Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 55

Thread: Movement to rename "conflictors"

  1. #1
    not gonna be around as much anymore
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    C-IEE
    Posts
    1,258
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Movement to rename "conflictors"

    Observation:

    My brother is my Conflictor, in Socionics terms. Thing is, he and I have never conflicted over anything. If anything, our relationship has typically been one of mild interest in each other (because we're siblings), where we can appreciate each others' differing abilities, but should one have to spend more than ten or so minutes listening to the other talk, we would drive each other to weariness and boredom.

    I'm imagining myself living alone in a house with my brother...He and I would lead two such completely different lives, we'd probably never see each other. And when we did, our interaction would be very formal and disinterested, rarely going beyond necessary communication. But, on the other hand, we'd probably never really argue with each other, either...we just wouldn't care enough to bother.

    "Conflictor" just seems, in this case at least, to be a misnomer. Though, I can't say I really have a good idea for a better name. Will have to give it some thought...

    My life's work (haha):
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/blog.php?b=709
    Input, PLEASEAnd thank you

  2. #2
    Lobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    TIM
    EII 6w5
    Posts
    2,080
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Maybe "dissonant" relationship?

    I also don't agree with using "valuer," like "Fi valuer." I think it's misleading, since anyone can find the value of a particular function, even though that is not what the phrase is actually referring to. A better word might be a synonym to "prioritizing," imo.

  3. #3
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,648
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What about the term 'relation of incompatibility' - not as negative as the initial one. It came to my mind because the conflicting types are just like two puzzle pieces which don't fit together.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  4. #4
    Lobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    TIM
    EII 6w5
    Posts
    2,080
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegaDoomer View Post
    What about the term 'relation of incompatibility' - not as negative as the initial one. It came to my mind because the conflicting types are just like two puzzle pieces which don't fit together.
    The issue with "incompatibility" is that it might just be the same as saying "conflictor" since both make sense when applied to Socionics alone. There's a difference between incompatible in Socionics and incompatible irl, where there are other factors involved.

  5. #5
    not gonna be around as much anymore
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    C-IEE
    Posts
    1,258
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Synonyms for "conflicting," according to my thesaurus...

    adverse, antagonistic, antipathetic, at odds with, clashing, contradictory, contrary, disconsonant, discordant, discrepant, dissonant, incompatible, incongruent, incongruous, inconsistent, inconsonant, opposed, opposing, paradoxical, unfavorable, unmixable.

    Interesting that there are essentially two intertype relations with the same name...but, I find that "Contrary" (also called "Extinguishment") seems to be a truly applicable name in the way it's used, but "Conflictor" just doesn't work for me...Actually, maybe "Extinguishment" would be a better name for Conflictors...idk.
    My life's work (haha):
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/blog.php?b=709
    Input, PLEASEAnd thank you

  6. #6
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's called conflictor because the functions conflict, not because the people are going to hate each other.

  7. #7
    not gonna be around as much anymore
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    C-IEE
    Posts
    1,258
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariella View Post
    It's called conflictor because the functions conflict, not because the people are going to hate each other.
    I know, but it just seems so misleading.
    My life's work (haha):
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/blog.php?b=709
    Input, PLEASEAnd thank you

  8. #8
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,648
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lobo View Post
    The issue with "incompatibility" is that it might just be the same as saying "conflictor" since both make sense when applied to Socionics alone.
    Yeah, you're maybe right. But it still fits pretty well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariella View Post
    It's called conflictor because the functions conflict, not because the people are going to hate each other.
    I think a conflict does not necessarily include hatred.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  9. #9
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegaDoomer View Post
    Yeah, you're maybe right. But it still fits pretty well.



    I think a conflict does not necessarily include hatred.
    Well I was exaggerating. But anyway I'm OK with the word "conflictor" because that's specifically what's being described as far as how the functions interact.

  10. #10
    Breaking stereotypes Suz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    On a chatbox diet
    TIM
    IDK
    Posts
    6,470
    Mentioned
    169 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Pianosinger, i think you've noticed what a lot of us are noticing about the conflictor inter-type relation as well.

    IME, i've clashed more with supervisors and superegos, and more consciously can't stand them, than conflictors.

    A problem i've run into with conflictors who have tried to teach me is that their teaching and explanations make no sense to me. It's like they're speaking a foreign language. I've run into this with supervisors to an extent as well. One LSI teacher i had would be explaining how to do some calculation and would totally confuse me because he would just say the number without the units (at least i think that was part of it). and he would be like, yeah so you take that and that and that, and that equals that, etc etc. I dont think he got me either, and he probably was frustrated that I wasn't understanding his explanations and kept asking for clarifications. I liked the guy though.
    Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "antagonistic" -- like this one.

