Is this explainable with intertype relations?

[Reficulris]

So, I'm finding two recurring phenomeny which might be explainable by socionics.

The first is the situation where someone asks for advice and I start riffing off options and ideas and they take it totally as a step by step instruction, get totally overwhelmed and eventually actually become agressive.

Some background; I'm in a management position in my parents firm and this usually comes up when trying to brainstorm strategic options. What happens is, I give them a few ways of looking at the problem or challenge and after a while they glaze over. Than, later, they'll have started doing all the shit I proposed even though I was basically shooting from the hip, trying to provide imput rather than telling them those ideas are actually worth implementing.... Totally wierd!


The second one is where I will be arguing, quite passionately about something and people will go "oh man..he's in his arguing mode" and will start ignoring me. The feedback I recieved (after asking) was something like "you're just doing it for fun" and or "you spin me around but never let me land".

Basically, what happens is, when I get into a philsophical or political argument I usually try to make the conversation as complex as possible. Trying to give all sides a voice, countering any strongly held oppinions my conversation partner has, sometimes escalating the argument into absurdity or relativising it into non-importantness. Basically, i'm always looking to shift perspectives, and I love people who can actually shift mine into a place where I didn't look before.

This usually goes over well as people are usually aware of my playfull nature and wili not take me too serious, but sometimes people get REALLY agressive about it. They'll either throw facts at me, go into solopsistic rages and/or go sulking into corners.

I'm not looking for feedback about how to HANDLE these things (I know, just don't do it as often, I actually succeed at that somewhat) but I'm more interested how this could be explained socionicswise..

Ne overload at people who are Ti seeking?
Ne overload at people who are Ne polr?

shoot if you have interesting perspectives to offer

[Beautiful sky]

ne overload to anyone ignoring their polr but at the same time kinda liking it; Ne ignoring would start arguing the same thing by saying the same thing but in other words; any other static functions such as Se could be involved...this is tricky because their static can hold up barriers to agreeing with your static view points

[Reficulris]

ne overload to anyone ignoring their polr but at the same time kinda liking it; Ne ignoring would start arguing the same thing by saying the same thing but in other words; any other static functions such as Se could be involved...this is tricky because their static can hold up barriers to agreeing with your static view points

Thanks Maritsa! It's a bit hard to understand, but it looks indeed exactly as what happens. The repeating is indeed frequent (and anoying, repetition is one of the two things that can get me really frustrated, repetition and waiting).

[Beautiful sky]

Thanks Maritsa! It's a bit hard to understand, but it looks indeed exactly as what happens. The repeating is indeed frequent (and anoying, repetition is one of the two things that can get me really frustrated, repetition and waiting).

if it's ti seeking that's making frequent repitions it's only to get a knee jerk reaction from you but it won't be that often

[anndelise]

Something similar was a common problem between my daughter and I. She would be faced with an issue and i would talk about the issue from different points of view...as a way of gaining insight into what can be done about it, but that would piss her off. She felt I was ignoring her side in favor of others. But it was something that I couldn't stop doing so I would just bite my lip and be unable to comment at all on it...again which would make her feel like I was ignoring her side.

Or she would be faced with another type of issue, and I would start popping out various ways of solving it, or asking questions which I am sure seemed random to her but would help me narrow down the variables so I could provide more situation-appropriate ideas. She always...even when i would specifically say that these are just ideas...she always interprets them as being me telling her to do all of them. She didn't want options, she wanted me to tell her one action she could take that would cover everything involved.

This is something that I've interpreted as a conflict between Ne and Ni. More specifically my Ne-base and her Ni-dual-seeking. She needed someone to provide her the Ni...that one route that would cover all variables. While I was simply popping out "random" ideas that might cover different povs.

She wanted to take decisive action, while I was offering a more judicial approach....as in gather more info, consider options, before deciding what to do.

It's probably the biggest issue that remains between us, and one I could never resolve.

