LII are relatively better at assessing the emotional atmosphere occurring in a group or during an activity than ESI.
When meeting someone knew, LII are not as likely as ESI to perceive "getting to know somebody" as a special kind of activity. LII know very well whey they are getting acquainted (i.e., what the purpose of the relationship is, be it business, personal, travel, etc.). LII, in contrast with ESI, do not divide the process of getting acquainted into consecutive stages; rather LII 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 LII 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 LII and their relationship with the other person.
ESI are more likely to believe in objective truths than LII. That is, ESI are more likely to believe there is a correct or best way of doing something than LII.
LII are more inclined to believe there are relative truths than ESI. That is, this relativity is perceived by LII 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 LII) 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 LII 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, LII 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 LII. E.g., ESI see having fun occurring simultaneously with other activities, such as work or even serious affairs. LII 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 LII than ESI. This comparison not only concerns LII methods, but also their understanding, terminology, etc. LII 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," LII 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 LII. 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 LII, 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 LII) 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 LII. ESI tend to be more linear in their relationship progression than LII, and ESI assign importance to the formalities of recognizing the start and end to each of these stages.
LII are rmore relaxed in their natural state than ESI. However LII will mobilize and concentrate when needed to accomplish an objective. After the task has been completed, LII demobilize again. This state of demobilization is the natural state of LII.
When contemplating a task, it takes LII longer time to mobilize than ESI; i.e., LII 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, LII are more likely than ESI to break up larger tasks into several stages. Then LII mobilize to carry out each stage (and demobilize between the stages).
When getting ready to start a project, LII spend more time planning and preparing for the project than ESI. In particular, LII spend more time discussing the plan, discussing options and ways to approach the project, etc.)
When describing their reasoning for their actions, LII (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 LII 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 LII 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 LII, 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 LII 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 LII to focus on the fruits of their labor, about what their effort will yield. LII on the other hand are more likely to focus on the environment they work in, e.g., their work conditions, conveniences, commute time, etc.
LII 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 LII. LII on the other hand, are better at seeing the big picture than ESI.
LII are more focused on ideas and concepts than ESI. On the other hand, ESI are more focused (than LII) on their surroundings.
ESI are more naturally comfortable with physical confrontations than LII.
LII are often more interested in the idea or theory of something, whereas ESI are more interested in the actual practice or implementation of it.
LII 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 LII often struggle understanding them.
LII 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 LII prefer to use argumentation as a means of convincing others.
ESI are more vulnerable to logical manipulation than LII. However LII in contrast, are often more vulnerable to emotional or ethical manipulations than ESI.
LII place greater value on their interests than ESI. For example, LII will maintain high levels of energy and focus on an interest they value, even deprioritizing their other resources to maintain the interest. For example, LII 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 LII. 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.
When planning to complete something, LII 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, ESI 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.
ESI are able to change and make adjustments to their goals more easily than LII (depending on how progress is being made, etc.). LII on the other hand, prefer to stick with their original goals.
LII tend to judge their available options by how likely the option will help them reach their goal. If a choice no longer helps LII reach their goals, it will be dismissed and discontinued. On the other hand, ESI prefer to continue pursuing their current option, opting to adjust their ultimate goal in order to fit the current choice.
When solving a problem, LII rely more heavily on their generalized past experiences than ESI. LII are inclined to use already prepared, preformulated methods and processes to solve a problem.
When solving a problem, ESI are more inclined (than LII) to solve it by relying predominantly on only the presently available information. Essentially, ESI will develop a process or method uniquely fitted towards the present problem, and this method is designed using the present conditions and information.
LII are more likely (than ESI) to seek new and novel experiences rather than returning to something already lived through. They will generally only re-read a book, re-watch a movie, or revisit the same place if they have forgotten it or are hoping to learn something new from it.
ESI are more likely than LII to use "emotional anchors" that resonate with their internal emotional condition. These emotional anchors could be a book, a movie, a place, a song, etc. ESI use these anchors to strengthen their inner emotional state and thus will repeat the experience: e.g., re-reading a book, re-watching a movie, continually going back to a place to experience the emotions associated with it.
