Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 201 to 230 of 230

Thread: Rankings/Ratings of Intertype Relations

  1. #201
    Hacking your soul since the beginning of time Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,087
    Mentioned
    200 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Who the fuck deleted my post?
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  2. #202
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,428
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    My list doesn't reflect which intertype relations amongst couples are the most common.
    It is not a prediction of such, but a prediction of which interactions would be the most "smooth" on a close level.
    A) i replied to sisofnight her list. not yours?
    B) i never said the list is most common. i was talking about comfortable level...

    just wanted to clear those two things up.

  3. #203
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'll add my thoughts on why a lot seem to be reporting supervision to be better then expected.

    The supervisee's most subdued functions, the ignoring and Polr, are supervisor's areas of greatest understanding, the Base and Demonstrative. This allows the supervisor to skillfully handle the areas in which the handle the areas where the supervisee shows the most inadequacy and inertness, perhaps more so then in dual relations in some cases. Being on the same side of process/result also allows a more direct flow of information and understanding of each other, unlike Mirage relations. The quality of supervision relations, perhaps more so then any other relation, probably depends a lot on the level of health of the people involved and if they can accept each others flaws and differences.

  4. #204

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddytextures View Post
    I'll add my thoughts on why a lot seem to be reporting supervision to be better then expected.

    The supervisee's most subdued functions, the ignoring and Polr, are supervisor's areas of greatest understanding, the Base and Demonstrative. This allows the supervisor to skillfully handle the areas in which the handle the areas where the supervisee shows the most inadequacy and inertness, perhaps more so then in dual relations in some cases. Being on the same side of process/result also allows a more direct flow of information and understanding of each other, unlike Mirage relations. The quality of supervision relations, perhaps more so then any other relation, probably depends a lot on the level of health of the people involved and if they can accept each others flaws and differences.
    I'd add that strengthened creative function of supervisor helps - it seems to create a channel of communication both ways (even if with hiccups here and there). So ILE-Ti's are often better for me than ILE-Ne's. The stronger the Ti, the better.

  5. #205
    LuckyOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    NEXT LEVEL
    TIM
    Who knows
    Posts
    350
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    For me it goes:

    Dual
    Mirror

    Identical

    Kindred
    Semi Dual
    Super Ego

    Activator

    Benefactor

    Quasi Identical

    Supervisor

    Conflictor

    Beneficiary

    Extinguishment
    Last edited by LuckyOne; 12-01-2016 at 09:42 PM.

  6. #206
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,961
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    Today I came across this article, and I pretty much agree with its descriptions and general conclusion that for most (or many) people, the best relations are typically Duality, Activity, Semi-Duality (and Mirage, as far as I know):

    As you could see, Duality is the best and the most satisfying relationship possible. Activation is pretty good, too, and Semi-Duality can be fine for some couples. Other relationships – you’ll have to try hard to make them work.

    Of course, personal issues, such as background, lifestyle and goals matter. When talking about marriage, they matter a lot, indeed. Besides, you do not just live with a personality type – you live with a person. One person is good, the other isn’t.

    However, given the same circumstances, a relationship with your Dual will benefit you most. Your Dual has the biggest chance of being your soulmate. Getting closer with him, you discover the best and often under-valued sides of yourself. These are the most loving and lasting relationships.
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  7. #207
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm on the side that thinks introverts prefer interacting with other introverts and vice versa for extroverts, and therefore I would rank activity as higher then duality.

    While a dual might offer the most potential in helping you achieve your goals and aspirations, I think activity is better in terms of pleasantness and sincerity between partners. The extrovert in a dual pair may often too much for the introvert to digest, and each partner may prefer their activity or benefactor over their dual due to matching energy levels. The fact that are each partner are trying to extract more from their activators creative could lead to tighter and stronger bonds then with duals in some cases.

    I think a similar kind of logic applies to conflict and super-ego. I would rank super-ego as worse then conflict since the different energy levels can help conflictors stay separated. Super-ego is harder to ignore and it is more likely that they will connect and exchange blows.

    I'll also add that I think Identity and Activity is preferred more amongst Si (and possibly Fi) valuing types, introverts especially, then it is amongst Se valuing types. Se valuing types might see it as more important that they accomplish their goals and thus seek their duals more often, while Si valuing types place more emphasis on the comfort of the relationship itself then what it has to offer.

    I also have the impression that Si valuing Extroverts tend to go for their benefit types more often then other types for some reason.
    Last edited by Muddy; 12-14-2016 at 05:15 AM.

