Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Do Harmonizers (H) feel neuroses because they focus on PoLR?

  1. #1
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Do Harmonizing (H) feel neuroses because they focus on PoLR?

    "...he frequently lives with a sensation of discomfort and stress, and does so consciously... if we do something not very pleasant for someone else - that will be a ponderous Good Deed. Therefore Harmonizers are often doing something with a painful function. When people talk about PoLR as the “secondary creative”, this is about Harmonizing."
    I find this paragraph extremely intriguing. I am new to subtypes theories, so assuming the validity of DCNH subtype system, do Harmonizing (H) try to work on PoLR consciously which cause neuroses and discomfort? Why Harmonizing are motivated to work on PoLR? What kind of pleasure it gives them? "No pain, no gain"?

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...translation%29
    Last edited by seriousguy; 01-28-2016 at 07:44 PM.

  2. #2
    bolong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    626
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah this is interesting and I have some trouble understanding it. So when you are a harmonizing subtype, you are, for example, a IEI-Te?

  3. #3
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maithili View Post
    Yeah this is interesting and I have some trouble understanding it. So when you are a harmonizing subtype, you are, for example, a IEI-Te?
    Nope. That means you are IEI-Ni or Ni-H-IEI who might be working on Te, though for other people. It makes sense for me actually (assuming I am harmonizing), as I seem to focus painfully on Te (i.e., I've spent years around Te ego), probably also because I am 6 which relates to Freudian's super-ego. 6s are already very neurotic, add the increased emphasis on PoLR and you have a recipe for creating the most neurotic person.

  4. #4
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,126
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't know. I'm a IEI - Ni - Harmonizing 6w5 and im very low on the neurotic spectrum. I wouldn't attribute it directly like that, though there may be a golden line of insight somewhere in that train of though.

    I'm going to have to read up on that link, as I would assume that the way IP is affected by Harmonizing fixation differs from the way a EP/IJ/EJ would handle Harmonizing. For instance, it's in the common line of thought that a Base function Subtype corresponds to an improvement in PolR(relative to Role), and vice versa. I.E. An IEI-Ni will likely have more focus and handle on their Te than an IEI-Fe will. But with an EJ, the Harmonizing aspect would fall on the creative. To me it wouldn't make sense that an E**J - Harmonizing would focus more on their PolR. If anything they'd focus less. If you spend more time processing Ni than the average EIE, you have spent less time producing Si than the average EIE.

    With EP and IJ its even more complicated as the Ni/Si elements split between valued and strong, but never both.
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If it’s a disease, it’s nobody’s fault. Yay empiricism.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    557
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well the DCNH labels are obviously parallel to the 4 IE one uses mentally, like e.g. dominant/lead, creative/creative, role/normalizing, etc.

    The point this theory is trying to make, I think, is that e.g. H temperament tends to go against strain/expenditure the most, so if one notes the polr as the place of mis-estimation and thus stress, they may seek to regulate what goes on there. I'm not sure it's the best way to think of it that they USE the polr more.

    I'd say this is a good example of a decent idea, but probably confused/taken the wrong direction by various theorists. I mean, if you interpret it sensibly, it makes some sense -- your base function is sort of your main agenda...this doesn't mean I don't think the D personality "uses" the lead more, so much as they are more agenda-focused perhaps than some of the others.

  6. #6
    rob timidly hacim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    personal space station
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    342
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kalinoche View Post
    do harmonizing types have an easier time with the harmonizing versions of their duals?
    Given that DCNH subtypes correlate with temperaments (Ej, Ep, Ij, and Ip, respectively) I would say that pairs would get along best if the subtype of x were complimentary to y's subtype, complimentary meaning the temperament of one's dual. For example, C-LII and H-ESE.

    Then again, harmonizing subtypes get along with just about everyone.

    Of course, this is the theoretical Socionics answer. Your mileage in real life may vary.

