. The individual is calm and feels fully accomplished only if society’s expectations in this respect coincide with what he himself allows to himself. That is why EIIs are very critical of all their “objective” properties: beauty, will, energy, elegance. Criticism of these properties is perceived very painfully and shows that they are valued by society lower than they had hoped for. Positive attitudes and praises are not perceived as containing a double entendre only if they are said without emphasis, in a soft tone and without witnesses.

Someone who set a goal and achieved it is the person EIIs consider “strong-willed,” but they doubt “strong-willed” as a compliment, as well as “beautiful”, “elegant.” That is, if you call the EII strong-willed or weak-willed, handsome or ugly, to him they are equally doubtful compliments, forcing him to reconsider his relations with the world around him. All he wants is a silent or quiet acknowledgement.

The same reason dictates the fact that such an individual cannot allow himself to be a dirty, ugly, poorly dressed object. Does not tolerate dirt in his own house. Does not tolerate stains. Scuffed clothes on his spouse are the same as scuffed clothes on himself. But compliments for his ability to maintain cleanliness and order are also doubtful to the EII.

A wide range of knowledge makes the EII both more confident and, seemingly, more courageous (in actuality – more precise in his claims for recognition).

They are very sensitive to the aesthetics of the object, but do not have their own taste. Aesthetic taste is conditioned by the expectations of the social group. Therefore, for example, in their elegance, as well as in the decoration of their apartment, they are very cautious, pondering and reasoning for a long time.

So, despite the fact that the EII decisively and boldly establishes his own order between objects (this order being a copy of the orders and regularities he observed), he is constantly unsure of this order. The EII needs a person who can empathize with these doubts of his. A person who perceives the order he established as a binding law. This is undoubtedly the LSE, or logical-sensoric extrathyme. The EII is only sure in their exact knowledge of any order and regularities when something that, to him, seems “most correct,” gets adopted by others; when the order he proposes is categorically correct because it gets supported by LSE’s Id block; when someone takes advantage of EII’s vast knowledge for their own purposes, even though it is only the social program of which the EII is the reproducer. When the EII himself empathizes with the emotions of another person, he receives the emotional program necessary for his activity, which is also a social program, because it has to reach the EII through LSE’s Superego block.

The signal that the dual (LSE) is ready to receive information is most often his grumpy tone – the tone of a person who is confused in the relations between objects and needs someone with whom to experience this relation together. By this grumbling the EII recognizes the other person’s needs, and the importance of his own knowledge – and thus, others’ need for his own self.

It can be said that in his knowledge of the order in the world and his particular environment the EII is not intrusive, but is very sensitive to the criticism of others. Therefore he seeks someone who recognizes his sense of logic, who trusts this sense and the manifestations of EII’s will. Who takes both his taste and his will into account and defends them in the face of possible attacks from others.

Superid Block

Distancing through submission. Finding the correct evaluation of the world

In his actions and deeds related to the manifestation of this aspect of his self, the individual is inclined to merge with the world around him and fully accept its dictate. It is always a dictate, but it can be different based on whether it takes into account the needs of the individual. It can take these needs into account, then the individual lives well. And it can not take them into account, then the individual’s mechanism of IM and his organism work themselves “to the bone.” In practice, every non-dualized person is stretched thin like this. The picture of the world, as the individual sees it, is determined by the extent to which his own interests, conditioned by this block, are taken into account. That is why the individual with a dualized psyche has a rather bright and joyful world. For the non-dualized individual, life is difficult.

So, because in his actions and deeds the individual tends to merge with the world, in an active enviornment the EII, too, cannot help but act. That is, he cannot help but work () when others are working. But he also fusses and hustles around even when others are inactive. Being idle is somehow uncomfortable, shameful, conscionable. Only the dual stops this fuss, pointing out both the possibility of fatigue and the ineffectiveness, the uselessness of many “acts of labor.” Therefore, in the absence of the dual, the EII is constantly tired and overworked.

During their realization of the Superid block the individual is apprehensive to set their own interests in opposition to those of others. This is why there is a rather pronounced inclination to “self-sacrifice,” and a need for external regulation. Something similar, but contrary, is observed on the Superego block. On their Superego the individual is afraid to “overdo it,” they try to be socially inconspicuous and unassuming, to avoid receiving corrective remarks from others. If this fails, the individual is tormented by conscience. On the contrary, on the Superid people try to have their self-sacrificing activity noticed and not accepted. If it is not noticed and the individual does not manage to “earn” corrective remarks, they are tormented by anti-conscience. What is anti-conscience? A gnawing feeling of guilt, but the guilt of others rather than one’s own. It is a feeling that those around you are guilty before you. It is a very unpleasant feeling, which in its “unpleasantness” is not different from the pangs of conscience. You could say that conscience and anti-conscience are equally unpleasant, equally gnawing. But with conscience the individual feels his own guilt, and with anti-conscience, the guilt of others. A person’s personality is spoiled by pangs of anti-conscience, he becomes grumpy, dissatisfied, rebuking everyone and everything.

The Superid activity must be realized at the highest level of technique and quality. The EII considers it incompetent and even shameful to do some work that isn’t “for them,” i.e. something they do not know well enough. It is necessary to be prepared for any work, business-wise and morale-wise. It is noteworthy that for the EII, work is more interesting than preparing for it, while for the EIE – on the contrary – preparation is more interesting than work: work itself does not even need to happen, all the interest is in the preparation. Undoubtedly, this is due to the fact that the Superego block of the EII is identical to the Superid block of the EIE, and the Superid of the EII is the Superego of the EIE.

The EII with pleasure listens to corrections of his work that are expressed in a calm, but categorical tone. The stricter the tone, the more sure the EII is in the person making the corrections, and the greater a sense of relief that someone cares about them and removes responsibility. It is noteworthy that the LSE, in criticizing the work, not so much criticizes it in the present, but rather gives thorough directions for the future. His instillation criticism is aimed at correcting the EII’s entire line of activity, so that the same mistakes would not be repeated in the future. The LSE criticizes for the lack of purity of work, for the insufficiently beautiful result, or for the individual’s poor performance in the sense that they get tired by work that could be less, or not at all, tiring. That is, the work is tiring, although this poor quality and fatigue can be avoided with a slight change in technique, the use of some rules, or better preparation for the job. The LSE is able to change EII’s line of action even when this line of action is familiar and habitual for the EII, thus changing the EII’s picture of the world, making his life in this world brighter and more joyful.

LSE’s nervousness (as well as methodicalness) does not irritate the EII and does not even seem nervous, but, on the contrary, gives a sense of calm that he himself is relieved of the concern and responsibility for the technique of the future activity and the quality of its result. The LSE criticizes only for the technique, that is, the wrong process (), not for the material result (). And the next time in a similar situation, the EII will automatically behave as he has been dictated to do. That is, what others (e.g., the ILE) would perceive as a stressful reproach, the EII perceives as benevolence and care, which give him well-being, rhythm, calmness, the knowledge that he is not alone, that everything in the world goes as it should, that he and his work are noticed and appreciated, that he himself is taken care of and will not be allowed to stumble.

For the LSE, someone feeling poorly is the result of what has been done wrong. Therefore, if the EII falls ill, first of all, there is a long discussion about what was done wrong. The EII listens to LSE’s reproaches about how he doesn’t take care of himself and doesn’t do what he should for himself. For the EII it is very important to hear that one should do something for oneself.

And only after the EII realizes all this do the LSE and the EII start discussing what he should do next, how he should be treated. What doctors to go to. Doctors are required to give strict orders about how to behave in order to improve one’s well-being. As for the LSE, he does not take his medication until he has read the instructions attached to the drugs. The instructions must be followed precisely and rigorously. The same is demanded of his dual the EII.

The EII knows that it is necessary to move, to give his muscles work, that this improves his well-being and capabilities as an active member of society. He feels the effect of any motor activity very quickly, almost immediately, as if it were the bottleneck in the process of energy metabolism, and as if, having eliminated it, he will improve his general condition. So it is. It’s not for nothing that we call this block a psychosomatic block.

When the EII sees a person who had a misfortune befall them, he feels it with his whole body. With his muscles he feels the other person’s stiffness, tightness. Listening to a singer who sings way too loud, the EII can go hoarse. He loves ballet because he comes out of the theater relaxed.