  8. #208
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,961
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddytextures View Post
    I'm on the side that thinks introverts prefer interacting with other introverts and vice versa for extroverts, and therefore I would rank activity as higher then duality.

    While a dual might offer the most potential in helping you achieve your goals and aspirations, I think activity is better in terms of pleasantness and sincerity between partners. The extrovert in a dual pair may often too much for the introvert to digest, and each partner may prefer their activity or benefactor over their dual due to matching energy levels. The fact that are each partner are trying to extract more from their activators creative could lead to tighter and stronger bonds then with duals in some cases.

    I think a similar kind of logic applies to conflict and super-ego. I would rank super-ego as worse then conflict since the different energy levels can help conflictors stay separated. Super-ego is harder to ignore and it is more likely that they will connect and exchange blows.

    I'll also add that I think Identity and Activity is preferred more amongst Si (and possibly Fi) valuing types, introverts especially, then it is amongst Se valuing types. Se valuing types might see it as more important that they accomplish their goals and thus seek their duals more often, while Si valuing types place more emphasis on the comfort of the relationship itself then what it has to offer.

    I also have the impression that Si valuing Extroverts tend to go for their benefit types more often then other types for some reason.
    This reminds me of an interesting excerpt I read from this book:
     

    "The [introverted] female and the [extroverted] male is the most traditional pairing. Jane Jones and Rush Sherman write in their book, Intimacy and Type, "Our extensive clinical practice and research seems to indicate that the [introvert-extrovert] relationship works better if the male is the extrovert and the woman is the introvert" (1997, 106). [...] This couple combination functions very well especially if the partners are from cultures that expect the man to be in charge. They often have less conflict because their roles are well defined and sanctioned by the culture."

    "Another study about marital satisfaction [...] followed couples over seven years to monitor marital behavior, satisfaction, and divorce. Among the couples they studied, introverted men tended to marry later and [...] they usually paired up with introverted women. The study also found that extroverted women married to introvert men were the least satisfied. Clearly, [...] cultural influences filter down into our relationships, even without our realizing it. The difficulties faced by this type of pair are based, at least in part, on the negative way introverted men are seen in our culture."

    "[...] [S]ame-temperament relationships aren't as common as [introvert-extrovert] ones [...]."

    "In Marti's own research about introvert and extroverted relationships, she found that the [introvert-introvert] couples report the most relationship satisfaction of all the variety of couple combinations. A high level of satisfaction in this type of relationship makes sense, since they tend to have fewer daily conflicts than couples of different temperaments."

    "An [extrovert-extrovert] pairing is one of the most problematic ones. It's fun, exciting, and full of dopamine – while it lasts. [...] A common hobby, interest, or occupation, or even the task of raising children, can strengthen their bond and keep them moving."

     
    "Of course, all of the differences we have discussed crop up in same-sex couples, too. This couple already faces discriminations, so adding other challenges like differences in temperaments can be stressful. [...] Introverted gay men may face rejection from extroverted partners who idealize outgoing temperaments."


    In summary (satisfaction rating):

    1. Introvert & Introvert
    2. Introvert female & Extrovert male
    3. Extrovert & Extrovert
    4. Introvert male & Extrovert female


    Now, let's translate this into Socionics.

    The supposedly best ITRs for...

    Introverts & Extroverted women: Identity, Activity, Look-A-Like, Kindred, (Benefit), ((Super-Ego)), ((Quasi-Identity))
    Extroverted men: Duality, Mirror, Semi-Duality, Mirage, (Supervision), ((Extinguishment)), ((Conflict))


    The supposedly worst ITRs:

    Introverted men & Extroverted women: ((Duality)), (Mirror), (Semi-Duality), (Mirage), Supervision, Extinguishment, Conflict


    I think those findings could spark an interesting discussion.
    Is Duality actually only the best for extroverted males (in our culture)? Or is Duality actually worse for introverted men/extroverted women?
    How much does culture influence the success of ITRs?
    Last edited by Olimpia; 12-22-2016 at 08:07 AM.
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  9. #209
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    Is this based on your experience? I think immature people would like conversing with people of their same orientation but mature people will prefer inverse orientation. Reason is pretty simple.

    With the dual pairing both people can be in their nature role. The extravert will naturally led the conversation and the introvert will enjoy that. Because of this the interaction is very balanced. Both people are activated but not over activated. It's a good pace.