  7. #7
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,220
    Mentioned
    67 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've been thinking about this same thing as well, but not just about harmonizing subtypes. Rather, I'm more curious about this works with a DCHN subtype that emphasizes one of the Id functions. In other words:

    Ixxj D (Ignoring) or H (Demonstrative)
    Exxp D (demonstrative) or H (Ignoring)
    Exxj C (Demonstrative) or N (Ignoring)
    Ixxp C (Ignoring) or N (Demonstrative)

    So my question is would a type with DCHN subtype that emphasizes their demonstrative be more accepting to the polr? Would subtype that emphasizes the ignoring want more of the role?

  8. #8
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,126
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The ixxj dominant might also emphasize their Suggestive as opposed to their ignoring. And so on.
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If it’s a disease, it’s nobody’s fault. Yay empiricism.

  9. #9
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pookie View Post
    I don't know. I'm a IEI - Ni - Harmonizing 6w5 and im very low on the neurotic spectrum. I wouldn't attribute it directly like that, though there may be a golden line of insight somewhere in that train of though.

    I'm going to have to read up on that link, as I would assume that the way IP is affected by Harmonizing fixation differs from the way a EP/IJ/EJ would handle Harmonizing. For instance, it's in the common line of thought that a Base function Subtype corresponds to an improvement in PolR(relative to Role), and vice versa. I.E. An IEI-Ni will likely have more focus and handle on their Te than an IEI-Fe will. But with an EJ, the Harmonizing aspect would fall on the creative. To me it wouldn't make sense that an E**J - Harmonizing would focus more on their PolR. If anything they'd focus less. If you spend more time processing Ni than the average EIE, you have spent less time producing Si than the average EIE.

    With EP and IJ its even more complicated as the Ni/Si elements split between valued and strong, but never both.
    You might be low on neurotic spectrum, but unhealthy 6s correspond to Paranoid personality disorder which has several characteristics of Neuroticism (i.e., anxiety, fear, worry, etc.). If you read the Harmonizing description, you might get the vibes that they have trouble (relatively) working for themselves, but they work for others. "Harmonizers are often doing something with a painful function." as if they do so even without conscious awareness and thus "lives with a sensation of discomfort and stress". I've seen neuroses in SEI-Si 6s as well (and they are most likely Harmonizing), and they have Te PoLR, but as 6s are supposed to be "loyal" to others, they need to fulfill their responsibilities anyway. You might say that they are compensating for Te PoLR through other functions, but considering the PoLR as the cause of neuroses, it seems they actually USE PoLR, and so does Ni-H-IEI 6s. Either there are other factors beside PoLR that causes neuroses or the Harmonizing description mean something else.

    I think DCNH are "roles" that we play in the society and so they doesn't actually affect the functional strengths, as that would be directly competing the Model A. Inert/Contact subtypes make the most sense in terms of functional strength (i.e., Base type has an improvement in PoLR). So, what Creatives do is that they use their creative function (Fe, Te, etc.) or other functions to generate Ne/Se ideas, so people see them as Ne/Se users. That is same for D, N and H. These are stereotypical roles. That's my understanding at this moment.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    TIM
    9w1
    Posts
    2,775
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    does this mean that Harmonizing types are the most apologetic ones?
    unholy water sanguine addiction

  11. #11
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,126
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "I think DCNH are "roles" that we play in the society and so they doesn't actually affect the functional strengths"

    I think if you're playing a role, your putting effort into something. Action = Energy. Putting forth effort in any IE will affect its strength. If you are a Harmonizing IEI, you are putting forth more effort into Ni than the average IEI. Your functional strength is going to grow more than the average IEI. The average IEI serves as the model for the functional strengths of each element in an IEI.

    I can't see how DCNH is separable from functional strength. DCNH, to me, is about how types will look when their functional strengths creep outside the rigid stereotype of Model A. It purposefully defies the Model A.
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If it’s a disease, it’s nobody’s fault. Yay empiricism.

