ITR Fails
Post any experiences involving you or people in your life where you've seen ITR as predicted by socionics failing.
- Make sure you're fairly sure of the typings of those in your examples.
- Also say why you think things played out the way they did (any special circumstances, personality quirks, or "NTR factors").
Last edited by niffer; 04-01-2018 at 05:20 AM.
When you have predicted how I would act or react to you, or when you tried to guess at my motivations, you were totally wrong and have failed.
Not enough lube?
This needs huge statistics, not cases. All cases may be explained by external influences. And by wrong types.Originally Posted by niffer
The other is not more than much speculative fan.
Also IR are described for close informal communication like friendship and marriages. In other situations, where people do not seek for friendship, they may behave and feel with variations. Ne and Fi ego types may notice IR effects better.
> - Make sure you're fairly sure of the typings of those in your examples.
take into account <20% average typing match. most types are wrong
> - Also say why you think things played out the way they did (any special circumstances, personality quirks, or "ITR factors").
there is a lot of negative factors - just anything you may dislike in other one or what you want and do not get
some people may just to want new relations, and then any minor issue will be rationalized by them as significant obstacle - and they'll choose _same quality_ or even worse relations just with new dude
IR should be thought as one of positive factors for good relations. Significant for friendship and marriages.
You may like the human for something, but to have quarrels because you dislike something. Dual marriages may break, but it should happen more rare and such marriages should be longer than in average.
Or to have surfacely good relations, though where you have no what good IR would give you. Like to have neutral IR relations where you may to have no big issues, but where you do not feel yourself happy, the relations as deep and satisfying. Most people live such.
I'd prefer long "bad" relations with good IR, than "good" with neutral or bad. I'd felt better with grumbling wife which one I love and feel deep personal sympathy, than with quiet and smiling but which inspires no much good in me. Are my relations good or bad for external observer?
Statistics of breaks would help to understand how important Jung's types are and the degree in which IR express as should.
In my personal experience. I never had strong soul attraction to activator girls. While I saw pretty ones and noticed sympathy to them. I prefered for feelings introverts only. Mb I could to understand them better and to like more, - a lot is from a random chance in life.
The most significant feelings to this time I had to conflictor girl. Though relations were not long or good, - but they could if I'd try seriously. I had semi-duality romantic attraction in past to compare and understood that something is very wrong to leave her, to allow more her and destiny to decide there. If I'd was lesser principled (or mb was smarter) or had no good IR experience - I'd made normal marriage with that conflictor girl, though lesser emotionally satisfying than both could to have with good IR.
From what I notice with people. They tend to do long friendly relations with good IR and lesser personally close with neutral ones. IR theory is much confirmed in my experience. Non-types factors explain all other.
@Sol My point in creating this thread was not in postulation that ITR doesn't work out most of the time, but to collect information on why and the kinds of things that happen when things work out differently from what socionics predicts. Individual cases are needed.
That's another failure for you.
The question is, has anyone actually improved relationships using Socionics, and the answer is probably no, in a realistic way.
Socionics says that the key to a successful relationship is simply a matter of finding the right person, or finding someone who is compatible with you, and that may be true to a certain extent, but relational conflicts and issues often have to do with yourself, the other person, or perhaps both. The key to a successful relationship lies in changing your own attitudes toward relationships, and namely, solving your own emotional issues, hangups, baggages and problems. These are often the repeated patterns of learned behaviors that you have learned as you were being raised as a child.
Saying that certain relationships will always end up in a conflict may also be too pessimistic and lacking in imagination, as well as saying that it will always end up in a success and being smooth-sailing is too naive. I think that "objectifying" these kinds of relational issues and saying that it is due to some pseudo-psychological determinism, is not very helpful in clarifying the issues at hand. It ignores the very "subjects" of the relationship, who are the real causes of either successes or failures of most relationships.
Within its realm - none. The types of anyone who is close to me right now are quite apparent.