However...
The shifting of perspectives thing you described could also be a Ti vs Te preference. You'll do whatever it takes to alter their 'internal structure' of something, but if they are Te valuing, they want their 'internal structure' to represent something more 'real', hence the fact throwing you mentioned. These are 'ojective' and 'explicit' things involved in the topic that must be taken into account, and which count more than any one individual's subjective beliefs/views on the topic. And you're basically playing around with that. (Obviously that was written by Te valuing pov, lol. There is value in what you do...i recognize that...but it can also feel like the Ti valuer is trying to mind-fuck the Te valuer...or to use a forum favorite word...like you are trying to gaslight them.)

[Reficulris]

[QUOTE=anndelise;996082]Something similar was a common problem between my daughter and I. She would be faced with an issue and i would talk about the issue from different points of view...as a way of gaining insight into what can be done about it, but that would piss her off. She felt I was ignoring her side in favor of others. But it was something that I couldn't stop doing so I would just bite my lip and be unable to comment at all on it...again which would make her feel like I was ignoring her side.

Or she would be faced with another type of issue, and I would start popping out various ways of solving it, or asking questions which I am sure seemed random to her but would help me narrow down the variables so I could provide more situation-appropriate ideas. She always...even when i would specifically say that these are just ideas...she always interprets them as being me telling her to do all of them. She didn't want options, she wanted me to tell her one action she could take that would cover everything involved.

This is something that I've interpreted as a conflict between Ne and Ni. More specifically my Ne-base and her Ni-dual-seeking. She needed someone to provide her the Ni...that one route that would cover all variables. While I was simply popping out "random" ideas that might cover different povs.

She wanted to take decisive action, while I was offering a more judicial approach....as in gather more info, consider options, before deciding what to do.

It's probably the biggest issue that remains between us, and one I could never resolve.
/QUOTE]

Thank you so very much for this post! It is exactly what I was talking about, even the "staying silent makes it worse" part!!!

It also seems to point to different styles of "planning". Where i'm basically going for incremental implementation while keeping sight on the many things that are changing due to my actions they really want to know the plan from a to z beforehand and will implement even when at c things occur that weren't taken into account...

Understanding this might make my life easier since i've really been baffled by the effects of my brainstorming on some people. It might even make biting my tongue more bearable even though it's really hard (and as you already pointed out not always effective)

However...
The shifting of perspectives thing you described could also be a Ti vs Te preference. You'll do whatever it takes to alter their 'internal structure' of something, but if they are Te valuing, they want their 'internal structure' to represent something more 'real', hence the fact throwing you mentioned. These are 'ojective' and 'explicit' things involved in the topic that must be taken into account, and which count more than any one individual's subjective beliefs/views on the topic. And you're basically playing around with that. (Obviously that was written by Te valuing pov, lol. There is value in what you do...i recognize that...but it can also feel like the Ti valuer is trying to mind-fuck the Te valuer...or to use a forum favorite word...like you are trying to gaslight them.)[

yeah, I can see that now. Truth be told, what I do isn't always well intending, sometimes i'm probably just trying to gaslight people indeed. However, most of the time i'll be serious and well meaning. I actually believe that most facts are not set in stone, numbers can be manipulated (lies, damned lies and statistics and all) and most emperical phenomena can be explained (away)by different routes. I guess it's part of how i'm aware that we humans have a tendency to take the world as a fact where we're often easily fooled (optical illusions, blind spots, psychological biasses etc). For me taking the world as somewhat of an illusion actually felt like freedom after I couldn't find the objective and true rules that would help me thrive. I can see however, that such a mindset would be damaging if someone found/is looking for a Te way to deal with the world.

Very interesting!

P.S. Gaslighting? I hadn't heard that term before, what is it exactly? I want to include it in the glossary.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

@Reficulris You may find this link interesting. Be sure to read the comments, since the author of this article doesn't completely have it together.