  12. #12
    Deer Woman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    In my head
    Posts
    40
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't know if I agree with that. There are many paths to Rome.
    Let's take Creative for example, the "idea generator". You don't need Ne to specifically generate ideas. Otherwise xSIs would be incapable of doing so.
    In Golihov's description, xSI is actually known for a certain kind of ingenuity.
    Se as creative function in LSI (ISTj; Maxim Gorky) and ESI (ISFj; Dreiser) - these people have artistic and creative approach to handling power, money, and different skills. The ideal trainers who can make others more powerful by teaching them unique and original techniques or skills. His strength is flexible, sophisticated, it aims to be relevant to the situation..... Great financiers [because this addresses ESI too, this can't be linked to Te only, at least in author's perspective], but prone to making risky moves, thus they can become rich and go broke several times during their life.... If they have no opportunity to realize their second function, they can sometimes deliberately create a problem - fall into a very deep a financial or physical "hole", to then be able to work on getting out of it..... Able to work towards a victory creatively.... Actually there are many things that they are capable of. Can turn poverty into wealth anywhere. ... It is often useful to invite him to some business, because he knows just the right thing to do so that it will yield some real profit. Uses force creatively, knows when it is necessary to "tighten the screws" for his business and when it is necessary to loosen them. ..... They know how to create for themselves and others a certain image, how to work with the clothes, very innovative in this, create their own original style rather than following the current fashion. If necessary, they know how to save money and make a living with very little. Sometimes they are so clever in financial activities that can make money as if out of thin air. They love to handle and manipulate forms: collect stamps or badges, cars, build interiors, draw and paint. .... They know how to handle things so that they serve them for many years - turn this into an entire form of art. Old, used things they do not rush to throw out but attempt to still use it somehow, thus find work for their second function.
    I see plenty of opportunities for idea generation in this description, something that would fit Creative in DCNH, but without putting undue pressure on developing their Ne PoLR to do so.
    I promise if you keep searching for everything beautiful in this world, you will eventually become it.

  13. #13
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by metaphoriac View Post
    I think it is normal for the HA function to be pretty conscious and strong (I know the HA is not supposed to be conscious but virtually everyone I know would have a HA that seems consciously used like boss/managers who are xEE wield the Te bat)
    But, if you tell them, they will say it can't be conscious / mental or question your understanding or simply call you stupid when you can see that many "real" people actually show their HA to the world, especially if they are in careers which demand its use. How do you know when someone is consciously using HA? When his / her style of using / understanding it seems similar to its Leading / Creative user, so he / she is no longer unaware of its effects on him / her. I think in many people Creative and Mobilizing is nearly differentiated (conscious) to support the most conscious function (Leading).

  14. #14
    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 chemical View Post
    Well the DCNH labels are obviously parallel to the 4 IE one uses mentally, like e.g. dominant/lead, creative/creative, role/normalizing, etc.

    The point this theory is trying to make, I think, is that e.g. H temperament tends to go against strain/expenditure the most, so if one notes the polr as the place of mis-estimation and thus stress, they may seek to regulate what goes on there. I'm not sure it's the best way to think of it that they USE the polr more.

    I'd say this is a good example of a decent idea, but probably confused/taken the wrong direction by various theorists. I mean, if you interpret it sensibly, it makes some sense -- your base function is sort of your main agenda...this doesn't mean I don't think the D personality "uses" the lead more, so much as they are more agenda-focused perhaps than some of the others.
    I'm H subtype, if anything, my focus on the PoLR is on how to avoid it. I try to avoid people that are too overpowering with Se.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hacim View Post
    Then again, harmonizing subtypes get along with just about everyone.
    I think most people see me as someone easy to get along with and I certainly try to do so, but if someone is rude to me or others or 'wrongs' me in some way and doesn't seem to be sorry, that's when I stop trying to get along with the.

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddytextures View Post
    I've been thinking about this same thing as well, but not just about harmonizing subtypes. Rather, I'm more curious about this works with a DCHN subtype that emphasizes one of the Id functions. In other words:

    Ixxj D (Ignoring) or H (Demonstrative)
    Exxp D (demonstrative) or H (Ignoring)
    Exxj C (Demonstrative) or N (Ignoring)
    Ixxp C (Ignoring) or N (Demonstrative)

    So my question is would a type with DCHN subtype that emphasizes their demonstrative be more accepting to the polr? Would subtype that emphasizes the ignoring want more of the role?
    It's not true in my case. Maybe I'm mistyped in DCNH, who knows.

    Quote Originally Posted by kalinoche View Post
    does this mean that Harmonizing types are the most apologetic ones?
    Perhaps. I know I am.
    LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP



Posting Permissions

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