  12. #12
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Call me prejudiced, but in my experience, conflictors conflict. That doesn't imply "hate" or anything such, not even "dislike". People are more likely to react with boredom and indifference to id information, IMO.

    I agree another name might potentially be better, but renaming a relation isn't going to change its nature. In particular, if your typings don't fit with intertype relations, not on personal, but socionics information exchange level, it seems like a very self-deceiving way to fix it.

  13. #13
    Sir Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    523
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pianosinger View Post
    I know, but it just seems so misleading.
    But is it, though? I mean, Soconics has its own vocabulary, where it'll use common words but mean something else entirely by them. This is just another example of that.
    4w5 sp/sx

    Please, direct all questioning of my self-typing to this thread. Thank you.

  14. #14
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't think there is particularly much wrong with the name; if another one was chosen there would probably be some other problem with it that isn't visible straight away.

    It would be a particularly bad thing if a politically correct name was chosen that dulls and pacifies the perfectly warranted claim that conflictors get along poorly in a general sense.

  15. #15
    2 EVIL I golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Several stories high
    TIM
    EIE prob 6
    Posts
    2,970
    Mentioned
    106 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The only other thing I would call it is "opposition." That's how I conceive of it personally.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Knight View Post
    But is it, though? I mean, Soconics has its own vocabulary, where it'll use common words but mean something else entirely by them. This is just another example of that.
    And that's a problem.

    Who conflicts? Friends who have the same values but opposing types, or adversaries who have diametrically opposite values and opposite types?

    Never mind the type hate that has emerged around that word.

    But antagonistic... that's a word that perfectly captures the relation. The two types antagonize each other, inadverdently, whether friends or enemies. And it's always mutual, not one-sided as with supervisors-supervisees. Conflictors seriously get under each others' skin... you can count down the days between conflictor fights... 1,2,3,4... FIGHT! 1,2,3,4...FIGHT! And the fight continues until the two get some time away from each other. A long, long time away.

  17. #17
    Creepy-Snaps

    Default



    You all are considering re-naming conflictors because of one personal testament? C'mon people. Think for a second. You all just accepted pianosinger's judgment that her brother was a conflictor, because she said so. Really?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aiss View Post
    Call me prejudiced, but in my experience, conflictors conflict. That doesn't imply "hate" or anything such, not even "dislike". People are more likely to react with boredom and indifference to id information, IMO.

    I agree another name might potentially be better, but renaming a relation isn't going to change its nature. In particular, if your typings don't fit with intertype relations, not on personal, but socionics information exchange level, it seems like a very self-deceiving way to fix it.
    This is perfect. Thank you. At least someone has some sense.

  18. #18
    fka lungs ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,630
    Mentioned
    635 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Dew View Post


    You all are considering re-naming conflictors because of one personal testament? C'mon people. Think for a second. You all just accepted pianosinger's judgment that her brother was a conflictor, because she said so. Really?.
    it doesnt follow that just because they agreed about "conflictor" not being the best term it means that they took her word about her brother's type. she isn't the first person i've seen write that they don't "conflict" with their conflictor in that way. it's at least as likely that they agree because of their own experiences or for some other reason.

  19. #19
    So fluffeh. Cuddly McFluffles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    2,780
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't have serious issues with every Conflictor, but I do have issues with the one I live with.

    Regarding the proposal, I don't see a reason to change things.
    Johari/Nohari

    "Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."

    Fruit, the fluffy kitty.

  20. #20
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,648
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @MD:
    I think you're taking that a little too seriously. I think nobody really wanted to change the official name of that relation (except for pianosinger maybe, but she only proposed that). We just made suggestions how the name could be changed in order to make the actual meaning clearer. Almost every term is known and already has a meaning as it was said. A good example would be 'aristocratic' vs 'democratic'. I think it's hard for beginners to distinguish socionic terms from real-life ones.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  21. #21
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,633
    Mentioned
    160 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pianosinger View Post
    I know, but it just seems so misleading.
    Yeah, this is easily the WORST or most misleading relationship name. I get along fine with most SEEs, and some of the worst conflicts are not between conflictors. IME Kindreds usually have the most heated and volatile arguments.

    I would call it disorienting relations or something like that. Awkward relations?

  22. #22
    Marie84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,359
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I prefer Contrary to Conflict it's straight to the point "opposite" but doesn't necessarily imply enmity
    EII INFj
    Forum status: retired

  23. #23
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is nothing wrong with the name. There are also duals that don't get along well. None of this changes the fact that the general pattern holds true.