    In contrast the activity pair tends to over stimulate both people. It's very crash and burn. Like a rollercoaster with huge highs and then lows. Don't get me wrong it's still a very enjoyable relationship but it definitely is not as balanced. There is a tendency for the two people to talk over each other.
    It is possible what I said earlier could just apply to the levels of classical extroversion/introversion between partners instead of socionics extroversion/introversion and that I mistook that as activity. Energy level can vary within the same type, and my hypothesis is that we prefer to be around other people that exhibit levels of restlessness and chattiness closest to our own, independent of socionics related factors.

    As @Cassandra posted, gender roles could also influence this. Males tend to not like being controlled/overshadowed as much as females and thus prefer their partners to be more agreeable and submissive on average. I am a male so maybe this might factor in my experiences.
    Last edited by Muddy; 12-22-2016 at 09:52 AM.

  10. #210
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    Isn't "classical" extroversion/introversion just a misunderstanding of Jung's definitions?
    Maybe but I don't really see why this is relevant towards the point I was trying to make.


    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    I think this also has to do with personality (not types tho) / maturity. From my experience weak men like weak women. As you said these people (majority of people) have self-esteem and are uncomfortable with a strong women. Inversely, I am a strong man (you'll just have to take my word on that) and I require strong women. The low self-esteem of weak women mean they get easily offended by me. As for the overshadow part, weak women do not like being in the spotlight and that will frustrate me so I want a women who isn't afraid of being the center of attention.
    This works very similar to the way men and women match up by height. A taller man an average will pair up with taller women then a short guy. However, no matter the height range you almost always see the guy being taller then the woman. Statistics have proven this, even when factoring in that men tend to be taller then women on average. As guy who as stronger/tougher then the average man, you would probably like your woman to also be tougher then average women. However, chances are you would still only pair with a woman who is at least a few notches below your own levels of strength/toughness. When I go to the gym for example I see this one super ultra-masculine dude who just so happens to have a wife that is also super-masculine, more masculine then the majority of guys in there even, but she is still less the masculine the him, hence maintaining the "close but less than" rule.
    Last edited by Muddy; 12-22-2016 at 08:27 PM.

  11. #211

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    your list is probably exactly what theory would predict but i tend to think that reality is different.

    for example mirror is likely lower than semi dual.
    i once read a summary of a study they did by interview i believe, and conflict came out as pretty comfortable, also supervision wasn't as bad as one would have expected purely on the theory.
    Also Identity is probably lower than activity, since it only has the friendship/information functions in common and not the energy/dual functions. Identity can get boring real quickly.
    Yup Identity is boring to me for that reason. As a friend, okay... that's about it.

    I disagree that Conflict is all that comfortable. Not for me. Highs-lows too much, lack of consistency essentially with how rewarding vs how bad it can get, I just don't notice this pattern quickly enough initially. But definitely not leading anywhere long term. Which is again something that has taken me some time to notice before. That's me though since I don't easily notice it in time if I picked the wrong option in certain complex situations (and romantic relationships are definitely a complex type of situation - been learning though, lol).

  12. #212

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    Is this based on your experience? I think immature people would like conversing with people of their same orientation but mature people will prefer inverse orientation. Reason is pretty simple.

    With the dual pairing both people can be in their nature role. The extravert will naturally led the conversation and the introvert will enjoy that. Because of this the interaction is very balanced. Both people are activated but not over activated. It's a good pace.

    In contrast the activity pair tends to over stimulate both people. It's very crash and burn. Like a rollercoaster with huge highs and then lows. Don't get me wrong it's still a very enjoyable relationship but it definitely is not as balanced. There is a tendency for the two people to talk over each other.
    I agree on some of this. The activity pair thingy, as described, I experience that with IEIs pretty much. And EIEs are fine with more balance yes. Actually, LIEs too (Rational Mirage for me), I must mention this dynamics too since there's definitely a neat balance but it's also with a certain distance that may not be noticed by the parties but never gets closed. Like with me and my LIE ex, I noticed and decided only after quite the delay that this distance was there and could simply not be closed. My ex on the other hand didn't ever get aware of this. Probably the 1D Fi sucks even more at noticing than my 2D Fi role lol. I don't find the LIEs different from EIEs in terms of being activated initially. But that distance thingy, I think it leads to less activation over time. In the long term especially.

    With the LIEs, I also notice that this balance will be self-sustaining very neatly (with that distance that is hard to notice and can never be closed), like forever. Unless external circumstances mess with the Ethics aspect of things - because then this balance is very quickly disturbed and it looks real BAD to outside observers especially. To the LIE vs me, it's less noticeable, especially to the LIE (again the 1D Fi thingy) and we can sort out things Logically after a while. Intense arguing until then can be quite fun, hell, lol.