[anndelise]

P.S. Gaslighting? I hadn't heard that term before, what is it exactly? I want to include it in the glossary.

It's not my favorite word and, imo, got thrown around here needlessly a while back. But this can be how it feels to have someone messing around with "facts" or things that the person "knows"...while not necessarily being what you're doing.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...rm=gaslighting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

---
But it's more than just "facts". For Fi, the internal structures are very personal, and built off personal and emotional links of attraction/repulsion. This does make their internal structure very personal, and chemical/hormonal. As in if you try messing with the Fi internal structure, you are messing with brain parts (ie hypothalmus, amygdala, etc) and brain chemicals. This gives it a very personal feel to the process.

But please don't mistake Fi structures as being the same as Ti structures. Ti structures are based off abstract rules, abstract links, categories, etc. You can easily recategorize things or alter some rules and reality doesn't change. Just the view of reality. And that's fine, imo. "The map is not the territory." And what you're messing with is the map. (Admittedly, many people with strong Fi forget that their emotional structures are merely personal maps as well, not the actual territory.)

But, when you start messing with the territory, that is a whole different matter.

Like, for me, for example, I rely heavily on my emotional links as memory triggers, and things that were said, done, or events that happened. The parts that don't need interrpretation. As in he said this, she yelled then left immediately afterwards, an hour later he walked out and discovered his car had been keyed. (Made up scenario.) Those are "facts" that I can count on, explicit things that happened. Which can be interrpreted in a number of ways. Now, if a person draws the conclusion that she keyed his car, and you were to try to get them to see other interpretations, that's fine...unless you started messing with those facts, such as rearranging the time frame, saying that something else happened when you either don't know if it did (a "what if" but stated as truth) or if you were to flat out give false information. This is akin to messing with the territory.

---
Another possible example:
Have you heard of chaos magic? Imo, it's very Alpha NT. My understanding of it is that these practitioners will deliberately create, rearrange, or destroy their personal abstract structures, the rules they grew up learning, their own understandings of the world, and recreate or rearrange a new structure. This process might be akin to using drugs as a way of gaining insight or new experiences. A way of breaking free from old chains and expanding one's mind regarding one's world.

Unfortunately, if they aren't careful, they might have a psychic breakdown. Delusions are a common side effect. And imo, it was pretty freaky to read the writings of "heavy" practitioners. (But then, I also had to question how much of what they wrote was real...and how much was made up in the telling...a way of keeping the myths of chaos magic alive, or of fitting in...or other???)

I think most of these people I had read or looked into were NeTi. And I think that while they may have played with destroying and creating abstract structures (abstract maps) I also think that their Te Demonstrative (the subconscious awareness/acknowledgment of the territory) may have helped keep most of them from total break down.

(Note: i edited and rearranged and deleted chunks, hopefully the above is understandable at least, )

---
Back to gaslighting. So basically, gaslighting can be messing with the map, and it can be messing with the territory. And for those who have very personal maps, they might not be able to tell the difference. And messing with the map can feel like messing with the territory. Which is where the Te comes in...Helping them see the separation between the territory "facts" vs their personal map.

[Reficulris]

@Reficulris You may find this link interesting. Be sure to read the comments, since the author of this article doesn't completely have it together.

Ehm yeah... well...

I must admit that when I was younger I did probably engage into gaslighting (in the real, inballanced mental abusive sense)... I kinda dislike that history so.. maybe parts of it still inger in my style of arguing, but at least the intent is gone.

Interesting though how the term was used "clinically" as first and has spread mainstream..kinda like how "psycho" is used for ultra violent uncontrolled people nowadays while they are usually not how the stereotype is (they are violent, but theyre usually very calculated about it....) Same with "i'm depressed" (meaning someone feels sad).