If he is asked to do something, he can not say no, I can not, I do not want to. If he does, it’s only to the person closest to him, and even then it is not “I can’t,” but rather “why me?”, wanting to make sure that it is logical that he will be the one doing it. That is why EIIs are exploited, getting overloaded with all sorts of work more than necessary. And they don’t know how to shut themselves off from it. They need the guadrdianship of the dual who will unambiguously tell them who and why should do one or the other thing. This is how they get shut off from an activity from which the EII himself cannot and does not feel the right to shut himself off. That is to say, shutting off through subordination to the dual.

How does this type perceive pain? It is an element of well-being and in his eyes it is always the result of some wrong-doing, bad behavior or the result of the absence of some deeds. Can’t cheat on his spouse because cheating is an act that shouldn’t happen. Because cheating is shameful. Ashamed of the very fact of the act, not the fact that the spouse found out. An EIE, on the other hand, can physically cheat on his partner. And he doesn’t consider it “cheating.” For him, cheating is the betrayal of a person as an object – for example, when comparing his partner with another in favor of that other.

The EII has a strongly developed sense of shame. He is constantly ashamed of himself. He gets ashamed for others too – usually in the case when they are loved ones, the group with which he identifies himself. But, as one EII told us, they also experience shame when the audience reacts inadequately during a concert or performance – for example, for others’ superficial remarks, or when, without waiting for the end, others rise from their seats. It is both a shame and a pity for the performers.

The EII lives insofar as others notice and take care of his work, his energy expenditure. And to the degree of how good this care leads him to feel. This determines the feeling of success of one’s own functioning, the feeling of life’s happiness and peace of mind.

Appendices

I am attaching the materials I received from other socionics specialists to my characterization.

Aegis Gudzinskas, ILE

The unguided thoughts of the ethical-intuitive introvert are directed toward all objective relations that concern him to some extent. However, there is so little of them devoted to individual regularities, and they are so poorly understood, that one gets the impression that they are not even aware of them at all. And all the more surprising are their remarks about objective relations, which no one has ever noticed before. These quick, reactive, “unconsidered” remarks are only evoked by the objective relations, the objective needs of objects. It turns out that these reactions are necessary for extroverts with complementary deductive thinking, who, even if they notice new objective relations, are unable to take them into account without such remarks from another person. With these ill-considered remarks and the appropriate response to them, the bonds of psychological cooperation are born. (Whoever does not perceive these remarks, dropped carelessly, as if by the way and most often in a dissatisfied tone, or those who hear in them nagging, reproaches rather than a statement of fact, cannot become an optimal partner in psychological cooperation).

The objective reality by which the ethical-intuitive introvert orients himself is the objective relationships (regularities) with the specific objects involved. This type is sensitive to the imperfections of any objects, including people. Sensitive to everything that is not subjectively necessary, and contradicts elementary laws, does not fit its purpose, violates common norms of relations. Including relations between people. The EII looks for opportunities to improve the object only in subjective phenomena – in distorted inter-human relations or in unused human possibilities, but not in the objective regularities themselves. The relations between objects, their regularities, are immutable and untouchable. Attentive to all possibilities of improving objects and re-educating people. It can be said that on the element (2/1) there is a search for social request*. Selective information about abnormal, not fitting the norms and the purpose subjective relations is collected on the strongest accepting element (3/1).

* Editor’s note: relation of benefit.

In the second ring instead of conscious accumulation of information we have only imitation, instead of thinking and doubting we have only a feeling of anxiety or satisfaction. The perception of internal processes, such as emotions, when is in the second ring, does not play the role of either scientific or creative imagination. All it gives the individual is a sense of security or insecurity about what is going on inside something (someone) or within oneself.

When the ethical-intuitive introvert feels secure, he takes up the active use of his time. There is a tendency to think abstractly about what is or could be happening around him ( – 4/2). He is happy to comply with the wishes of others, unless he feels that these are malicious intentions aimed at his exploitation. Requests, which the individual has not had time to understand (i.e. understand which emotions are behind them), intimidate him, give rise to a sense of danger. He is usually compliant, but is often petty suspicious, mistrustful.

He is unable to assess the quality of his work and the time lost. He measures his work only by the inner energy he uses – . Ability and readiness to show emotional activity, emotional disposition, emotional state, which is a readiness for some form of activity or passivity.