  24. #24
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,123
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Conflictors aren't hard to get along with, and they're not even horribly uncomfortable to be around ime. The conflict shows up when you're trying to problem-solve together. It's then that you discover how you view things in diametrically opposed ways.

    Like Mariella (my conflictor ) said, it's a functional clash, not necessarily a personal one. Obviously the functional can impact the personal, but you can't rely on "this person does/doesn't bug the shit out of me" as a reliable indicator of type relations. Even duals can be fucking annoying.

  25. #25
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pianosinger View Post
    I'm imagining myself living alone in a house with my brother...He and I would lead two such completely different lives
    I've lived with my conflictor (ex girlfriend) for 4 years.

    Conflict is the right term for this relationship especially at close psychological distance.

    Other names for this relationship would be: pent-up rage, danger, deceivement and the best of all: ................................TIME BOMB

  26. #26
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squark View Post
    Conflictors aren't hard to get along with, and they're not even horribly uncomfortable to be around ime. The conflict shows up when you're trying to problem-solve together. It's then that you discover how you view things in diametrically opposed ways.

    Like Mariella (my conflictor ) said, it's a functional clash, not necessarily a personal one. Obviously the functional can impact the personal, but you can't rely on "this person does/doesn't bug the shit out of me" as a reliable indicator of type relations. Even duals can be fucking annoying.
    Apparently, you don't live with Conflictors.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  27. #27
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,123
    Mentioned
    140 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold View Post
    Apparently, you don't live with Conflictors.
    ha. No, I don't. And honestly, I've never been able to see eye-to-eye enough with any ENFp to want to become friends with them, so yeah, they stay on the casual aquaintance level which probably makes a helluva lot of difference.

  28. #28
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold View Post
    Apparently, you don't live with Conflictors.
    +1

    Most socionics sources agree that the best strategy in conflict is avoidance, and for a good reason. Living with a conflictor, it's impossible to do so nearly enough. That's why I personally doubt pianosinger's conflict story, though obviously I can't discuss the typing of an unknown person.

  29. #29
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,633
    Mentioned
    160 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    I've lived with my conflictor (ex girlfriend) for 4 years.

    Conflict is the right term for this relationship especially at close psychological distance.

    Other names for this relationship would be: pent-up rage, danger, deceivement and the best of all: ................................TIME BOMB
    I like those names better.

    As for living with conflictors: Throughout my life I've lived with two SEEs, an LIE, an SEI, two SLIs, an LSI, and an ESI. The people I had the most fights with were the LSI, the LIE, and one of the SLIs. There were certainly other variables at play, but I see no evidence for conflictors being the most "conflicting" types, even if it is the most incompatible and strained socionic relationship. Conflict only occurs when people try to maintain an inappropriate psychological distance - but that happens with any relationship! Just giving my two cents on the issue.

  30. #30
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You people are both handpicking the interpretation of "conflict" AND the occasions that serve as the example of what the relation is typically like. No wonder you end up with something to complain about. My point is, if you pick some other name such as "awkward" relations or "antithetical" relations you either end up picking a name that is so esoteric as to say nothing at all, or you end up with some other problem.

    The other issue is that if even the basic fact that conflicting types don't get along can't be trusted to some extent, socionics is a useless theory and it stops making sense to discuss anything on this forum at all. It makes me wonder what you are still doing here if you believe this.

    @ aixelsyd; I'm going to repeat this every time I see a post of yours in which you act as you being ESFp is the most normal and obvious thing in the world: you can't type yourself INTp for years and suddenly make a 180 degree turn and expect to be taken seriously. I don't care whether you were crazy before you switched types or now; your posts are henceforth complete bogus.

  31. #31
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ashton2 View Post
    "Anithesis Relations" is the best term I can think to characterize it as atm. Something implying a relationship of opposite contradiction, but without the misleading connotations given by 'conflict'.
    I like that. If I was going to rename Conflict, I think Antithesis would be it.

    I agree that not all practical manifestations of the Conflict relationship are openly hostile, due to the fact that people tend to instinctively keep distance between themselves and their Conflictors, preventing open clashes (unlike other relations like Supervision, for example, where the shared Base/Creative function can trick people into drawing closer together). However, when Conflicting types are forced into close proximity for an extended period of time, it's been my experience that "Conflict" is a very appropriate name.
    Quaero Veritas.