It's not my favorite word and, imo, got thrown around here needlessly a while back. But this can be how it feels to have someone messing around with "facts" or things that the person "knows"...while not necessarily being what you're doing.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...rm=gaslighting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

---
But it's more than just "facts". For Fi, the internal structures are very personal, and built off personal and emotional links of attraction/repulsion. This does make their internal structure very personal, and chemical/hormonal. As in if you try messing with the Fi internal structure, you are messing with brain parts (ie hypothalmus, amygdala, etc) and brain chemicals. This gives it a very personal feel to the process.

But please don't mistake Fi structures as being the same as Ti structures. Ti structures are based off abstract rules, abstract links, categories, etc. You can easily recategorize things or alter some rules and reality doesn't change. Just the view of reality. And that's fine, imo. "The map is not the territory." And what you're messing with is the map. (Admittedly, many people with strong Fi forget that their emotional structures are merely personal maps as well, not the actual territory.)

But, when you start messing with the territory, that is a whole different matter.

Like, for me, for example, I rely heavily on my emotional links as memory triggers, and things that were said, done, or events that happened. The parts that don't need interrpretation. As in he said this, she yelled then left immediately afterwards, an hour later he walked out and discovered his car had been keyed. (Made up scenario.) Those are "facts" that I can count on, explicit things that happened. Which can be interrpreted in a number of ways. Now, if a person draws the conclusion that she keyed his car, and you were to try to get them to see other interpretations, that's fine...unless you started messing with those facts, such as rearranging the time frame, saying that something else happened when you either don't know if it did (a "what if" but stated as truth) or if you were to flat out give false information. This is akin to messing with the territory.

---
Another possible example:
Have you heard of chaos magic? Imo, it's very Alpha NT. My understanding of it is that these practitioners will deliberately create, rearrange, or destroy their personal abstract structures, the rules they grew up learning, their own understandings of the world, and recreate or rearrange a new structure. This process might be akin to using drugs as a way of gaining insight or new experiences. A way of breaking free from old chains and expanding one's mind regarding one's world.

Unfortunately, if they aren't careful, they might have a psychic breakdown. Delusions are a common side effect. And imo, it was pretty freaky to read the writings of "heavy" practitioners. (But then, I also had to question how much of what they wrote was real...and how much was made up in the telling...a way of keeping the myths of chaos magic alive, or of fitting in...or other???)

I think most of these people I had read or looked into were NeTi. And I think that while they may have played with destroying and creating abstract structures (abstract maps) I also think that their Te Demonstrative (the subconscious awareness/acknowledgment of the territory) may have helped keep most of them from total break down.

(Note: i edited and rearranged and deleted chunks, hopefully the above is understandable at least, )

---
Back to gaslighting. So basically, gaslighting can be messing with the map, and it can be messing with the territory. And for those who have very personal maps, they might not be able to tell the difference. And messing with the map can feel like messing with the territory. Which is where the Te comes in...Helping them see the separation between the territory "facts" vs their personal map.

Aaahhh the old The map is not the territory adiego. Basically, when someone accepts that (the map is NOT the territory) they will never get into heated argument with me as I respect everyones map (now I do). However, those who have the territory as map (or rather think it is) have a potentially violent effect on me. Basically what happens is they go speaking factual, generalized statements that (thus) apply to me. Think "y is a sin" or "people should x" or "all z's are u's". What happens is I'll start shooting at the very foundations of those statements, going as deep is trying to find out why they are holding them (yeah...that's still kinda bad...). These are rare and extreme occasions however.

don't think I "lie" often. Basically I suck at lying, telling something that I know is untrue will make me blush like a schoolgirl. Also, I dislike it immensely since to be congruent one has to remember the lies...and I don't do that very well. So where I'd probably try to reframe the situation "thank god he/she's out of your live, the keyed car is a small price to pay" or "maybe it's a sign he still cared about you" or "couldn't it be the neighbour who you spat on from your balcony? maybe you should hold of the conclusion and ask the other person" etc etc. I guess that;s what you call changing the map.

