How do I teach basics of socionics

[Vespertine]

I wouldn't bother waste a single date on someone who has an opposite answer to "do you want children" or " do you want to get married" from mine.
I find distressing not to know what a person wants from me, from the relationship. Sure, people change their mind and can lie. I don't care which one happens, it would mean "bye" to me.
Then again, I wouldn't go out on a date with a stranger...
Then again, I'm not sure I even want a relationship...
Then again, books are great.

[Adam Strange]

@Aki, there are 16 types and 8 dual pairs, all different.

For the record, the second paragraph begins with the word “Seriously”, indicating that I was joking, and for most of the dual pairs, this kind of conversation on the first date would be ludicrous.

However, I should mention that, while my first date conversations with Betas and Deltas kept things light, my most recent first date conversations with ESI’s very quickly got down to the details of what we both wanted. I didn’t plan this, it just happened. It actually surprised me when I realized what we were discussing. All I can say is, there might be reasons for why Gamma is known as a business-oriented Quadra, run by contracts and negotiations.

*EDIT*
Thanks, @NorthernRose, for the corroborating information.

[Adam Strange]

@Adam Strange

Once an LIE invited me for having lunch, since we were working together, I didn't considered it as a date. Soon, he started asking all kind of questions, it resembled more an intreview than anything. One of his questions was if I want to have kids, I just started windeeing why on earth he was asking all of that if it was not a date since he didn't asked me out for one. I was uncomfortable and considered it disrespectful. We were there for 4 hours and I didnt find the way to say him that it was time to leave.

I know you were being funny, but I know that gammas j do that for real. It wasnt a personal criticism its based on my own experience.

He purposely did not present it as a date in order to keep your anxiety levels low.

Gammas kind of circle around each other for a while to learn more about each other without committing, because when Fi commits, it commits hard.

I did something kind of similar to what your LIE did to you the first time I went out with my SLI ex. Because to me, it wasn’t a date, it was just a way to have a good meal with a good conversationalist. She, however, interpreted it as a date. It kind of surprised me when I figured that out. I mean, I liked her and thought she was smart and attractive, but I really didn’t think she was romance material.

[Ave]

I personally like it being it clear what the relationship is about.

I just don't like there being ambiguity about the status of a relationship, like we don't know what it's about. Are we dating? Are we together? Is this not clear? I hate that. That isn't to say I'd subject someone to the kind of questions @Aki describes though. Basically I like knowing what the relationship is about. Especially since I often assume things about the relationship when the other person isn't clear about what they want. Because if you aeren't clear about something or are deliberately ambigous the other person will project things that you didn't intend and it won't be fun for either party.

The whole problem is bringing up the subject of the relationship and actually talking about it because it makes alot of people feel uncomfortable. Especially in our society where everything has to be interpreted and not said in the open, it seems, which is just encouraging bad communication, but hell, our society values alot of fake things, imo.

[Hope]

I wouldn't bother waste a single date on someone who has an opposite answer to "do you want children" or " do you want to get married" from mine.
I find distressing not to know what a person wants from me, from the relationship. Sure, people change their mind and can lie. I don't care which one happens, it would mean "bye" to me.
Then again, I wouldn't go out on a date with a stranger...
Then again, I'm not sure I even want a relationship...
Then again, books are great.

Yeah, for me is the opposite. If ppl evaluate me as compatible or not by such things, I feel like they are seeking for those things, not me. Which is clear since you say you won't waste time in them. So they are not seeking to love me or someone but somebody to fulfill their personal agenda. Thats my pov ofc. I know that all the time couples break up because because they fail at matching their expectations. To me relation means adaptation and commitement to someone you like and love above personal agenda.
As adam said, those are differences between types.


@Avebury, I'm very clear in status of relations, so clear that I even get upset if someone, like friend or peer seek to make some kind of "movement" without me giving my consent. But assuming or someone projecting things in the other, I'm against. As I said to me its more like wanting someone to fulfill expectations (that could be unrealistic for example), than finding someone to actually love. For me there are moral things that I want others to have, and I def wont consider someone without it, like for example same religious beliefs. But thats something present more than future oriented.

[Ave]

I wouldn't bother waste a single date on someone who has an opposite answer to "do you want children" or " do you want to get married" from mine.
I find distressing not to know what a person wants from me, from the relationship.

Same.

Yeah, for me is the opposite. If ppl evaluate me as compatible or not by such things, I feel like they are seeking for those things, not me. Which is clear since you say you won't waste time in them. So they are not seeking to love me or someone but somebody to fullfil their personal agenda. Thats my pov ofc. I know that all the time couples break up because because they fail at matching their expectations. To me relation means adaptation and commitement to someone you like and love above personal agenda.
As adam said, those are differences between types.

I'm not really sure I understand the difference between "commitment to someone you like and love" and "personal agenda". I don't understand it in practice, at least, because it seems that without having shared goals it can't work out. I had an LSI friend, I mean this was non-romantic, but he was constantly on the lookout for people "using" him and others. After we had a falling out he accused me of having profited from him. It's true I see my relationships as something I wanna get something out of, like if we hang out I wanna use that time to maybe do something I wouldn't do alone, visit a museum maybe. I don't see why that's using someone, but in his view relationships were about dedication to the other person, even if you don't share goals. In fact, I think he feels safest when people don't want to get together to accomplish goals. It makes him feel used towards an end. From my pov, however, the main reason our friendship fell apart was because of a lack of shared goals.

I truly do not understand this, but I also think it's type related. Different qaudras will see relationships differently, and I understand that. I felt like clarifying this because what I wrote above about being clear about the status of relationship isn't the same thing.

[Vespertine]

I had to give up a... I never knew how to define the relationship actually.
It was odd, people thought we were dating, there seemed to be hints from her yet I weren't sure...
I didn't know what she wanted and I was sure asking her up front to clarify her view of it would have gone... bad is the best word I got.
I had to burn the bridge.

More than anything, I'm looking for someone who would feel like a plus in my life.
Not someone I need, but someone I want around.
Someone I can live without easily, yet don't want to.

I was once told there were something romantic about how unromantic this can be, that is being chosen. Through all the others, it was that person in particular.
The others don't matter anymore (idealy), just that one person.
The person who said that is likely beta.

[Bertrand]

He purposely did not present it as a date in order to keep your anxiety levels low.

Gammas kind of circle around each other for a while to learn more about each other without committing, because when Fi commits, it commits hard.

I did something kind of similar to what your LIE did to you the first time I went out with my SLI ex. Because to me, it wasn’t a date, it was just a way to have a good meal with a good conversationalist. She, however, interpreted it as a date. It kind of surprised me when I figured that out. I mean, I liked her and thought she was smart and attractive, but I really didn’t think she was romance material.

so he didn't present it as a date, but treated it as a date, and you do something similar except its not a date..? sounds like you're doing that thing where you live in a quantum state of initiatives without commitment and relabel them in retrospect to simply evade responsibility, if you see it heading south. "in retrospect it was whatever I think gives me the upper hand or helps me evade criticism." no wonder you need contracts, because if its not pinned down in writing you won't hold yourself to anything, but this process literally devalues your word into presumed-lies unless you've drawn up a contract that binds you in some tangible and irrevocable way (truth is a binding contract, everything else is provisional and therefore meaningless). if you think your dual is somehow onboard with this you have the wrong idea of duality. the goal would be to reintroduce the value of truly ethical relationships not perpetuate your endless scheming. the reason they're so innately suspicious is because you have to be if you're dealing with this--this person on the other end cannot be trusted by definition. the more you try to wriggle out of this the more it demonstrates the point. its just another species of "im never wrong" and "even if I admit I'm wrong its only because the cost benefit analysis lead me to believe it would be more detrimental to not admit it--im actually irreducibly arrogant, so any admission of wrongdoing needs to be understood as just another form of playing the market"--its like at no point is there a human under there, just an self interest maximizing algorithm. we could probably replace you with a computer and no one would know. weirdly enough Trump is just like this but in a demented way, so I guess its shouldn't come as a total surprise america might elect the man

the idea that you even want a relationship is sort of baffling, and then one realizes you don't actually want one, you want kids, a house, sex, etc. the other person never actually enters into it except as an instrumentality. this is precisely why raskolnikov killed his landlady. you accumulate all this stuff and at best you've just maximally incentivized someone coming along and taking it in good conscience, not because your life's product amounts to a particularly attractive dollar amount, but because you're such a cockroach. and people wonder why crime is high in america. its because under these circumstances stealing seems like doing society a favor. if your dual has a purpose its to protect you across this angle, which is to say, they might confer a kind of moral legitimacy to the relationships that heads off this sort of dynamic. if they're not onboard maybe they simply don't consider themselves equal to the Sisyphean task you've outlined for them. which is to say they wouldn't mind if you got mugged and aren't interested in defending you. in the end people go out of the world naked the way the came into it, if ESI symbolizes having achieved something, its that they considered you capable of being managed and not a net loss. thus your own self interest ought to militate toward transforming the dynamics of your relationships into one wherein ESI might consider participating. but its not because you achieved your goals, its because you tuned your mode of being such that someone thinks they can work with it.

all this shit about getting rich and working hard is just gloss on the balance between being a good enough human being and a good enough provider to make someone with an actual conscience assess you as a worthwhile human being. except you don't know anything about being decent so you go about bettering yourself indirectly via self interest and materialism--it just so happens built into self interest is the inalienable, albeit shrunken and distorted to the point of absurdity and therefore pathetic, craving to be loved. unfortunately for you, being such an overblown slickster is part of the problem. Jung does say folly followed all the way down does terminate in wisdom though, so once again we have people making demonstrations of their lives for the benefit of the collective

[Vespertine]

How do you people define date?
I mean, for a while there was this guy I enjoyed talking with so I invited him out a few times... it looked an awful lot like dates... beside he dated like 7 different woman through that period of time. One after the other.
He did mention he didn't do those kinds of evening out with anyone but me but we never got that close. Things died when I refused sleeping with him.
I never meant hanging out with him to be dates, I only enjoyed the conversation.
Who decides what's a date and what's not? How does one know?
Can I invite someone on a date without knowing it? .-.
'Nuff questions...

[Guillaine]

its sort of humorous talking about frequency of sex, what kind of house, and where kids go to school, but not socionics. that just crosses the line. gotta save the socionics talk until you know there's something there, meanwhile talk about your future children. as if that isn't almost the definition of cart before horse. oh well I guess what school you send your kid to is really important to some people. as for me, it was for my parents as well, which is why they moved me from school to school as a youngster whenever my grades would drop. which by the way if you want your kids to flourish or trust you this is a bad idea

My mum (LSI) complained of this about her childhood too. Your logic is personal, intricate and impractical, even the structure of your sentences and lack of capitalisation points to Ti not Te. When you are disturbed or upset you pounce with Se. you do not value Fi, in fact you disdain, particularly when it comes from Delta Nfs. You like the rules and order. This relation between us is a conflict relation, I am familiar with it. To me you are a clear LSI.

[Adam Strange]

No, I think he did it because he knew that I was already in a relationship and because he was interested in his own agenda and convenience but not my person or feelings. To me if something is not a date, its out of place to ask personal/relational stuff such as "do you have a bf/gf?" or "do you want to have children?" etc. I still considering him a good peer, though. He apologized later, btw.

I do committed harder than anyone I know and I didnt circled my partner as if he were my prey. I value Fi too, but not Se, different quadras.

OK, @Aki, I see. I agree that the guy was way out of line.

I never go after a woman if I know that she’s in a relationship, but some guys might do that.

For what it’s worth, about half of my past GF’s were in a relationship when I met them, but in almost every case, they approached me. The one time that I approached a woman in a relationship, I wasn’t aware she had a BF, and when a mutual friend told me (because it sure as hell wasn’t obvious), I stopped.
After a few months, they broke up, but that had nothing to do with me or anything I did or said (because, as I said, I just stopped everything). Rather, she was IEI and he was LSE.

[Number 9 large]

step 1: learn basic english

[Vespertine]

This has been spinning in my mind for a few days now, and I think it sort of fits here.
I know a woman who used to date a man who doesn't want children, so they didn't have children. They broke up and now she's with a man who wants children, so they have a child.
She said she has sort of wanted children all along, yet went along with what her ex wanted.
I'm perplexed by this story and it makes me think she's not trustworthy about her wants at least.
In the end, it doesn't matter much, they love the kid, all is fine.

[Adam Strange]

Some people have strong feelings about certain things, and are indifferent to other things.

I like vanilla shakes, and whether or not there’s whipped cream on top doesn’t make it or break it. It’s the shake I want.