    Actually, it's all pretty much like described here about Cold-Blooded (IxTx) vs Business (ExTx) relationship: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ication-styles ("3. "Business-like" (PL) and "Cold-blooded" (LP) types.
    : Events in this pair usually follow this scenario. Both partners in this pair are quite indifferent to ethical influences. "Business-like" partner tries to use "Cold-blooded" partner for his purposes, but his efforts don't lead to anything. Over time and after a series of unsuccessful attempts, the desire of "Business-like" partner to change situation to his own tastes fades, and partners start drifting apart. Internal equilibrium, nevertheless, is attained in this way. In relation to people around them, this pair turns out to be insensitive. Each is busy with something of his own. However, if external influences are so strong that they affect the low-activity ethical functions of partners, quarrels begin between them concerning how to respond. This impaired balance with the outside world for them is very difficult to restore."
    )

    It's otherwise alright, being one of these two relationships: "The following two kinds of relationships provide psychological homeostasis only partially. Compatibility between them is of average significance. Either internal disagreements or external destructive influence can undermine these relations".


    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    Isn't "classical" extroversion/introversion just a misunderstanding of Jung's definitions?
    No, this dichotomy has been defined several times by several different psychologists/researchers. Jung is just one of them. The picture is slightly more complex than what Jung painted though he definitely had some nice insight into some um, patterns that seem like a lot more sensible insights than what some other ideas by others were from his time. A very unfinished system though, so...


    I think this also has to do with personality (not types tho) / maturity. From my experience weak men like weak women. As you said these people (majority of people) have self-esteem and are uncomfortable with a strong women. Inversely, I am a strong man (you'll just have to take my word on that) and I require strong women. The low self-esteem of weak women mean they get easily offended by me. As for the overshadow part, weak women do not like being in the spotlight and that will frustrate me so I want a women who isn't afraid of being the center of attention.
    I think your definition of what's weak vs strong in women is a bit unrefined. Lol


    Quote Originally Posted by Ares View Post
    It is possible what I said earlier could just apply to the levels of classical extroversion/introversion between partners instead of socionics extroversion/introversion and that I mistook that as activity. Energy level can vary within the same type, and my hypothesis is that we prefer to be around other people that exhibit levels of restlessness and chattiness closest to our own, independent of socionics related factors.

    As @Cassandra posted, gender roles could also influence this. Males tend to not like being controlled/overshadowed as much as females and thus prefer their partners to be more agreeable and submissive on average. I am a male so maybe this might factor in my experiences.
    Eew, submissiveness, not my thing. Fought a lot with my LIE ex over him feeling too controlled by me. EIEs don't mind in the same way, must be that they mind the Ti less. It's funny, my ESI-Se mom is also anything but submissive or agreeable seeming but my LIE dad was fine with her way of controlling - more Ethics based than mine I suppose.

    As for the levels of activity, restlessness, chattiness, whatever... No I prefer to be around certain duals who are definitely more restless and more chatty than me. Level of general activity is similar though, in terms of amount of initiative taking. I'm more initiative taking in the sensory/physical areas essentially, compared to them, and they are more initiative taking socially. There can also be mutual initiative taking in some areas and that's cool too.

  13. #213

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    "The [introverted] female and the [extroverted] male is the most traditional pairing. Jane Jones and Rush Sherman write in their book, Intimacy and Type, "Our extensive clinical practice and research seems to indicate that the [introvert-extrovert] relationship works better if the male is the extrovert and the woman is the introvert" (1997, 106). [...] This couple combination functions very well especially if the partners are from cultures that expect the man to be in charge. They often have less conflict because their roles are well defined and sanctioned by the culture."
    Bullshit. In my case. It needs more than just extraversion vs introversion for it to work. Plus I'm pretty much ambiverted in terms of levels of activity, etc. I most definitely don't care to have the man being in charge too much. Absolutely zero chance of me liking such a thing. I feel more natural if I'm in charge in enough things. So fuck these stereotypes lol

  14. #214
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I took a different approach in addressing this subject when I wrote the article below. I thought that processing perspective (need?) would produce a greater holding force. However, since our primal needs have to be met first and both, in any relationship, is affected by all the baggage that the other carries, this makes cognitive style a distant tertiary consideration and perhaps somewhat irrelevant. I think that Socionics theory is best used to help one understand oneself and the partner(s) that one ends up with rather than to use it to find theoretically ideal relationships........

    http://www.socionics.com/articles/thestrength.html

    a.k.a. I/O
    Last edited by Rebelondeck; 12-26-2016 at 03:53 PM.