He is loved by the one who saves his inner energy () from being dissipated on small things, who shows what is small, of secondary importance, what is not worth of being treated as a problem. The inability to figure out for himself what is everyday minutae and what is vital is one of the main weaknesses of this type. He feels cared for, feels emotionally supported when he hears that he is really worried about something that he should be worried about, that it can’t be otherwise. He only trusts someone who notices and appreciates his work. And not because he loves praise, but only because he himself does not feel the significance of his work. For himself, the only thing that actually (more or less) exists is what can be done, how one can act, what one could have to do. But he does not know what he should do, what he must do, what to use his energy for (totally unsuitable for specific leadership). Without assurances that he makes others happier, the EII is restless, unhappy with himself.

Perception of dynamics, movement, processes ( – 1/2) does not fulfill the role of intellectual function. It is rather an attempt to understand one’s own behavior, actions, the evaluation of which is mainly conditioned by activity of and . The purpose of the element is to mobilize the activity of the individual. What is needed is information that physically rouses the individual and gives him stamina. This is not so simple. It is not enough, for example, to feel healthy. It is necessary to see that others consider his life happy, successful. And thereby receive unambiguous instructions through the reactions of other individuals about when it is appropriate and necessary to feel bad, when – good. He feels good and bad only among other people.

This individual’s activity is directly proportional to his healthy lifestyle. In a “healthy” environment, he does not know fatigue and bad moods. That is why he is very afraid of fake criteria of “healthy life”, criteria that may involve him in an activity that will not bring any benefit, will not lead most others people to feel envy or support for the EII. That is, it provokes a waste of energy () and time (). If the individual’s activity is not supported, that is, if there is no concrete compensation by improved well-being and self-satisfaction, it soon fades, the individual begins to feel a hard-to-explain anxiety that causes him to go to conflict. Physical atmosphere plays such a large role in the life of this personality type that he looks upon anyone who spoils the well-being of others as a personal enemy. Good well-being is the main condition for activity and joyful existence. If his well-being is spoiled, he loses the ability to react consciously. Only retreat or unconscious outbursts of aggression are possible.

Laima G., EII

I feel very bad when I have one unfinished rush job at work and get a second one, also a rush job. I can only do one thing at a time. If I get a second one, I get lost and take on the latest thing. I feel very bad when I have unfinished work to do for others.

Every person has their morality derived from their essence. It is possible to reprimand actions, facts, but not when motives are discerned. When there is understanding that the person is this way and cannot be different (this is where they end, there are their limits – you cannot go higher than yourself), then there is no need in evaluation, it is superfluous. I understand correcting and re-educating others only as facilitating the person’s ability to see themself, to awaken the inner necessity of self-training.

Antonina Volkova-Obozova, EII

C. G. Jung’s thoughts, which can be attributed to the ethical-intuitive introvert (and even more so to the ethical-sensory introvert):

“…The egocentrized subject now comes to feel the power and importance of the devalued object. She begins consciously to feel “what other people think.” Naturally, other people are thinking all sorts of mean things, scheming evil, contriving plots, secret intrigues, etc. In order to forestall them, she herself is obliged to start counter-intrigues, to suspect others and sound them out, and weave counterplots. Beset by rumours, she must make frantic efforts to get her own back and be top dog. Endless clandestine rivalries spring up, and in these embittered struggles she will shrink from no baseness or meanness, and will even prostitute her virtues in order to play the trump card.” (Jung C. G. Psychological types)*

* Editor’s note: a revision by R. F. C. Hull of the translation by H. G. Baynes. The section on the introverted feeling type.

From the letters of A. V., EII

If a feeling, a love for example, is insulted by someone, or rejected rudely, or deceived, there is a thirst for revenge. The person who has done this is suddenly seen in the worst possible light; he is assumed to be vicious, low, etc. One has to think of an antidote to his foulness, to find disarming “tricks”. In this case, perhaps, you don’t think about the evaluation of your “plan”, whether it is bad, whether it is immoral… You can do anything you want, if the subject is so low. The main thing is to get back at him, ruthlessly and definitively.