Btw, the original question ofcourse was about the non-neferious use. I'm usually well aware when I actually try to harm someone (usually after the fact and sorely regretting it) so that I kinda chalk up to just being an bastard sometimes. It's when I'm actually NOT trying to hurt or befudle people and they still get anxious and or agresive that's wierding me out....

Chaos Magic, I have not heard of, but what you describe is basically what I went through age 15 to 23. I think I systematically disconstrued everything inside my mind (and inside others, as I admitted earlier). I than got severely depressed to the point where I was hospitalised for 1.5 years. So yeah, dangerous stuff. Couple it with NLP hypnosis and PUA training and you have a walking horror....
From those disciplines also come the idea of "forbidden patterns". Basically, routines or things to say to maim or destroy someone else's internal paterns. (all three said disciplines also draw heavily on the map is not the territory asumption). What they give with their training is basically; if you use it on someone else, you have to go first (as in, experience the state) and thus it'll harm you just as bad. While it is ofc morally bullshit (rationally) I usually try to stay true to that maxim.

I'd say chaos magic probably draws from sources like Nlp/hypnosis to learn how to effectively relativise/destroy/recreate subjective reality. However, naming it "chaos magic" kinda already is a frame I'd say either that name is given by others or they really didn't succeed in destroying their old frames since the need to "belong to a group of elitist sorcerors" kinda is...well you can draw your conclusions.

[anndelise]

Btw, the original question ofcourse was about the non-neferious use. I'm usually well aware when I actually try to harm someone (usually after the fact and sorely regretting it) so that I kinda chalk up to just being an bastard sometimes. It's when I'm actually NOT trying to hurt or befudle people and they still get anxious and or agresive that's wierding me out....

So...lotsa Fi types, eh?

Hopefully I provided one way of looking at it that might come in handy or be useful for some of those times.
Good luck.

[Amber]

Some background; I'm in a management position in my parents firm and this usually comes up when trying to brainstorm strategic options. What happens is, I give them a few ways of looking at the problem or challenge and after a while they glaze over. Than, later, they'll have started doing all the shit I proposed even though I was basically shooting from the hip, trying to provide imput rather than telling them those ideas are actually worth implementing.... Totally wierd!

I'd guess this happens mainly with people weak in Te or who don't value it, cause they don't actually judge the practical applicability and results of what you're proposing in your brainstorming sessions.

[Amber]

The second one is where I will be arguing, quite passionately about something and people will go "oh man..he's in his arguing mode" and will start ignoring me. The feedback I recieved (after asking) was something like "you're just doing it for fun" and or "you spin me around but never let me land".

Basically, what happens is, when I get into a philsophical or political argument I usually try to make the conversation as complex as possible. Trying to give all sides a voice, countering any strongly held oppinions my conversation partner has, sometimes escalating the argument into absurdity or relativising it into non-importantness. Basically, i'm always looking to shift perspectives, and I love people who can actually shift mine into a place where I didn't look before.

This usually goes over well as people are usually aware of my playfull nature and wili not take me too serious, but sometimes people get REALLY agressive about it. They'll either throw facts at me, go into solopsistic rages and/or go sulking into corners.

I'm not looking for feedback about how to HANDLE these things (I know, just don't do it as often, I actually succeed at that somewhat) but I'm more interested how this could be explained socionicswise..

Ne overload at people who are Ti seeking?
Ne overload at people who are Ne polr?

shoot if you have interesting perspectives to offer

the rest might also have to do with Rational Ti seekers who are not always after debates for the sake of debating and don't appreciate too much perspective shifting that's not helping their plans. As EJs they could see where your discussions are going and don't wanna get there. I don't think it has to be a Ne polr ...in general one's main function, if overdone in a wrong context, can be received as "overload" by anyone ... perhaps except for duals.

[Absurd]

It's not my favorite word and, imo, got thrown around here needlessly a while back.

Yup, time to invent a new one called homolighting.