ITR never fails. It's the descriptions that are wrong, because they attribute instant happiness to the supposed positive ones, and negativity to the supposed bad ones. But the truth is that those factors are independent from the ITR. There are good conflicts, and bad conflicts. Likewise, there are good dualities and bad dualities. The same for all other ITRs.
What is true though, is that some ITRs are more suited for some things than others.
It does need to be logical, but to be fully justified it needs to match with reality. Both the premise and the conclusion need to match with reality, because they linked and are of the same.
But this does not "prove" that there ever was "good ITR", as it will be impossible to know from this fact.
Well then it's simply a matter of miscommunication, or having different opinions, but it's not necessarily a conflict. Whether you escalate it to a conflict depends entirely on the persons within the relationship.
You can say that "People of low emotional intelligence are likely to conflict with other people, because they have not yet found a way to successfully resolve conflicts", and that would generally be true. But you can't really say that "If you add these two types of people, then they will conflict", because that would really depend. I think the problem is that those independent variables are not necessarily the ingredients for conflicts.
Yeah lol I don't disagree at this point. I'm just looking for stories of special cases or incidents of these imperfect cases. To collect data on these NTR factors involved, and it's also a good thinking exercise and helps in being predictive about relationships overall, socionics or not.
@Singu Once again, you're wasting your breath by preaching to the deaf here. The deaf know not to be led by the dumb though, at least, fortunately.
@niffer Here's what's not a waste of time. Read this book: Emotional Intelligence, by Daniel Goleman.
Well then it only means that if you take seriously the premises of Socionics, then it will only lead to false or nonsensical conclusions, because miscommunication or not finding certain humor funny doesn't necessarily lead to conflicts. How a conflict is created, depends on how one emotionally feels toward the another (for instance, it's the feeling of anger or hostility that will potentially lead to conflicts). So conflicts are rather better explained by emotional explanations and explaining the mechanics of how emotions operate in people.
Then you can simply test the model, via statistical means or some much.
@Singu this is fucking off topic lol take your retardation elsewhere please
lol because you can't refute it. But what's really "retarded" is ignoring all new information and evidence, so that you can keep believing in your own faith. Yeah so it's funny that you say "Let's take a look at NTR factors" "Let's try to improve ITR, let's see where it fails" but when it comes down to it, you ignore everything else.
I mean really, it's trivially easy to keep refuting ITR, until it somehow becomes "perfected", but then it no longer becomes ITR or probably even Socionics.
Anyway, bye.
some couples I know:
me xNFx + bf xSFx = kindred, benefic, superv or lookalike. Together for 1+ year, up and downs, we're not planning to live together anytime soon
my sister ESI + her bf ISTx (I tend for J)= Look alike or Benefic. Together for 10 years and they're going to live together soon
my mum ISTx (I tend for p) + my dad ILE = semidual or superv. Together for 40+ years, they've never cheated each other and loved each other very much
INFx friend + SEI gf = benefic or lookalilke. Together for 1 year, they're planning to move together
ESE cousin + INTx husband (I tend for p) = dual or conflict. Together for 13 years, he works in the middle of the sea and my cousin spends most of her time home alone, they're having problems lately.
SEI cousin + ILE husband = dual. Together for 13 years, they seem very happy although sometimes I've seen my cousin be very upset by some rather rude attitudes of him.
ESE aunt + ESI uncle = contrary. Together for 40 years, they've had up and downs and she cheated on him but they're still together, seemingly happily.
IEI aunt + SLI uncle = superego. Together for 50 years, until his death. They could barely stand each other but anyway have supported each other.
EIE aunt + IST (I tend for j) husband = dual or conflict. Together since they're 15, over 40+. He cheat(ed)s on her, she cheated on him, they're still together and look good from outside. Sometime it looks like she can't stand him but they're still there.
