Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Relations of benefit description from socion.info

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Relations of benefit description from socion.info

    From: http://socion.info/TYPOLOGY%20DESCRIPTIONS/benefit.html

    A clear explanation of the relations of benefit
    By Reuben McNew [ENTp]

    In relations of benefit there are two parties: the weakest being the benefactor, who urgently seeks to indulge in whatever the beneficiary has to offer him. And the beneficiary, the strongest member of the party upon which the Benefactor draws functional energy. In this regards, relationships of benefit could be considered mutual to parasitic, depending upon the emphasis the partners place on the relationship.

    Usually partners in relations of benefit can form good friendships and remain on good terms with one another, so long as the relationship remains casual and non-serious; trouble usually only begins when the beneficiary invest time, energy, and risks emotional rejection in result of the interest of the benefactor. In essence, the benefactor is the taker of the relationship. In normal every day terms, this means that the benefactor may display typical signs of interest towards the beneficiary, who gives in the relationship. Yet, because of the natural tendencies of the two, the benefactor almost always lacks all natural ability to return anything the beneficiary might need in any type of relationship, which could lead to some unexpected disappointments and unfulfilled expectations. This could frustrate the beneficiary, since naturally he or she does not understand the nature of the benefactor’s interest; in the end, this could lead to conflict, accusations, and a general mistrust.

    In relations of benefit with opposite sex partners, signs of interest from the benefactor of one sex could serve to lead on the beneficiary of the other sex. Even if the Benefactor finds the beneficiary utterly repulsive and unattractive, he or she may still attempt to draw some sort of functional strength from him or her. The beneficiary usually determines this as a positive sign of personal interest. However, destruction comes when the benefactor eventually reveals his or her true intentions did not actually involve intimacy with the beneficiary.

    Relationships of benefit are typically good for friendships, but nothing more; in all, it lacks the general ingredients required to make a personal and intimate relationship work, grow, and prosper. All attempts to form personal intimacy in a relationship of this sort is always fruitless, and should be avoided for the sake of decency. Do not be fooled by your benefactor!

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The poster above was me ...

  3. #3
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Very nice, except that your first paragraph seems to explain the second stage of Relations of Benefit, whenever you start becoming closer. The Benefactor is still pretty much in the superior position until the intimacy starts appearing.

    I like your explanation of the energy flow between the types. Note that the Benefactor flows energy from the Beneficiary's 1st function to his own 6th function. The Beneficiary then flows energy from the Benefactor's 2nd function to his own 5th function. So what happens is the Beneficiary is very impressed with the Benefactor (typical 5th function response), and the Benefactor basically feeds off of the Beneficiary for help (typical 6th function response.)

    The most intense friendship I ever had was with an INFj, and it was pretty much how you described it.
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Exactly Cone, I described it pretty much the same way to Steve with functional graphics over at the socion.info forum ...

    http://socion.info/forums/index.php?showtopic=23

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ich bin ein ubel glied
    Posts
    8,198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Stupid guest access ... that was me ...

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angel von Himmel View Post
    Socionics.com: These relations are asymmetrical. One partner, called the Benefactor (+) is always in a more favourable position in respect to the other partner who is known as Beneficiary (-). The Beneficiary (-) thinks of the Benefactor (+) as an interesting and meaningful person, usually over-evaluating them in the beginning. The Beneficiary (-) can be impressed and delighted by their partner's behaviour, manners, thoughts and their ability to easily deal with things that the Beneficiary (-) conceives as complicated. When partners are together, the Beneficiary (-) involuntarily starts to ingratiate themselves with the Benefactor (+), trying to please them without any obvious reason. In the worst cases this starts from little things and then becomes bigger until the Beneficiary (-) realizes the foolishness of their situation. The Beneficiary (-) can see the weakness of the Benefactor (+), wishing to help their partner to strengthen themselves. Because the strongest point of the Beneficiary (-) is the weak and unconscious point of the Benefactor (+), the Beneficiary (-) is convinced that they are able to help. However, when the Beneficiary (-) tries to help, the Benefactor (+) usually refuses the help without any good explanation. The Beneficiary (-) usually listens to every word the Benefactor (+) says but there is no feedback, the Benefactor (+) can not hear the Beneficiary (-). This may be sometimes unpleasant and even irritating for the Beneficiary (-). The Benefactor (+) accepts the Beneficiary (-) as somebody who is lower in rank or social position and often undervalues them in the beginning. The reason for this is that the Benefactor (+) feels that the Beneficiary (-) needs something from them, that special something that only the Benefactor (+) can provide. Therefore the Benefactor (+) naturally finds themselves in an advanced position in respect to the Beneficiary (-), but are at the same time willing to encourage and take care of the Beneficiary (-). Relations of Benefit may appear even and conflict free. Usually it is the Benefactor (+) who initiates the contact. Partners can even feel some kind of spiritual connection between them. However, relations last only as long as the Benefactor (+) has something to give and the Beneficiary (-) has need of it. If this major condition is no longer fulfilled, relations enter quite an unpleasant stage of their development. The Beneficiary (-) may begin ignoring the Benefactor (+) completely or they may start to accentuate too many of the Benefactors (+) inability, provoking arguments and quarrels. Finally, when the Benefactor (+) is in a superior position to the Beneficiary (-), it can work quite well, but not when it is the other way round!

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hey I can fly.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default relationship of benefits

    you make it sound like it is always the benefactor who end of this type of relationship.if u read what i posted from socionics.com., once the beneficiary realizes the foolishness of this relationship, they start to ignore the benefactor. thus, the benefactor is somehow forced to move on unless he/she gives the intimacy the beneficiary needs. therefore beneficiary can decide to end the relationship. he /she does not have to wait for the benefactor to decide for them.

Posting Permissions

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