which do you think are the most psychologically complicated relations? state why you think so.
which do you think are the most psychologically complicated relations? state why you think so.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Most complicated relations: between those who don't share values, goals, personal traits, intelligence, interests, cultural, social and economical background, different species and aliens
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
i do not know how to do a poll otherwise i would have, but anyway.
to me the most complicated relations are comparative and when i am the supervisee. with both of these relations there are things that draw me to the other person strongly, but yet other things that repell and disable me in a way that's totally uncomfortable. these are relations where there is push and pull and contstant tension. these relations are much harder to navigate than, say, conflict or quasi or even superego. indeed, with opposite quadra relations, it seems that i just have to accept that they see things completely opposite and as a result we are not going to be close. plus, with gamma, i understand their democratic values and can find a way to fit with them if i have to (like at work or something).
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
I'm not really sure how to answer this question, although it is an interesting food for thought. Even though there is this system, Socionics, I feel that when I make a bond of relations I strive to individualize the person and meet their emotional needs. Ummm. I think that the most difficult relations were the ones where I spent less time with the person then my energy or patience could endure. These relations are with supervision and benefit, unfortunately, as I am greatly attracted to people of both these relational types; it's true that they are easiest to establish but also end quickly too. I try to speak their own language to keep conversations going, but I can't find myself coming up with material to sustain them...they get kind of draining and boring to the point that physical distance is the only way to recoup.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
whatever the relation it is, the relation between me and discojoe is complicated enough.
Sincerely Yours,
Beyond the clouds. Beyond the sun.
The Rebel without a cause.
It's supervisory sweety pie.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Supervision
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I agree
Something about the delta STs is just confusing. Like I get along with them, but something is always off. Like we never have any major problems in communication or anything, but I just can't seem to fit around them. There's this awkward, and seemingly irrational tension and I don't know where it's coming from.
there has been a lot written about supervision for sure. most people agree this is complicated.
what about comparative? is this an equally complex relation?
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Supervision is up there, so is benefit.
complex meaning multi level, multiple dynamics occuring at once, these dynamics having different causes and effects in the world of the relationship. hard to understand clearly, hard to explain, not straightforward.
so lately i've been thinking illusionary and benefit are the most complex relations. and in a way the most interesting.
thoughts?
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Benefit. You have Person A's leading hitting B's mobilizing, triggering B's leading, which is A's demonstrative, and B's CREATIVE, hitting A's SUGGESTIVE! BOOM. Compatible Ego functions, which is why relations of Benefit can get along well.
The downside is Person A's creative function hitting B's ignoring function, that's why the 'Beneficiary' often feels ignored, and Person B's leading function hits Person A's demonstrative function, which is why the Beneficiary can find the Benefactor humorous (which can make the relationship fun), but can sometimes make the Benefactor feel like he isn't being listened to, or his suggestions aren't being taken seriously. Simple, right?
Illusionary. Person A's leading function hits Person B's ignoring function, and vice versa. Simple. Therefore, illusionaries aren't threatened by each other. (No Role functions or POLRs being hit)
Can get a bit complicated, when Person A's creative function hits B's mobilizing, and vice versa... which continues to trigger the leading function being ignored by the other... so you have a continually pattern of having to expend a bit more energy, to use your creative function, as opposed to leading, only to draw the person out to mention something you'd ignore as irrelevant. Can create a feeling of distrust, or both people can feel as though they are putting more effort into the relationship than the other person...
In order to make Illusionaries work, one or the other has to use their Role function... where they're not as confident... each person subconsciously pressures the other into using an area of they're psyche where they're weak... that's why Illusionaries can mistrust each other, or be confused when things come into action... it's relatively easy to use your Role function in discussion, but on-the-go, people naturally fall back to their Ego functions.
Does that help at all?
Certainly interesting relationships, indeed!
my illusionary is ENTp and they have been my easiest relationships. i can go up to them and say anything, like ANYTHING. i can sense an ENTp a mile away. this one entp in my politics and law class goes out whenever the class is talking about some controversy and i'm just like haha
an entp would NEVER go out during a debate in a politics and law class.EVERYONE knows that.
yes, good thoughts, all. benefit especially seems mysterious in practical application. i guess all relations are complex, that's why we need a theory. unless you have Fi ego lol.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
any of the relations with the opposing quadrant from the descriptions. a deceptive sense of similarity lingers on.