SEE friend + ExI gf= mirror or superv. Together for 10 years, lived together until he couldn't stand him anymore. He cheated on her and she on him.
happy easter~
conflict is anything what you dislike. the mentioned miscommunication and humor styles which you may like relate to IR significantly
@Andreas Spooked, but thank you...
idk this advice is kind of Oprah-y but it's so true that you don't really have good relationships until you find some way to make yourself happy. And that hurt people hurt others. Other people can only meet you as a reflection of where you yourself are at. If you are sad enough to bring them down... you will bring them down, and they will get weirded out by that- and avoid you. This doesn't mean you act like a fake pollyanna to be in a relationship, but if you are happy and confident/secure in yourself first in your own life; other people will become an extension of the spiritual good-will that you created.
You also have to be wise and not ditzy so you can pay attention to the warning signs. Don't naively ignore them, like I stupidly did during my teenage years. If something emotionally deep inside is rubbing you the wrong way about a person - you confront it with yourself, it's there for a reason. Would you ignore a really bad smell in your house just because it was bad? Are you that much of a ball-less middle class pussy so divorced from your external reality that you'd literally die in your own filth? People who are successful almost instantly take matters to remove the stench rather then wallow in it retardedly. OMG MAYBE THE SMELL IS MY DUAL!!! Nietzsche, what does it mean! Edgelord Hollywood writers , tell me why I'm here as I passively watch your tv show that you created instead of making my own! /mentally masturbates over foul odors instead of clearing the air. This is what middle class people are socially conditioned to do, and elites simply don't do this. Shit is shit, quality is quality, and they go for the quality. What many people do emotionally though, is scoop up a turd that just came out of their ass and use it for earrings and say to everybody 'Don't I look so pretty?' When all your friends can see they aren't worth anything: They are SHIT.
Back to relationships. You might have loved this person once, but now something is telling you to 'back away, give space.' And so you do that. Remember... be here now. You must live in the moment. You have no other choice really. You don't leave now- you end up regretting it. With that said, I understand that it's easier to be in something miserable than it is to be completely alone because we are social creatures and crave affection/companionship with others. And assholes often end up with other assholes because they are the only ones that entertain each other's bullshit for awhile. But yes, always be kind to yourself first. It's easier said than done. It takes practice. Do you get physically fit by halfheartedly working out once a week for 20 minutes a day, ho-humly walking along the gym track like a basic bitch in pink track pants? No. You of course have to put more effort into it than that, and being happy is no different.
I have often preached (because I really care, one of my weaknesses) this for somebody in rl that 'just doesn't get it yet.' She mocks it, which if she took it seriously- would actually help her.
She really honestly genuinely believes once she has the right man or right job then she will be happy- and she just doesn't get that she's got it backwards, that it's totally the other way around. How do you just get happy then? Do you wave your hands and magically become less bitter, cruel/victimy and depressed? Obviously it doesn't work that way. It takes filtering out and re-evaluating sub-conscious belief patterns you hold about the world/yourself/other people that sets you back. Which requires meditation/quieting down the mind to not let what your mind holds be a harsh script set in stone that dictates your entire life. It's sort of like you know, you're in a play- and you MUST give those exact lines, if you don't- everybody important in society will laugh at you, and many people are unhappy and live their lives like this, as if everything were a 'harsh script'. They don't get life isn't a script even if consciously they say otherwise. Deep down inside they *do* think life is a script, because they are unwilling to challenge themselves to do something different that would make them feel better. They like to think themselves as some independent free-minded person but when push comes to shove, they will jump off a bridge just because everybody else is doing it.
Often it's a matter of simply being okay with being a little weird and different.
Last edited by Hot Scalding Gayser; 04-03-2018 at 06:16 AM.
A large portion of failures in romantic relationship can be attributed to what I call the grass-looks-greener syndrome, in which infidelity fits. The highest proportion of failures in relationships of every kind are caused by bigotry that is sourced from negative upbringing and experiences. The conflicts that ITR directly cause are all relatable to differences in priorities, methodology and goals, which really aren't causes for failure; ITR only affects how the schisms, as you say, play out. I've experienced, witnessed and presided over countless conflicts and fractures, and I can't blame ITR on a single one - so I wonder how ITR by itself could be used to predict a failure.......
a.k.a. I/O
Having a conflictor friend is a very good socionics laboratory. Being seemingly against the ITR predictions it clearly contrasts the socionics factor against other factors.
Same with duals that you dont like that much. This is how one learns socionics.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
yes I think a dual you don't like gives you a good look into your own shadow, i feel like it is also a product of conflicting subtype
The least possible among all IR is to wish regular communications with a conflictor of own sex.
> Conflictors are easy to talk to in the sense that the conversation keeps on going but that's because you argue and disagree about everything.
You'll tire from such talking and IR effects themselves. If people keep the wish for talking while arguing much - there is something good between them what compensates the aversion. It's doubtfully be conflictors.
I agree with that in general but what I would say can potentially "compensate" can be very broad, which is why people can be "friends" with conflictors. friendship isn't identified to psychological restorative relations necessarily, although we'd like to think that is what all friendships are. there are a lot of cordial relations called "friendships" that are usually just relationships of convenience because of offsetting factors that are NTR. although i think complete semantic accuracy would require these kinds of relationships actually be characterized as working or familial or some other form of not-technically-friendship relations. people get drawn into objective relations via commitments or conflict avoidance or lack of viable alternatives and this is how you get people that hate all friends but nevertheless go out to meet them every day. i think Fi types are more likely to think they're not true friends, where Fe is more to look to the objective relationship which is one of friendship, and say everything else must be there. sort of how the marriage vow becomes to mean more than the actual subjective relationship between the couple in Fe/Ti types. Ti types would be less likely to call those people "friends" up front, because they're more about accuracy to begin with, so a lot of it solves itself at the inception. but this is how people speak different languages
Well, I have one ILE coworker that I didn't respect for a long time (here).
Another coworker that I truly care about, but our interests/rhythms are so different that it is hard to talk.
Another ILE that I had a short lived relationship with (here).
A final one that I fell in love with while we briefly dated but who did not love me. And then forgot me.
So.
The examples of successful cooperation:
conflictors: Dmitry Puchkov (SLI), Klim Zhukov (EIE)
superego: Andrey Tayler (SEE), Ivan Smolkin (ILE)
Good IR relate _more_ to abbility for close friendship, than else.
inb4 you two cry from being quoted in the same post
I agree, and that's exactly the point of this thread. By assuming that relationship dynamics don't *always* work out the way socionics predicts, it pushes the whys and hows and having to clarify more details about the dynamics going on in these situations into the spotlight.
Sure. There are many common patterns of value/personality conflict that people get into though and socionics is very relevant and useful here as a boost in knowledge and it gives you a structure that can give clues as to why conflict may be occurring. Maybe an NF type can function well on their own, but for someone like me it is inexpedient to ignore it or not consider it for more information.The key to a successful relationship lies in changing your own attitudes toward relationships, and namely, solving your own emotional issues, hangups, baggages and problems. These are often the repeated patterns of learned behaviors that you have learned as you were being raised as a child.
Yeah, it's exactly these kinds of scenarios that I'm looking for examples and stories of.
The more data, the better.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
As a system of observation, I don't think Socionics can actually come up with anything new that you already don't know from the said observation.
What's it really doing is that it makes people THINK that it's coming up with explanations for people's behaviors, when it's actually just the reiteration of the observation, like "This is due to Ni dual-seeking behavior". So it actually stops people from investigating any further, which they think that they have gotten the explanation, when they haven't. They stop at "It's because of Ni dual-seeking behavior", and don't bother to investigate any further.
Actually, that wasn't even the answer to the question of "why". It was just a statement of a kind of "truism", that something seeks something, like "feelings and logic conflict with each other".