  32. #32
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,633
    Mentioned
    160 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    You people are both handpicking the interpretation of "conflict" AND the occasions that serve as the example of what the relation is typically like. No wonder you end up with something to complain about. My point is, if you pick some other name such as "awkward" relations or "antithetical" relations you either end up picking a name that is so esoteric as to say nothing at all, or you end up with some other problem.

    The other issue is that if even the basic fact that conflicting types don't get along can't be trusted to some extent, socionics is a useless theory and it stops making sense to discuss anything on this forum at all. It makes me wonder what you are still doing here if you believe this.
    Aren't we hyperbolic... Try reading my post again...1) I am speaking from my own experience, not based on some over-simplified theoretical notion of conflict. Sometimes socionic concepts are slightly more nuanced than the terminology would suggest. 2) I agree that conflictors don't get along very well at all, and are the least compatible types socionically - but in my mind this is not the same as the most obvious meaning of "conflicting", i.e. "an open clash between two opposing groups or individuals". It's just misleading.

    It is exactly the desire to not handpick observations that makes me prefer "awkward" to "conflicting" - conflictors only conflict sometimes, but they are almost always awkward and distant.

  33. #33
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it's important to note that intertype relations are really only applicable at close psychological distances. Duality, for instance, isn't much different from any other relationship at long psychological distances. It's only once people "break the ice" and start interacting on a closer psychological level that the unique characteristics of the various intertype relations start to manifest.

    As I said, since Conflicting types tend to instinctively maintain longer psychological distances from each other (like the north poles of two magnets repelling each other), open clashes tend to occur less frequently than in some other relationships. But when forced into close proximity, Conflict results in the deepest and strongest clashes of any relation in the socion, with little chance of reconciliation outside of re-establishing a longer psychological distance.

    Of course, this doesn't necessarily mean that you see your Conflictor as "evil" -- each type has a range of healthy and unhealthy manifestations. It might simply mean that you see your Conflictor as "a good person that I simply cannot get along with".
    Quaero Veritas.

  34. #34
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the most obvious meaning of "conflicting", i.e. "an open clash between two opposing groups or individuals"
    The more obvious meaning is much more subtle and non-specific than that. It just means misalignment and disruptive difference. As to your "awkward" suggestion, the problem is that there are tons of pairs of types that are awkward towards each other. The term doesn't describe the unique characteristics of the relation, but something far more commonplace than those.

  35. #35
    Poster Nutbag The Exception's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    my own personal bubble
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    4,108
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    I think it's important to note that intertype relations are really only applicable at close psychological distances. Duality, for instance, isn't much different from any other relationship at long psychological distances. It's only once people "break the ice" and start interacting on a closer psychological level that the unique characteristics of the various intertype relations start to manifest.

    As I said, since Conflicting types tend to instinctively maintain longer psychological distances from each other (like the north poles of two magnets repelling each other), open clashes tend to occur less frequently than in some other relationships. But when forced into close proximity, Conflict results in the deepest and strongest clashes of any relation in the socion, with little chance of reconciliation outside of re-establishing a longer psychological distance.

    Of course, this doesn't necessarily mean that you see your Conflictor as "evil" -- each type has a range of healthy and unhealthy manifestations. It might simply mean that you see your Conflictor as "a good person that I simply cannot get along with".
    I like this explanation.
    LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP



  36. #36
    So fluffeh. Cuddly McFluffles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    2,780
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by warrior-librarian View Post
    I like this explanation.
    Seconded.
    Johari/Nohari

    "Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."

    Fruit, the fluffy kitty.

  37. #37
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariella View Post
    It's called conflictor because the functions conflict, not because the people are going to hate each other.
    +1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000

  38. #38
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post

    Of course, this doesn't necessarily mean that you see your Conflictor as "evil" -- each type has a range of healthy and unhealthy manifestations. It might simply mean that you see your Conflictor as "a good person that I simply cannot get along with".
    Yea, it's the Supervisors that are evil.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  39. #39
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold View Post
    Yea, it's the Supervisors that are evil.
    I wouldn't say they're evil -- they're scarier, though, because you can't really defend yourself against them. At least with Conflict, you can hit back.
    Quaero Veritas.

  40. #40
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mariella View Post
    It's called conflictor because the functions conflict, not because the people are going to hate each other.
    at close distance you ARE going to hate eachother.

    Actually if you read some russian relationship descriptions, you would know that there is mutual attraction in this relationship at the beginning, or at long psychological distance, that's what makes this relationship dangerous. You seem to get along quite well, but that's just the surface. Underneath things are boiling. It's a time bomb, but it just hasn't exploded yet with some of you.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •