Inner worlds and intertype relations

[OSG]

As an ILI I spend a lot of time in my inner world imaging scenarios or whatever, but what really surprised me was whenever I was imaging some story where there is a heroine, she would always be
“an energetic, joyous, playful girl who knows how to enjoy the moment and fun to be around. She is very attractive and not dramatic”
which I believe is SEE (my dual) yet when I imaged this type of girls I didn't know anything about socionics or other personality typing system.


Is there anyone experienced something similar about their dual? If so does that mean deep down we know our duals? And does both duals feel the same? I mean wouldn't ILIs look boring to SEEs?


Also even though I would like to have an intimate relationship with such a girl, yet in friendship I would say other NT types can make great interesting discussions.
This being said I guess every intertype relation can be effective in certain areas of life (love, work, parenting and so on).


So what are your thoughts on this? And which relation is good for what in your opinions?

[FriedEggz]

“an energetic, joyous, playful girl who knows how to enjoy the moment and fun to be around. She is very attractive and not dramatic”

Honestly, that sounds more like Fe than Fi. Plus, where's the Se power in your description?

[OSG]

Honestly, that sounds more like Fe than Fi. Plus, where's the Se power in your description?

I agree it is a general description and can be applied to Fe, but I wouldn't describe Fe-users as energetic and playful, to me they are dramatic, harmony seeking.

If you notice the description was short and not intended for you to type her but just to illustrate the point.

[aixelsyd]

Yeah. I've experienced the same. If it was, say, a character/entity that I could relate to/self-insertion-y, it'd always be (male or female but usually the latter) who was strong, independent, a good leader, and a good friend, usually trying to take down tyranny with a rag tag team that later becomes a super organization for the promotion of liberty and democracy of a larger scale. However, there would always be the more ILI foil: mysterious, introverted, calculating, of initially questionable loyalties but ultimately good hearted. Occasionally, I've come up with leads for different prospective stories that were typical ILI, shy, quiet, nerdy, detached, with an SEE foil.

The difference is I've known about socionics for a long time, but this was before even that, and I've had different self-typings over the scope of it. But my point is I think it's natural to have a recognition of our duals whether we consciously realize it or not. Even if someone knows typology and is typed wrong, what's natural is natural. I've always been innately drawn to ILIs over other types. And I think duals can seem boring from a distance, sometimes, but sometimes it's the opposite (I think this is true from both introvert and extrovert perspective).

But if you look at a lot of fictional works, you'll notice many times these kind of dual relations with the lead characters. I'm pretty positive the creators don't know anything about socionics or necessarily much about typology or would put any stock into it. I just think it's natural.

As for relations that are good, any relation technically has the potential to be good or bad, using general terms. I find dual relations to be the best in friendship and would think they'd be best for romantic relations (my experience in that area is limited to non-existent, but I'd really only want a long term relationship with an ILI). I think duality has the best potential for longevity and stability. Other relations, of course, are great (semi-duality, for one, and identity can be really good for work and, to a certain degree, friendship, but lacks longevity and stability of duality and semi-duality). I think variety is the spice of life, and as an extrovert, I feel the more the merrier as far as relations go. I wouldn't want to only be friends and associates with one sociotype. To me that seems unrealistic and limiting as far as growth and wouldn't make life as interesting.

[Beautiful sky]

yes. i too have had fantasy like dreams of what would match me without knowing socionics. the things ive imagined were someone who let me have my time with family and who enjoyed their time with his relationships like a boy playing in the mud with his friends and leaving me alone to have tea with my family or just read a bbook on my own. this would translate into independence. also someone who cared that others looked up to him and wasnt dismissive about peoples admiration of him. someone who took care of his family's welfare and is very caring. that is LSE in a nut shell

[Aylen]

The way I imagine an ideal partner or friend might be a combination of these types. Just using these descriptions from Keirsey because they were convenient and short. I prefer numerology to duality when it comes to relationships but none of it matters when there is strong chemistry.

ESTP- The Promoter
Your ideal partner is known as the promoter. As a romantic partner, this type is usually exciting and willing to try anything once. They are often much more responsive to their partner's physical needs, rather than their emotional ones. They tend to communicate at what other types tend to think of as a superficial level, as they don't see a big need for heart-to-heart talks. They want to be appreciated for the fun-loving responsive problem solvers they are. They are happiest when their partners respect their need for freedom to be spontaneous and to enjoy life's many pleasures.

INTJ The Mastermind
Your ideal romantic partner is known as the Mastermind. As a romantic partner, this type can be both fascinating yet demanding. They are not apt to express their emotions, leaving their partners wondering where they are with them. They strongly dislike repeating themselves or listening to the disorganized process of sorting through emotional conflicts. They see their own commitments as self-evident and don't see the need to repeat something already expressed. They have the most difficulty in admitting their vulnerabilities. They feel the most appreciated when their partners admire the quality of their innovations and when they listen respectfully to their ideas and advice. They need plenty of quiet to explore their interests to the depth that gives them satisfaction.

ENFJ - The Teacher
Your ideal partner is known as the Teacher. This type needs to feel a deep and meaningful connection to his or her romantic partners, and goes to great lengths to understand and please their mates. Harmony is vitally important to them, and they often put others' needs before their own. They have a pretty thin skin and are easily hurt. Although they strive for harmony, when their values or ethics are violated, they can be very emotional, confrontational, and even punishing. However, they are very insightful about the underlying cause of conflicts, and excellent communicators, so they have the tools to bring about a quick and peaceful resolution as long as they can keep control of their facilities. They want to be appreciated for their thoughtfulness and compassion. They need their partners to make a real effort to get to know them. Above all, they need to be able to express their feelings and have them taken seriously.

INFJ - The Counselor
Your ideal romantic partner is known as the counselor. This type makes a supportive and insightful romantic partner, encouraging their mates to have dreams and work hard to make those dreams come true. Because they are so creative, they have a wealth of ideas to help them toward those goals. They need harmony so much that they are driven to resolve conflict quickly, as long as the terms don't violate their strong ethics. They feel the most appreciated when their partners admire their creativity, trust their inspirations, and respect their values. It is also vitally important that their partners be open and emotionally available - in other words, that they be willing to share themselves completely.

I know it seems contradictory but...there is a time and place for everything.

[OSG]

Yeah. I've experienced the same. If it was, say, a character/entity that I could relate to/self-insertion-y, it'd always be (male or female but usually the latter) who was strong, independent, a good leader, and a good friend, usually trying to take down tyranny with a rag tag team that later becomes a super organization for the promotion of liberty and democracy of a larger scale. However, there would always be the more ILI foil: mysterious, introverted, calculating, of initially questionable loyalties but ultimately good hearted. Occasionally, I've come up with leads for different prospective stories that were typical ILI, shy, quiet, nerdy, detached, with an SEE foil.

The difference is I've known about socionics for a long time, but this was before even that, and I've had different self-typings over the scope of it. But my point is I think it's natural to have a recognition of our duals whether we consciously realize it or not. Even if someone knows typology and is typed wrong, what's natural is natural. I've always been innately drawn to ILIs over other types. And I think duals can seem boring from a distance, sometimes, but sometimes it's the opposite (I think this is true from both introvert and extrovert perspective).

But if you look at a lot of fictional works, you'll notice many times these kind of dual relations with the lead characters. I'm pretty positive the creators don't know anything about socionics or necessarily much about typology or would put any stock into it. I just think it's natural.

As for relations that are good, any relation technically has the potential to be good or bad, using general terms. I find dual relations to be the best in friendship and would think they'd be best for romantic relations (my experience in that area is limited to non-existent, but I'd really only want a long term relationship with an ILI). I think duality has the best potential for longevity and stability. Other relations, of course, are great (semi-duality, for one, and identity can be really good for work and, to a certain degree, friendship, but lacks longevity and stability of duality and semi-duality). I think variety is the spice of life, and as an extrovert, I feel the more the merrier as far as relations go. I wouldn't want to only be friends and associates with one sociotype. To me that seems unrealistic and limiting as far as growth and wouldn't make life as interesting.

So you are a SEE yet you have such vivid imagination I must say I didn't expect this, actually I wouldn't mind visiting your inner world if it is like this.

Since you are a SEE I would like to know how think of ILIs?
For me I may see SEE as less intelligent but they are definitely fun and not boring < maybe over energetic

as for "variety is the spice of life" I can't argue with since every type have something special to offer to the world.

[OSG]

yes. i too have had fantasy like dreams of what would match me without knowing socionics. the things ive imagined were someone who let me have my time with family and who enjoyed their time with his relationships like a boy playing in the mud with his friends and leaving me alone to have tea with my family or just read a bbook on my own. this would translate into independence. also someone who cared that others looked up to him and wasnt dismissive about peoples admiration of him. someone who took care of his family's welfare and is very caring. that is LSE in a nut shell

Interesting I never looked at LSE from this perspective.

[OSG]

The way I imagine an ideal partner or friend might be a combination of these types. Just using these descriptions from Keirsey because they were convenient and short. I prefer numerology to duality when it comes to relationships but none of it matters when there is strong chemistry.






I know it seems contradictory but...there is a time and place for everything.

Interesting but why was ISTP replaced with INTJ ?

and btw what is your type?

[Aylen]

Interesting but why was ISTP replaced with INTJ ?

and btw what is your type?

I wasn't aware that it was but in socionics terms, a combination of SLE, ILI, IEI and EIE 458 sp/(sx)/sp would be pretty awesome. At least I imagine it would be. This would probably play out better in my imagination than it would irl. So I stick to chemistry first.

My type? Since you are new I would rather you decide for yourself. I leave clues everywhere.

[aixelsyd]

So you are a SEE yet you have such vivid imagination I must say I didn't expect this, actually I wouldn't mind visiting your inner world if it is like this.

I had a more vivid imagination when I was younger. I may have had what is called Maladaptive Daydreaming Disorder in order to cope with emotional abuse and whatnot growing up. I'm usually too externally focused these days, but a lot of my ideas are similar, in feel, to Leiji Matsumoto's (creator of Captain Harlock, Galaxy Express 999). I still go back to these ideas, developing them as fodder for fiction should I decide I want to utilize my knowledge and talents in writing. An SEE I went on a date with expressed similar childhood imaginings without any foreknowledge of my own. I've known other SEEs to have a fantastical and intellectual side that wasn't readily apparent. I don't think it's that unusual but it's usually not obvious.

Since you are a SEE I would like to know how think of ILIs?
For me I may see SEE as less intelligent but they are definitely fun and not boring < maybe over energetic

Every ILI is different. Overall, I have few, if any, difficulties in getting along with ILIs. I think they are interesting, intelligent, sometimes mysterious, which I like, sometimes a little dry, sometimes a little boring (usually applies to the 'nicer' ILIs, not that I like jerks, but I like those who speak their mind truthfully and don't try too hard to be socially acceptable to the point of squelching their own ego with a persona). Some are extremely clever or else elusive and intriguing. My favorite characters in fiction are always ILIs. I often find them the most fascinating.

But as a rule, I think of ILIs as reserved, intelligent, and very good and very kind people (also the most physically attractive type, especially those with the classic ILI appearance of wearing glasses and having a rather emotionless, withdrawn demeanor, and seeming detached from the physical). I've yet to meet an ILI, irl, who was not a kind person, even if they were grumpy on the outside, which I tend to find endearing. But I often rely on ILIs for their knowledge and patience. I like helping them in physical tasks and in issues requiring diplomacy (I've shielded an ILI supervisor in overwhelming or else difficult customer concerns and queries). I feel a desire to defend an ILI when others go on the offensive merely because they have spoken their mind, often a criticism.

ILIs to me are relaxing to be around. It's easy to talk about anything and to find agreement on many things. I don't feel self-conscious, usually, around them. These are pleasant friendships that are usually built on real trust, affection, and acceptance. I usually can learn a lot from them without being made to feel like a fool. They usually seem to like my groundedness, friendliness, and level-headedness, low-maintenance, and the fact I don't create drama and when drama and tensions arise, I can diffuse it with pragmatism, diplomacy, and humor.

I'd say I am, like other SEEs I know, reasonably intelligent and cultured and educated, if you will, and can interject it here and there without really flaunting it. I can be prone to making errors in logical judgments and can struggle to recall facts that are disconnected from actual experience.

[Beautiful sky]

I had a more vivid imagination when I was younger. I may have had what is called Maladaptive Daydreaming Disorder in order to cope with emotional abuse and whatnot growing up. I'm usually too externally focused these days, but a lot of my ideas are similar, in feel, to Leiji Matsumoto's (creator of Captain Harlock, Galaxy Express 999). An SEE I went on a date with expressed similar childhood imaginings without any foreknowledge of my own. I've known other SEEs to have a fantastical and intellectual side that wasn't readily apparent. I don't think it's that unusual but it's usually not obvious.

Every ILI is different. Overall, I have few, if any, difficulties in getting along with ILIs. I think they are interesting, intelligent, sometimes mysterious, which I like, sometimes a little dry, sometimes a little boring (usually applies to the 'nicer' ILIs, not that I like jerks, but I like those who speak their mind truthfully). Some are extremely clever or else elusive and intriguing. My favorite characters in fiction are always ILIs. I often find them the most fascinating.

But as a rule, I think of ILIs as reserved, intelligent, and very good and very kind people (also the most physically attractive type, especially those with the classic ILI appearance of wearing glasses and having a rather emotionless, withdrawn demeanor, and seeming detached from the physical). I've yet to meet an ILI, irl, who was not a kind person, even if they were grumpy on the outside, which I tend to find endearing. But I often rely on ILIs for their knowledge and patience. I like helping them in physical tasks and in issues requiring diplomacy (I've shielded an ILI supervisor in overwhelming or else difficult customer concerns and queries). I feel a desire to defend an ILI when others go on the offensive merely because they have spoken their mind, often a criticism.

ILIs to me are relaxing to be around. It's easy to talk about anything and to find agreement on many things. I don't feel self-conscious, usually, around them. These are pleasant friendships that are usually built on real trust, affection, and acceptance. I usually can learn a lot from them without being made to feel like a fool. They usually seem to like my groundedness, friendliness, and level-headedness, low-maintenance, and the fact I don't create drama and when drama and tensions arise, I can diffuse it with pragmatism, diplomacy, and humor.

I'd say I am, like other SEEs I know, reasonably intelligent and cultured and educated, if you will, and can interject it here and there without really flaunting it. I can be prone to making errors in logical judgments and can struggle to recall facts that are disconnected from actual experience.

aww there was a young lady that my esi cousin was fostering who i was sure had that day dreaming disorder too. she was SEE too. when we went to a restaurant once she kept being pushed by her foster dad to eat but she caved in and started crying. a cry that flows from deep within so troubling that when you hear it it produces hickup like sounds. i hugged her and had the waiter remove her food and put her to the task of drawing. she began to draw hearts which if a psychologists saw would quicly and accurately determine that this lady needed love and attention.

[OSG]

My type? Since you are new I would rather you decide for yourself. I leave clues everywhere.

I guess I had a clue already

[OSG]

But as a rule, I think of ILIs as reserved, intelligent, and very good and very kind people (also the most physically attractive type, especially those with the classic ILI appearance of wearing glasses and having a rather emotionless, withdrawn demeanor, and seeming detached from the physical).

I think people avoid me because of this emotionless withdrawn demeanor, but I guess people are different.

I like helping them in physical tasks and in issues requiring diplomacy (I've shielded an ILI supervisor in overwhelming or else difficult customer concerns and queries). I feel a desire to defend an ILI when others go on the offensive merely because they have spoken their mind, often a criticism.

I found a guardian

They usually seem to like my groundedness, friendliness, and level-headedness, low-maintenance, and the fact I don't create drama and when drama and tensions arise, I can diffuse it with pragmatism, diplomacy, and humor.

that is reassuring

Thanks a lot that was insightful

[Aylen]

I guess I had a clue already

Ahh

[ouronis]

The idea is that one type's information complements the other's need, that none of the relationship's information-based parts clash. That isn't to say that everything else can't clash.

