If Every Man Were an Island
If every man were an island, we’d all be super easy to type. I propose that the reason for all the confusion, is not that individuals are all that complicated, but because our relationships are. In other words, intertype relations have great potential to affect the way we behave and how we come across to others. In the following analysis, I will attempt to point out how intertype relations can blur the line between visible “type” and true type, and why one should always be aware of the influence of intertype relations when attempting to type someone else.
It has been suggested (further down in this thread) that perhaps not every type will be equally inclined to try to change in order to better match the psychological expectations inherent in a given intertype relation. True though this may be, I still think that the same expectations and pressures will still be there regardless of the types involved, but that some types will be more aware--able to identify the problem spots--than others.
I will use my own type, ENFp, as the example type. Eventually, I intend to come out with charts for the other 15 types as well (but don’t hold your breath, I am known to not finish what I start, after all).
Inter-Quadra Relations (Delta)
Identity
ENFp’s Identity is, of course, ENFp. It is unlikely that an ENFp in this type of relationship will be mis-typed; however if it does happen, the most likely mis-typing will be that of ISTp, or ENFp’s Dual. This can happen because both partners in the relationship have an inner desire for more duality in the relationship, and one or the other will attempt to provide that duality at times.
Duality
ENFp’s Dual is ISTp. Again, a mis-typing is unlikely in the case, due to the perfect psychological ease of this type of relation and the freedom each partner feels to be themselves at all times. Over time, however, partners may make attempts to emulate each other, and in these moments the ENFp may appear more like an ISTp.
Activity
ENFp’s Activity partner is ESTj. Despite the j/p difference, again mis-typing is unlikely. Though, there may be times where partners rub off on each other in such a way as to make the perceiving partner appear more rigid, and the judging partner to appear more flexible. If any mis-typing does occur in Activity interaction, the ENFp may appear to be more like an INFj to the outside observer.
Mirror
ENFp’s Mirror partner is INFj. Similar to Activity, some j/p conflicts may arise, but overall the ENFp will continue to act like herself. If any mis-typing occurs, she may resemble an ESTj.
Neighboring Quadra Relations (Alpha)
Kindred
ENFp’s Kindred is ENTp. Partners in this type of relation feel a psychological pull to be more like each other. However, the ENFp will have difficulty meeting the expectation to act more like an ENTp, due to her weak Ti. Instead, she will try to bring out more Si (valued by both partners) and Fe (her de-valued strength), making the most likely mis-typing in this type of relation that of ISFp. A mis-typing of ENTp can also occur.
Semi-Duality
ENFp’s Semi-Dual is ISFp. In this relation of deceptive duality, partners will expect themselves to act more like Duals, and will be repeatedly surprised at their failure to do so. As the ENFp attempts to meet the expectation to be more like an ENTp, she will quickly tire of her attempts at Ti and instead bring out more Si and Fe, beginning to resemble her Semi-Dual (ISFp). This can frustrate the ISFp, who is expecting a Dual partner, not an Identity partner.
Benefit
ENFp’s Benefactor is ESFj. In a relation of Benefit, the Beneficiary tries to be more like an Activity partner to her Benefactor. In the ENFp's case, she will try to entertain the ESFj with her Base Ne, but since her accompanying Creative Fi is unvalued by the ESFj, her efforts for a true Activity relation will fall flat, as the ESFj exerts pressure on the ENFp's Vulnerable Ti. Possible mis-typings are unclear as yet, perhaps ENTp or ISFp.
Supervision
ENFp’s Supervisor is INTj. In a relation of Supervision, both the Supervisor and the Supervisee expect a Mirror-type relation. However, the ENFp can find herself blocked at every turn whenever she tries to correct her INTj Supervisor's Role Fi, while the INTj seems to have an unfair advantage when it comes to correcting the ENFp's Vulnerable Ti. Both partners may wish they were more "equally yoked" psychologically. Possible mis-typings are unclear, perhaps ISFp or ENTp.
Neighboring Quadra Relations (Gamma)
Business
ENFp’s Business partner is ESFp. Partners in this type of relation expect to be more like each other, and are surprised to find out that they are not. Psychological pressure is put on the individual to bring out more of her Role function, which for the ENFp is Se. However, the ENFp will never be very comfortable in her Role function, so instead, she may try to bring out more Ni (a strong, devalued function for the ENFp and the ESFp’s dual-seeking function) and Te (valued by both partners). Possible mis-typings in this case, then, are INTp or ESFp.
