ESE' psychic energy more often flows outwards, whereas with EII, their psychic energy more often flows inward.
EII' energy levels tend to improve when they're alone whereas ESE' energy levels increase when they're interacting with larger groups.
ESE' energy levels tend to decrease when they're alone whereas EII' energy levels will decrease when they're interacting with larger groups of people.
With regards to energy levels, ESE tend to have higher energy levels than EII.
EII are more often focused on their thoughts and feelings where as ESE are more often focused on their surroundings.
ESE tend to be more active and initiating with others where as EII tend to be more passive and less initiating.
EII often have a smaller, closer network of friends where as ESE often have a wider network of friends.
ESE are often more cognizant of their outwards appearance and are thus better at presenting themselves than EII.
EII are generally better at concentrating on specific tasks for longer periods of time than ESE.
ESE often prefer to work with others in a team where as EII often prefer working alone.
EII tend to be more idealistic with their heads-in-the-cloud. ESE, on the other hand, are more realistic and down-to-earth.
ESE are better at noticing details than EII. EII on the other hand, are better at seeing the big picture than ESE.
EII are more focused on ideas and concepts than ESE. On the other hand, ESE are more focused (than EII) on their surroundings.
ESE are more naturally comfortable with physical confrontations than EII.
EII are often more interested in the idea or theory of something, whereas ESE are more interested in the actual practice or implementation of it.
EII tend to perceive events in an episodic manner, i.e., they see events evolve in discrete states rather than continuous changes. On the other hand, ESE tend to perceive events in a continuous sequence; i.e., they see events evolving fluidly rather that one state to the next.
When describing the stages of an event, ESE are more likely to focus on how stage A leads to stage B, how stage B leads to stage C, etc. EII, on the other hand, focus more on the stages themselves without necessarily seeing or emphasizing the transitions or causes and effects of the stages to the extent that ESE do.
When describing reality, EII are more likely to talk about the properties and structure of reality. ESE are more likely to describe reality as movements, interactions, and changes.
When planning to complete something, EII are more likely to focus their attention on the goal itself, overlooking and deprioritizing the individual actions needed to reach that goal. On the other hand, ESE tend to focus their attention on the each action; i.e., they're focused on how each decision and choice is being made (towards reaching the goal), in a step by step process.
ESE are able to change and make adjustments to their goals more easily than EII (depending on how progress is being made, etc.). EII on the other hand, prefer to stick with their original goals.
EII tend to judge their available options by how likely the option will help them reach their goal. If a choice no longer helps EII reach their goals, it will be dismissed and discontinued. On the other hand, ESE prefer to continue pursuing their current option, opting to adjust their ultimate goal in order to fit the current choice.
EII are relatively better at assessing the emotional atmosphere occurring in a group or during an activity than ESE.
When meeting someone knew, EII are not as likely as ESE to perceive "getting to know somebody" as a special kind of activity. EII know very well whey they are getting acquainted (i.e., what the purpose of the relationship is, be it business, personal, travel, etc.). EII, in contrast with ESE, do not divide the process of getting acquainted into consecutive stages; rather EII immediately establish the necessary emotional distance in contact and can regulate it if needed. To bridge the gap between poorly acquainted people in a group EII amp up the emotional tone; this can be mutually experienced happiness or misfortune. The name and title of the person are of secondary relevance to EII and their relationship with the other person.
ESE are more likely to believe in objective truths than EII. That is, ESE are more likely to believe there is a correct or best way of doing something than EII.
EII are more inclined to believe there are relative truths than ESE. That is, this relativity is perceived by EII as an extenuation of the differing beliefs, opinions, intentions, etc. of each person.
When something is perceived by ESE as being incorrect, they are more likely (than EII) to tell the person who made the error what they did wrong and how to do it the right way. ESE are focused on who made the error and helping them to correct the mistake.
When something is perceived by EII as being incorrect, they are more likely (than ESE) to ask why it was done that way. Instead of necessarily trying to correct the person who made the error, EII attempt to understand the person's reason for their decision/action.
ESE tend to internally combine emotional exchanges with other activities rather than separating them out like EII. E.g., ESE see having fun occurring simultaneously with other activities, such as work or even serious affairs. EII are more likely to internally separate out having fun with other activities, although the two can be interchanged at a high frequency.
The "comparison and verification of concepts" is a more common phenomenon among EII than ESE. This comparison not only concerns EII methods, but also their understanding, terminology, etc. EII are attuned to the fact that different people might understand and interpret different concepts and terms differently. They perceive terminology as well as actions of other people as part of the subjective concept inseparable from personal opinion, position, intent, etc. In contrast to ESE who perceive terminology as "objective," EII understand personal differences behind terminology (this applies even to well established terms) and they attempt to compare and verify them.
ESE are not as inclined to compare and verify concepts as EII. ESE assume that these can have only one unique interpretation (the "correct" interpretation), and ESE often do not think about the fact that the other person may be interpreting them differently. Much more than EII, ESE apply concepts such as "objective reality," "unequivocal facts," and de-emphasize concepts; ESE consider that they know the "right" way of doing things, how something "truly is," etc.
ESE are more likely (than EII) to use special rituals or other culturally accepted formalities when forming relationships with others. What that means is that the emotional proximity and relationship status for ESE be more externally predetermined. Additionally, ESE generally progress in relationships through stages, and therefore are more familiar with these stages than EII. ESE tend to be more linear in their relationship progression than EII, and ESE assign importance to the formalities of recognizing the start and end to each of these stages.
EII are more likely than ESE to perceive and distinguish themselves primarily through personal qualities. EII focus on individualism more than ESE.
EII attitude towards a specific person (more so than ESE) is based on their personal characteristics (authority, intellect, personal achievements, etc.) EII recognize superiority of certain individuals drawing from their personal qualities
ESE, more than EII, frequently perceives and defines themselves and other people through group associations. ESE focus on collectivism over individualism.
When ESE form opinions of others, these opinions are formed under the influence of their attitude towards the group to which the person belongs. To ESE, it is incomprehensible how it is possible to belong to two opposing groups at the same time:, i.e., "you're either with us, or with them and against us."
ESE are often able to form quicker opinions of others they have just met than EII. This is based on the ability of ESE to draw conclusions about the person based on the groups the person belongs to; EII are more reluctant to make these inferences.
When developing a plan of action or process, ESE tend to see themselves as "within the process"; they are immersed in it. Often because of this, they have more difficulty managing several plans at once. On the other hand, EII tend to place themselves "outside of the process"; they dissociate from it. For them the process or situation is something external from themselves.
When working on a project, EII experience more discomfort (than ESE) if the project does not have a clearly delineated end-goal or result. This happens because EII have more difficulty monitoring and understanding how the project is developing than ESE because they are outside of the process.