I have not had such a situation, but when there is a suspicion of its possibility, then my head is puffed up with plans to fight and possible responses. However, for this the ethical function needs to completely stop working, the feelings need to be hurt very deeply. Otherwise, the person will not dare to begin their violent actions. In this case, I can usually stop myself with the thought, “God will punish him,” or “this pathetic creature is not worth getting my hands dirty over.” The best thing to do is to remove myself and never deal with him. By the way, this is also a way to punish…

What do I myself do and experience when my feelings are not considered? As you rightly say, the first function is an area of personal arbitrariness. So there are many shades here, it all depends on the situation. In general, I won’t deal with people who are expected to ignore my feelings. I avoid such situations in every way possible. And most of the time I succeed. After all, I can see in advance who doesn’t like me and how serious it is. By the way, again to the first function: I was often told that it was impossible not to love me. True, the first function is convincing to those around me. Secondly, initially I always, without prejudice, treat everyone well – that is, even before contact, I give them my positive feelings upfront, inviting them to behave in the same way. Well, if a partner responds with negative feelings, does not consider my good disposition, then the first thing I try to do is to break off any relationship with him. I will leave. If there is no way to leave (e.g., it’s coworkers, relatives, etc.), then I will shut down. I will stay within the formal relationship, with the implication behind it: I understand that you don’t like dealing with me; neither do I; but we are forced by circumstances to cooperate. So the relationship becomes outwardly decent, but there is restraint and coldness, I am unapproachable and withdrawn, all contact is within the minimum of necessity. Those who have experienced this behavior of mine say that it is terrible, it would be better if I yelled, openly behaved in a hostile way, then there would be a reason for the partner to show his feelings as well. But the ice shell forces them to be proper as well.

I will always try to figure out why the person doesn’t accept me. It seems like a misunderstanding to me: he didn’t understand my good attitude; he is misjudging; I made some kind of involuntary mistake. I will try to dispel the negative relationship by clarifying with my partner the reason for it; I will be ready to apologize, to give in, to behave with him as he wants; I am sure that with gentleness, love and goodwill one can and should (this is the point: they should) soften anyone, even a rascal. If my partner does not meet me halfway, and I have tried all the ways, then there is only one way out – to break up with him. Leave.

I think that the introvert is more likely to be characterized by defensive activity, aimed not at achievement, but at avoidance. You’ve written this somewhere before. I’m generally amazed at how insightful you are, and find more and more discoveries that you’ve already written down. I don’t know how to explain it from a relationship standpoint, but I – your supervisor – appreciate you very much and am afraid of losing contact. I think EIIs could say that they are all very selective in relationships: the relationship is not established quickly, the selection is very biased, but after that it is for life. That’s what one of my EIIs told me: I keep friends for life.

You ask me how I tolerate others not considering my Id emotions. Kill me, I don’t know what you’re talking about. I was trying to explain to you that I won’t communicate with a person who – I can feel it right away – won’t consider me. If it turns out that someone doesn’t consider me, it takes me a long time to figure out what they need to not get angry at me, and to smooth things over. And then I will react as he deserves: I will be rude if he is rude, I will shout if he shouts, I will be ironic… Of course, I always try not to stoop to this kind of communication, but if it happened, then I just respond in the exact way, and to the extent, that my partner behaves. I accept his “game”.

As for situations, I don’t care if a stranger doesn’t consider me. In this case I just become cold and walk away. And if someone close to me doesn’t consider me, it hurts me. It hurts if it’s a person on whom I depend, and their dislike threatens me in some way. What matters here is whether someone else’s emotion causes fear () as a suspicion of possible trouble. If it does not threaten me in any significant way, then let him shout as much as he wants. I am more hurt of negative emotions; if someone is having fun in spite of my mood, it’s not traumatic. But if it’s a loved one who should share the grief, the trouble, and he’s having fun, I perceive it as his callousness and lack of understanding of the situation. One SEI often got into trouble when he tried to cheer me up and I had reason to grieve. To me, then, his tomfoolery seemed to be maximum tactlessness.

I suppose the first function is the heaviest burden. For example, the SEI establishes a long-term relationship with a partner based on sexual attraction; they are quite promiscuous, but stop at the partner who satisfies their attraction. LSEs selectively choose like-minded people who share their ideas. You selectively choose companions who would be enthusiastic for an interesting endeavor. Me – the one and ultimate lover to whom I could give my life…