Illusionary
ENFp’s Illusionary is INTp. As with Semi-Duality, partners will expect themselves to act more like Duals, and can become frustrated when they find out that their expectations were wrong. As the ENFp attempts to emulate the INTp’s Dual (ESFp), using her Role Se, she will find it psychologically draining and frustrating to continue to do so. Instead, she will fall back on something more comfortable and what she thinks will be well-received by the INTp, using Ni and Te to be more like the INTp. This can be frustrating to the INTp, however, who really wanted a Dual partner, not an Identity partner.
Benefit
ENFp’s Beneficiary is ENTj. What a Benefactor really wants from her Beneficiary is more of an Activity-type relation. However, such a relation is seen as unachievable by the ENFp until she is able to "fix" some obvious flaws that she perceives in the ENTj. If she is feeling generous towards her Beneficiary, the ENFp may try to act more like ENTj's Activity partner (ESFj) by bringing out more Fe and Si. However, this will get tiring and annoying after a while, and instead the ENFp will start to exert pressure on the ENTj's Base Te (which the ENTj is probably already providing), and Vulnerable Si (which of course will not be very welcome to the ENTj). Possible mis-typings are unclear, perhaps ESFj or INTj.
Supervision
ENFp’s Supervisee is ISFj. In a relation of Supervision, both the Supervisor and the Supervisee expect a Mirror-type relation. However, the ENFp will find herself in a superior position to correct the ISFj's behavior in Ne matters (ISFj's Vulnerable function), while becoming annoyed with the ISFj's attempts to correct her Role Se. Both partners may wish they were more "equally-yoked" psychologically. Possible mis-typings are unclear, perhaps INTj or ESFj.
Opposing Quadra Relations (Beta)
Quasi-Identity
ENFp’s Quasi-Identical is ENFj. Partners in this type of relation will feel a psychological pull to be more like each other, bringing out their strong but unvalued functions. While it is relatively easy for the ENFp to bring out more Fe and Ni, she is unlikely to do so seriously, and so it may appear to the ENFj that she is being mocked by the ENFp. When the ENFp is not trying to act like the ENFj, she is most likely to simply revert back to being herself, figuring that it would not be worth the effort to try to please the ENFj any other way. Mis-typing in this type of relation is unlikely, except when the ENFp is acting like the ENFj, in which case a mis-typing of ENFj is possible.
Conflict
ENFp’s Conflict partner is ISTj. Partners in this relation expect each other to act more like their Duals, however Duality is so far from their grasp that they are not all that surprised when they fail to achieve it. Call it tragic irony; deep down, Conflict partners know they can never really help each other, yet they may find it hard to give up on each other completely. If the ENFp is feeling generous, she may play at being an ENFj for the ISTj’s benefit. However, if anyone were to suggest typing her as ENFj, she would scoff at the idea.
Super-Ego
ENFp’s Super-Ego partner is ESTp. At first, Super-Ego partners may simply see each other as a fun challenge, similar to an Activity relation. However, if a more serious relationship is pursued partners can put all sorts of psychological pressure on each other that will be very uncomfortable. For the ENFp, she will feel pressured to use her Role Se and Vulnerable Ti, which will leave her exhausted and out of touch with her core self. Instead, if she continues to pursue the ESTp, she will bring out more Fe and Ni; if this is well-received by the ESTp, partners may briefly come across as Activity partners, though this type of interaction will hardly last over a long period of time. So again, most likely mis-typing in this case is ENFj, but an ENFj typing is highly unlikely to be given any real consideration.
Contrary
ENFp’s Contrary partner is INFp. Partners in this type of relationship feel a constant pull to try to correct each other, as if in a Mirror relation. However, correction is rarely received well, and both partners are better off if they simply learn to keep their critical opinions about each other to themselves. Even sincere compliments have the potential to be mis-interpreted by Contrary partners, who speak such radically different psychological languages. Again, ENFj is probably the most likely (but still improbably) mis-typing in this type of relation.
And thank you
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by CILi
