ILE are relatively better at assessing the emotional atmosphere occurring in a group or during an activity than EII.
When meeting someone knew, ILE are not as likely as EII to perceive "getting to know somebody" as a special kind of activity. ILE know very well whey they are getting acquainted (i.e., what the purpose of the relationship is, be it business, personal, travel, etc.). ILE, in contrast with EII, do not divide the process of getting acquainted into consecutive stages; rather ILE 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 ILE 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 ILE and their relationship with the other person.
EII are more likely to believe in objective truths than ILE. That is, EII are more likely to believe there is a correct or best way of doing something than ILE.
ILE are more inclined to believe there are relative truths than EII. That is, this relativity is perceived by ILE as an extenuation of the differing beliefs, opinions, intentions, etc. of each person.
When something is perceived by EII as being incorrect, they are more likely (than ILE) to tell the person who made the error what they did wrong and how to do it the right way. EII are focused on who made the error and helping them to correct the mistake.
When something is perceived by ILE as being incorrect, they are more likely (than EII) to ask why it was done that way. Instead of necessarily trying to correct the person who made the error, ILE attempt to understand the person's reason for their decision/action.
EII tend to internally combine emotional exchanges with other activities rather than separating them out like ILE. E.g., EII see having fun occurring simultaneously with other activities, such as work or even serious affairs. ILE 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 ILE than EII. This comparison not only concerns ILE methods, but also their understanding, terminology, etc. ILE 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 EII who perceive terminology as "objective," ILE understand personal differences behind terminology (this applies even to well established terms) and they attempt to compare and verify them.
EII are not as inclined to compare and verify concepts as ILE. EII assume that these can have only one unique interpretation (the "correct" interpretation), and EII often do not think about the fact that the other person may be interpreting them differently. Much more than ILE, EII apply concepts such as "objective reality," "unequivocal facts," and de-emphasize concepts; EII consider that they know the "right" way of doing things, how something "truly is," etc.
EII are more likely (than ILE) 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 EII be more externally predetermined. Additionally, EII generally progress in relationships through stages, and therefore are more familiar with these stages than ILE. EII tend to be more linear in their relationship progression than ILE, and EII assign importance to the formalities of recognizing the start and end to each of these stages.
ILE are more likely than EII to perceive and distinguish themselves primarily through personal qualities. ILE focus on individualism more than EII.
ILE attitude towards a specific person (more so than EII) is based on their personal characteristics (authority, intellect, personal achievements, etc.) ILE recognize superiority of certain individuals drawing from their personal qualities
EII, more than ILE, frequently perceives and defines themselves and other people through group associations. EII focus on collectivism over individualism.
When EII form opinions of others, these opinions are formed under the influence of their attitude towards the group to which the person belongs. To EII, 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."
EII are often able to form quicker opinions of others they have just met than ILE. This is based on the ability of EII to draw conclusions about the person based on the groups the person belongs to; ILE are more reluctant to make these inferences.
ILE are more likely to make decisions based on logical reasons than EII, who are more likely to make decisions based on their own feelings.
EII are often better at solving and minimizing interpersonal problems, where as ILE often struggle understanding them.
ILE are often more interested in studying systems, structures, and functionality than EII.
EII tend to prefer using persuasion as a means of convincing others to do something, where as ILE prefer to use argumentation as a means of convincing others.
EII are more vulnerable to logical manipulation than ILE. However ILE in contrast, are often more vulnerable to emotional or ethical manipulations than EII.
ILE place greater value on their interests than EII. For example, ILE will maintain high levels of energy and focus on an interest they value, even deprioritizing their other resources to maintain the interest. For example, ILE may spend a large amount of energy on an interest they value, often to the detriment of their time, sleep, relationships, money, etc.
EII place greater value on their resources than ILE. For EII, resources like their money, time, sleep, etc., fall into their "inner personal space," and the EII will be more likely to deprioritize an interest if it starts to drain these resources too much.
When conversing, EII types are inclined to communicate in the form of monologues, where each party has "its turn." Because of that they subconsciously attempt to transform a dialogue into a series of monologues. Conversely, ILE tend to prefer more of a question and answer style format.
EII' psychic energy more often flows outwards, whereas with ILE, their psychic energy more often flows inward.
ILE' energy levels tend to improve when they're alone whereas EII' energy levels increase when they're interacting with larger groups.
EII' energy levels tend to decrease when they're alone whereas ILE' energy levels will decrease when they're interacting with larger groups of people.
With regards to energy levels, EII tend to have higher energy levels than ILE.
ILE are more often focused on their thoughts and feelings where as EII are more often focused on their surroundings.
EII tend to be more active and initiating with others where as ILE tend to be more passive and less initiating.
ILE often have a smaller, closer network of friends where as EII often have a wider network of friends.
EII are often more cognizant of their outwards appearance and are thus better at presenting themselves than ILE.
ILE are generally better at concentrating on specific tasks for longer periods of time than EII.
EII often prefer to work with others in a team where as ILE often prefer working alone.
ILE tend to plan ahead, making decisions early. On the other hand, EII tend to prefer a wait and see, more spontaneous approach.
EII are relatively more flexible and tolerant than ILE.
ILE are relatively more rigid and stubborn than EII.
EII are comfortable making changes and adjustments to their decisions quite frequently. ILE, on the other hand, prefer to not make changes to their decisions.
ILE tend to put more effort than EII into finishing any new project they start.
EII tend to start more tasks and other projects than ILE, but the EII are less likely to complete all of them.
ILE tend to have stiffer more angular movements. EII tend to have more relaxed fluid movements.
EII tend to have a more democratic leadership style than ILE.
ILE tend to have a more authoritarian, hierarchical leadership style than EII.
EII have a relatively higher stress tolerance than ILE. ILE often struggle with continually changing situations more than EII do.
When planning to complete something, ILE 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, EII 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.
EII are able to change and make adjustments to their goals more easily than ILE (depending on how progress is being made, etc.). ILE on the other hand, prefer to stick with their original goals.
ILE tend to judge their available options by how likely the option will help them reach their goal. If a choice no longer helps ILE reach their goals, it will be dismissed and discontinued. On the other hand, EII prefer to continue pursuing their current option, opting to adjust their ultimate goal in order to fit the current choice.
When solving a problem, ILE rely more heavily on their generalized past experiences than EII. ILE are inclined to use already prepared, preformulated methods and processes to solve a problem.
When solving a problem, EII are more inclined (than ILE) to solve it by relying predominantly on only the presently available information. Essentially, EII will develop a process or method uniquely fitted towards the present problem, and this method is designed using the present conditions and information.
