ILE are relatively better at assessing the emotional atmosphere occurring in a group or during an activity than ESI.
When meeting someone knew, ILE are not as likely as ESI 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 ESI, 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.
ESI are more likely to believe in objective truths than ILE. That is, ESI 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 ESI. 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 ESI 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. ESI 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 ESI) 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.
ESI tend to internally combine emotional exchanges with other activities rather than separating them out like ILE. E.g., ESI 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 ESI. 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 ESI 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.
ESI are not as inclined to compare and verify concepts as ILE. ESI assume that these can have only one unique interpretation (the "correct" interpretation), and ESI often do not think about the fact that the other person may be interpreting them differently. Much more than ILE, ESI apply concepts such as "objective reality," "unequivocal facts," and de-emphasize concepts; ESI consider that they know the "right" way of doing things, how something "truly is," etc.
ESI 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 ESI be more externally predetermined. Additionally, ESI generally progress in relationships through stages, and therefore are more familiar with these stages than ILE. ESI tend to be more linear in their relationship progression than ILE, and ESI assign importance to the formalities of recognizing the start and end to each of these stages.
ILE are rmore relaxed in their natural state than ESI. However ILE will mobilize and concentrate when needed to accomplish an objective. After the task has been completed, ILE demobilize again. This state of demobilization is the natural state of ILE.
When contemplating a task, it takes ILE longer time to mobilize than ESI; i.e., ILE prefer to spend some time in a more natural state of relaxedness which will then prepare them to subsequently mobilize and concentrate at the crucial moments, improving their performance.
When working on a project, ILE are more likely than ESI to break up larger tasks into several stages. Then ILE mobilize to carry out each stage (and demobilize between the stages).
When getting ready to start a project, ILE spend more time planning and preparing for the project than ESI. In particular, ILE spend more time discussing the plan, discussing options and ways to approach the project, etc.)
When describing their reasoning for their actions, ILE (more so than ESI) tend describe how and why they came to a certain decision, and focus less on the timing and initiation of the action.
When it comes to completing a task, ESI are more likely than ILE to mobilize for longer periods of time. Specifically, ESI tend to mobilize for an action early and stay mobilized for a longer period of time after the task has been completed. For ESI, this state of readiness is their natural state.
ESI are more likely than ILE to tackle a task in its entirety, rather than breaking it up into smaller separate stages.
When doing a task, ESI are inclined to work for the sake of the result (for example, a reward or bonus for completing the task). In contrast to ILE, ESI can renounce their comforts and conveniences for this; ESI evaluate their place of work by looking at what returns they get for the effort they invested (e.g., monetary, prestige, etc.).
When describing why they undertook a project, ESI are more likely than ILE to focus on the moment when a decision is made and to speak in detail about the stages of its implementation.
When discussing work, ESI are more likely than ILE to focus on the fruits of their labor, about what their effort will yield. ILE on the other hand are more likely to focus on the environment they work in, e.g., their work conditions, conveniences, commute time, etc.
ILE tend to be more idealistic with their heads-in-the-cloud. ESI, on the other hand, are more realistic and down-to-earth.
ESI are better at noticing details than ILE. ILE on the other hand, are better at seeing the big picture than ESI.
ILE are more focused on ideas and concepts than ESI. On the other hand, ESI are more focused (than ILE) on their surroundings.
ESI are more naturally comfortable with physical confrontations than ILE.
ILE are often more interested in the idea or theory of something, whereas ESI are more interested in the actual practice or implementation of it.
ILE are more likely to make decisions based on logical reasons than ESI, who are more likely to make decisions based on their own feelings.
ESI 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 ESI.
ESI 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.
ESI are more vulnerable to logical manipulation than ILE. However ILE in contrast, are often more vulnerable to emotional or ethical manipulations than ESI.
ILE place greater value on their interests than ESI. 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.
ESI place greater value on their resources than ILE. For ESI, resources like their money, time, sleep, etc., fall into their "inner personal space," and the ESI will be more likely to deprioritize an interest if it starts to drain these resources too much.
ESI' 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 ESI' energy levels increase when they're interacting with larger groups.
ESI' 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, ESI tend to have higher energy levels than ILE.
ILE are more often focused on their thoughts and feelings where as ESI are more often focused on their surroundings.
ESI 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 ESI often have a wider network of friends.
ESI 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 ESI.
ESI 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, ESI tend to prefer a wait and see, more spontaneous approach.
ESI are relatively more flexible and tolerant than ILE.
ILE are relatively more rigid and stubborn than ESI.
ESI 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 ESI into finishing any new project they start.
ESI tend to start more tasks and other projects than ILE, but the ESI are less likely to complete all of them.
ILE tend to have stiffer more angular movements. ESI tend to have more relaxed fluid movements.
ESI tend to have a more democratic leadership style than ILE.
ILE tend to have a more authoritarian, hierarchical leadership style than ESI.
ESI have a relatively higher stress tolerance than ILE. ILE often struggle with continually changing situations more than ESI do.
ILE pay more particular attention to aspects of a situation or plan that are insufficient or lacking. This can be interpreted by others as ILE having a negative assessment of various situations and events (.e.g, "the glass is half empty). On the other hand, ESI pay more attention to what is actually present in a situation, and this can be interpreted as an affirmative or positive manifestation of the surrounding world, situations, possibilities, and prospects (e.g. "the glass is half full").
When assessing an option or available choice, ESI tend to focus more on how the choice could benefit them (what it would potentially yield) than ILE would. On the other hand, ILE would be more cognizant of the potential risks and potential losses that may accompany the decision that ESI may unconsciously minimize.
When developing a plan of action or process, ESI 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, ILE 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, ILE experience more discomfort (than ESI) if the project does not have a clearly delineated end-goal or result. This happens because ILE have more difficulty monitoring and understanding how the project is developing than ESI because they are outside of the process.
