Socionic Type Comparisons
This article is a collection of short materials for understanding the differences between various pairs of types. Similar material was originally posted by me at the16types forum.
Click on the links to see the descriptions below
ILE's dominant state is active mental activity that implies or demands some sort of discussion with others. New information gleaned from an interesting source must be conveyed to others. Because this need is no dominant, an ILE always has "colleagues" around who receive and digest his or her information. Extraverted intuition "shines" most when discussing and relaying information and expressing ideas. An ILE will light up and put immense energy into getting other people to understand things.
ILI's dominant state is receptive mental activity — sort of like registering on an internal slate signals from external reality (or an abstract internal representation of this reality). This information does not necessarily demand verbal transmission to others. One expresses it is a more subtle way — in one's reactions to others' statements and actions. When verbally expressed, this information is no less interesting than extraverted intuition, but it usually has to be sought out by others. It also often requires interpretation, whereas ILE's messages are adapted to his/her audience.
These types also have different kinds of suggestibility.
ILE is suggestive to comfort, relaxation, and states of mind that focus on tuning in to internal physiological sensations. He/she cannot create these conditions himself, but if you do it for him, he loves it and finds total rejuvenation.
ILI is suggestive to powerful desires (willpower) and drives to do or obtain something no matter what. He/she cannot create this state of mind himself, but if you do it for him, he gets drawn into the thick of exciting events in the outside world in a way that totally rejuvenates him and balances him out.
ILE's talk about logical systems and definitions without strain and are able to jump from system to system easily. IEE's like to stick to one system or set of definitions wherever possible. ILE's gobble up new systems and abstract categories. IEE's accept categories that they can somehow relate to their understanding of people.
Take an ILE and an IEE and ask them to study and describe a real person. An ILE will stick to external or abstract categories in describing the person, while an IEE will try to describe the actual person from that person's point of view, making occasional references to categories as necessary. (NOTE: I agree that this paragraph is too ambiguous, but I don't know what to fix here yet)
Now stick an ILE and an IEE into a serious logic-oriented debate with people they don't know. The ILE will tune into the ideas themselves and enter discussion quickly (provided he has something to say). The IEE won't feel comfortable expressing his opinions until he has established personal, individual contact with other group members. IEE's try to establish a personal link with people before conveying ideas and information. ILE's tend to avoid or ignore personal, subjective contact with people because they are not sure of themselves in this area. Likewise, many IEE's avoid expressing their opinions on logical topics in order to avoid painful criticism of their views.
Hence the common IEE acronym Reporter (I use "Psychologist" here). A reporter is someone who has been all over and knows everything and everyone, but uses situations and interviews to convey his awareness rather than expressing his views outright. This way he is invulnerable to logical criticism.
Other IEE's express their opinions on logical matters more often, but only if they have a whole string of logical arguments to back them up just in case.
ILE's are strong in logic, but weak in personal contact. They can convey interesting information to people they don't know, but they avoid sharing personal sentiments and experiences that might be understood incorrectly. IEE's, on the other hand, are fearless in baring their personal experiences and sentiments and like to analyze them together with other people.
ILE's like to have the issue of psychological distance in communication taken care of for them, and would prefer to always use the same distance and be everyone's "buddy" — no matter what the situation or people involved. They become uncomfortable when for some reason others want to change the distance on them and make the relationship formal and strict — or intensely close and personal.
In contrast, SEE's and IEE's (with  as their creative function) are very flexible in their psychological distance. They recognize when they need to be cold and formal, and when they can "break" the existing distance and get closer and more personal. Because of this they rarely, if ever, do or say something rash in a group or one-on-one that destroys the positive mood and hurts others' feelings (unless it was intentional).
EII's tend to be more supportive and accepting of others' initiative. IEE's are often indifferent to others' initiative (they want to be the first to take initiative).
IEE's fear boredom and are constantly on the lookout for new objects to "consume" (new information sources, people, situations) to satisfy their curiosity. They rarely get completedly absorbed in social situations. Their eye movements betray this — scanning the room they're in instead of looking only at the people they're talking to. Also, they tend to drop in and out of conversation, entering when something catches their interest and then dropping out to reflect on something.
EII's are steadier in social situations and seem to get more absorbed in communication. They have less active eye movements and focus on listening carefully and sticking to the topic. They don't usually drop in and out like IEE's do, but are able to maintain a steady conversation with less fluctuation for a long time.
02/26/2006 rogen
"or even from outer space" Care to elaborate on that one? Also are IEI's like that too? is it a  thing?
02/26/2006 Author
Okay, that probably sounded too bizarre. I've changed that phrase to "or an abstract internal representation of this reality."
10/29/2006 Frederick van der Spuy
Article contains
1.ILE to ILI and 2.ILE to IEE and 3.IEE to EII in distinguishing patterns.
1.intellectual process
2.expression process of ideas
3.expression process in social contexts.
comment:
it is probably hard to type the ILI across strata 2 and 3. (i read that u type people on physical appearance and initial contact expression)....and so i would think that ILI is particularily hard to type for these.
may i suggest the idea of 'competence zones' - an idea in Meyer Briggs for INTP or NT types particularily. (i know u don't like the idea, but aforementioned was my first learning ground).
interesting in context to the ILI is the SEE dual.
as the SEE senses 'kinetic energy' {extra sensing / socion2 article} - a latency the ILI builds-up by there ego process... in relation to the SEE intra feeling capacity....which keeps the ILI comfortable as the SEEs second function keeps the SEE orientated toward an idea....rather then a person object which the ILI can dispise.
Contrarily, the ILI needs to actively set-up competence zones to get noticed by the socialite SEE
(contrarily - one active to one passive frame)
|
socionics in practice >> type comparisons 
vs. 
) [