[Narc]

"Inner world" is one of the most pretentious terms I've come across to date.

[Aylen]

"Inner world" is one of the most pretentious terms I've come across to date.

What "paw" would you use instead?

http://www.pompousasswords.com/www/index.htm

http://www.stephankinsella.com/favor...nnoying-terms/

[Narc]

What "paw" would you use instead?

http://www.pompousasswords.com/www/index.htm

http://www.stephankinsella.com/favor...nnoying-terms/

Just use "imagination", surely.

[Aylen]

Just use "imagination", surely.

But what if there is a clear distinction between the two, for an individual? Not speaking for the op.

[Narc]

But what if there is a clear distinction between the two, for an individual? Not speaking for the op.

Please illustrate the distinction between "imagination" and "inner world".

[Aylen]

Please illustrate the distinction between "imagination" and "inner world".

inner world = thoughts, feelings and beliefs

imagination = creativity (to sum it up)

[Narc]

inner world = thoughts, feelings and beliefs

imagination = creativity (to sum it up)

Creativity is the conception of an idea and the execution of it, hence requires thoughts, feelings and beliefs after the conception stage.

[Aylen]

Creativity is the conception of an idea and the execution of it, hence requires thoughts, feelings and beliefs after the conception stage.

Poor word choice on my part. Just trying to convey the idea of a creative force of unknown origins. Did not mean to be so literal. That's why I linked to the common description of imagination to further clarify. My imagination does not need thoughts, feelings, or beliefs in the literal sense. Abstract images streaming through my consciousness seem to come from another realm that I cannot always describe with words since there are no words, for now, to describe them.

Imagination often implies "not real". My thoughts. feelings and beliefs are quite real to me. The inner world (includes all introverted functions) and imagination (does not have to include all introverted functions) are not separated in my consciousness so the line is crossed over many times. They complement each other. This is just the way I define it.

[lemontrees]

i went back at some point and mentally typed all of the imaginary girls i was, in the ongoing mary sue type fantasy stories i had going in my head all through adolescence

anyway it seemed like I really wanted to be SLI or ILI

and the guy was always a mix b/t ILE and IEE, E7.

[Beautiful sky]

The idea is that one type's information complements the other's need, that none of the relationship's information-based parts clash. That isn't to say that everything else can't clash.

My bf wasn't used to someone like me when we first dated. He liked tthe things about me that he liked in his benefits. With SEE the mannerisms that are attractive to hom is that SEE dress nicely unlike me who is humble doesn't buy expensive clothes, wears practical and comfy shoes and has unkempt hair. So initially one conflict was what has been true of him and my ESE relations....comb your hair lol. Once thought he came to love me and figued he could take on some of the tasks that I have and my time is freed I have time to comb my hair. Who knew lol.

[OSG]

or to recall your route to the toilet

Thanks for the explanation, but is this the best example you thought of?

[Radio]

all of my attempts to write novels or short stories at the age of 15 included an EII protagonist falling in love with an obvious LSE athlete

[OSG]

You must have misread what I wrote then.

Really?? I may not be an english speaker nor did I ever get more than a C in english, but I don't see how did I misread it?

[OSG]

I wasn't responding to your OP in my post but to Narc's post. The discussion was about definitional distinctions between the terms "inner world" and "imagination". I was responding to his objection that the phrase "inner worlds" ought not to be used and that the term imagination should be used instead. I essentially responded that the word "imagination" can encompass too many banalities and therefore is either too broad a term or not appropriate given what I feel is the intensity of meaning conveyed by the term "inner world". The "route to the toilet" was used as a banal example of imagination that feel should not be put under the term inner world, but could be placed under the umbrella term imagination. Unless you are calling into question the status of my example as not being banal enough, then I fail to see what your point would be other than a misreading that assumes that I was using it as an example of either an inner world or scenario that you were asking for in your OP -- which as I said I wasn't responding to -- or an exemplary use of imagination, which I never claimed it as being.

I guess you misunderstood me, I was just complaining that the term was inappropriate, at least in my country we would avoid to use it.