[Reficulris]

It seems you are unaware that people take actionable ideas seriously and may not be detecting whether you or joking or not. If you're at a brainstorming session about solving a problem, and you suggest something to solve it, and it gets acted upon, is that really a surprise to you? Not everyone likes wasting time debating politics or philosophy. While freedom of ideas and expression are valued by some, they are not valued by everyone.

hmhm, I agree. I don't think it's as bad as you are framing it in the case i'm describing. I'm not talking about philosophy or debates just for alpha fun. It's more, I like to establish a broad view of the possiblities before implementing things, basically getting a kind of strategic vision in place before enacting stuff. What happens is that the vision more or less gets translated into a direct sollution where it was proposed by me as more of a thing to keep in the back of our minds to test descisions against.

Per the bolded, it seems you are an ILE. It seems you get caught up in intuition and not realizing that sometimes a business is about money & power, not just a fun Alpha game about debating theoretical ideas. Your post displays weak Se and weak awareness of what people's motives are.

I do understand that it's about money (not so much power in our business) and am certainly (maybe even more acutely) aware that plans should contribute to that end. If anything i'm always hammering on "cost of opportunity" of plans, which is basically why this phenomena baffles me so much. I'll think up ideas, and am expecting that they'll be TESTED for both feasability and cost-efficiency (something I don't really do that well) but instead they just get implemented...regardless of efficiency issues :-S

... And not everyone gets the privilege of getting a management position at their parents' firm. Many people's lives are very difficult as they are trying to survive. They may not appreciate your instant 'fun games' of debate and wasting their time. In socionics terms, I wouldn't necessarily classify everyone who is hostile towards you as 'Ne overload at people who are Ti-seeking' or 'Ne overload at Ne POLR', but rather I would imagine even those in your own quadra may find frustration with you if they are from a different background.

Yeah, I am privileged, however i taste some disdain which I don't think is really fair (maybe i'm wrong) but I certainly don't consider the business as fun and games, if anything i'm very concerned about how my management affects the lives of my employees, about if i'll be able to continuate the business, how things affect the possibility of selling the business when my parents finally run out of steam and want to go enjoy from retirement...
I don't experience these problems with my employees or with people from different background, I experience them with my parents as management team. It's not bad, its just something I notice and find unexplainable.

Remember that socionics & genetic predisposition is only one factor in affecting someone's behavior, only one aspect or slice of the entire pie. I'd suggest paying attention to people's experiences more before categorizing them, and not necessarily making a quick judgment based on their reaction. I believe it would help you understand others better and could even improve your socionics-typing.

I never implied that it was JUST the socionics type, its more that I feel that it's explainable through different information needs. I do understand my parents on a lot of different levels, insecurities, experiences, general tendencies etc. I do tend however to asume that everyone thinks the same way as I do. Socionics seems like a tool that can make me aware of differences in thinking between me and others. So, I'm not actually looking to judge or categorize anyone rather than find out what differences contribute to the confusion.

[Reficulris]

I'd guess this happens mainly with people weak in Te or who don't value it, cause they don't actually judge the practical applicability and results of what you're proposing in your brainstorming sessions.

Yeah this sounds plausable!

the rest might also have to do with Rational Ti seekers who are not always after debates for the sake of debating and don't appreciate too much perspective shifting that's not helping their plans. As EJs they could see where your discussions are going and don't wanna get there. I don't think it has to be a Ne polr ...in general one's main function, if overdone in a wrong context, can be received as "overload" by anyone ... perhaps except for duals.

yeah probably true as well. However there is a difference in "sensitivity" to my overload, so where Ne excess is usually ignored by most people some of them actually react like a bull on a red flag...

[Reficulris]

So...lotsa Fi types, eh?

Hopefully I provided one way of looking at it that might come in handy or be useful for some of those times.
Good luck.

You did! thank you for your elaborate response and insightfull personal experiences!