No, let me give you an example:
let's say you've typed two people correctly, an ILE and an SEE. the two get into some fight and you as a third party figure out that the SEE offended the ILE due to values related to Fe. you could then coach the SEE to appeal to Fe values more by being more expressive and gentle in how he says things to soften the conflict and confusion. of course everything ends if you don't bother to investigate further or do anything with your knowledge, that's your problem though.
Anyway this is off topic.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
But that had actually nothing to do with "Fe", and of course being gentle would resolve the conflict, as that would simply be common sense. So this whole thing didn't actually tell you anything new.
Also did you not realize, that you've missed the REAL reason why the ILE got offended (which we don't know, of course), by replacing it with "due to values related to Fe"?
Are you retarded? (yes)
You didn't read this. I said the ILE got offended.
The implication is that the "real reason" is non-obvious of course. For someone like me, who is not good at feeling out peoples values and understanding interpersonal situations well, typology is extremely useful as a starting point. It is not meant to eclipse reality, only supplement possibilities -- the majority of people understand these limits that it has. Consider that you don't understand this because of the type you are / your own personality. Also consider getting brain surgery.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
You've made an assumption that may not even be true. You think that you can read people's motivations through Socionics, but you simply can't.
This is why I, and others get irritated by Socionics. They assume things and think that you're acting this way because you're Ti, you're Beta, etc, when that is not the case. They just project their assumptions onto you and think that they're getting somewhere in understanding people's motivations. Have they considered maybe simply listening to what people have to say?
These kinds of assumptions will only create conflicts, not resolve them, due to misunderstandings.
So why don't you just consider that there are multiple reasons, even an infinite possibilities for the reason why people act the way they do? Well you can't of course, because that would mean things being uncertain, and you're trying to reduce uncertainty by having an illusion of external locus of control through Socionics.
Not motivations, but values, which can help with surface dynamics and general understanding.
Just because you use socionics doesn't mean you don't listen to what people say or ignore reality in lieu of it lol. Maybe you do, with your narrow skull being incapable of weighing more than one tiny thing in it at a time. Clearly you've been doing that without even having socionics or anything else in there anyway.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
Right, and you're even making assumptions about their values, like "Fe values".
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
Done.A large portion of failures in romantic relationship can be attributed to what I call the grass-looks-greener syndrome, in which infidelity fits. The highest proportion of failures in relationships of every kind are caused by bigotry that is sourced from negative upbringing and experiences. The conflicts that ITR directly cause are all relatable to differences in priorities, methodology and goals, which really aren't causes for failure; ITR only affects how the schisms, as you say, play out. I've experienced, witnessed and presided over countless conflicts and fractures, and I can't blame ITR on a single one - so I wonder how ITR by itself could be used to predict a failure.......
a.k.a. I/O
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
A person can adopt any kind of values, and it's not as if he's forever confined to his "quadra values".
I have no idea why people who have been studying Socionics for years, have this delusion that people act like this exactly predictable automatons, where they are stuck in some sort of a pattern over and over again, and that's the only way they would ever act. Perhaps it's because they spend their time studying Socionics, and not actual people.
ITR does not explain the why of a conflict, because it doesn't even answer the question of why. Instead, it's making some general statements, like "this and that conflicts", which are irrelevant.
So who on here does this? If you're just going to implicatively insult the entire forum then gtfo this thread again.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
Well they necessarily have to, since 1) a type is static, and can ever act in predictable ways (or they would be no point in having types) and 2) a type can only ever adopt his own quadra values.
But hey, don't bring SENSE into Socionics or something...
Having static types (it's been proven that general personality IS static over one's lifetime) and acting in generally predictable ways (people ARE often predictable) is completely different from "predictable automatons, where they are stuck in some sort of a pattern over and over again, and that's the only way they would ever act". You are taking something to an extreme, and painting this as the only way to use something and the only way everyone here does things, when NOBODY here does that, even Bertrand doesn't believe it to such an extent lol. Get your head out of your ass, and please leave my thread if you aren't going to contribute anything relevant to it here.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