  15. #215

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    The beauty of Fi/Te. Just needs to be good enough to get the job done.

    IEE
    Oh a conflictor. Okay. Lol

    I don't think SLIs like to be in the spotlight tho'. Most introverts don't care to. Still they could be strong people.

  16. #216

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    Hard to say. The cognitive functions models don't take into account all personality traits. It's hard to say whether liking attention or being strong relate the personality types. I would personally say no with regards to personal strength (however we define that) and unsure with regards to introverts and the spotlight.
    Agreed partially in that the correlation between type and personal strength would not be very strong, definitely not a direct line of causation there. With introverts, I think there is a clearer correlation, I would say they can sometimes like being in the spotlight but not constantly. That would just require too much extraverted information processing. So my point was that this is not necessarily due to lack of personal strength, and not due to fear etc.

  17. #217
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Any opinions here on mirror vs extinguishment? Mirror is in same quadra but has conflicting temperament and shares the same cognition as one's conflictor, while extinguishment is in opposite quadra but has dual temperament and cognition.

  18. #218
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,961
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ares View Post
    Any opinions here on mirror vs extinguishment? Mirror is in same quadra but has conflicting temperament and shares the same cognition as one's conflictor, while extinguishment is in opposite quadra but has dual temperament and cognition.
    Extinguishment might be the best opposite quadra match for the reasons you have mentioned. But because it is opposite quadra, it will be less compatible than Mirror at the end of the day, because the true values of the individuals are the exact opposite. So, how that translates into real life: the Extinguishment partner will be more attractive initially, and enjoyable in surface level interactions, but once the people reach a more "emotionally intimate" level and try to build a life(style) together based on shared goals and values, the Mirror partner will be a better match after all.

    P.S: It is a possibility that Extinguishment is more enjoyable than Mirror when things are being "kept light" and no one tries to delve "deeper", whereas Mirror is often a bit uncomfortable or slightly awkward in the early stages, but has a much better "staying power" because of the shared quadra values.
    Last edited by Olimpia; 12-30-2016 at 08:52 PM.
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  19. #219
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Extinguishment might be the best opposite quadra match for the reasons you have mentioned. But because it is opposite quadra, it will be less compatible than Mirror at the end of the day, because the true values of the individuals are the exact opposite. So, how that translates into real life: the Extinguishment partner will be more attractive initially, and enjoyable in surface level interactions, but once the people reach a more "emotionally intimate" level and try to build a life(style) together based on shared goals and values, the Mirror partner will be a better match after all.

    P.S: It is a possibility that Extinguishment is more enjoyable than Mirror when things are being "kept light" and no one tries to delve "deeper", whereas Mirror is often a bit uncomfortable or slightly awkward in the early stages, but has a much better "staying power" because of the shared quadra values.
    Makes sense. Mirror I would imagine would be less pleasant due to behavior similarities with conflictor, but would offer more in the long term. Mirror I would see as a sort of "constructive conflict" while extinguishment is conversely a "unconstructive duality".

  20. #220
    nyessss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    female
    Posts
    159
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Anyone here think that temperment (ip/ej) matters more than most relations?

  21. #221

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domr View Post
    I don't understand the system e.g. Gold vs. Silver Stars, Stars vs No Stars.

    I also strongly disagree with the attractiveness. Dual and Activity are awesome. Semi Duality in contrast is average, about the same as Kindred, maybe only slightly better.
    Yeah the system for the stars should be described lol.

    As for attraction hmm, I find Activity and Mirage for me are very attractive fast (maybe this includes the "improvement time" being fast?), Duality is a bit more subtle intially... Semi-duality is somewhere between Activity and Duality with this, I think.

  22. #222
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,961
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andreas View Post
    I tried to reducing error in my scoring, from 5,92% into 5,41%.
    I also make this more "general view", so it will looks like an overview of what I tried to improve in this year.
    I know it's difficult. But, yes, all people are important, so do all socionics type. No one is less important than other people.

    Hope I can update again one year later, with improvement too.
    See you.

    Attachment 9352Attachment 9353Attachment 9354Attachment 9355
    Attachment 9356Attachment 9357Attachment 9358Attachment 9359
    Attachment 9360Attachment 9361Attachment 9362Attachment 9363
    Attachment 9364Attachment 9365Attachment 9366Attachment 9367
    Hm, interesting take on it.
    I also don't exactly understand the star system.
    And I would evaluate attractiveness and "improving time" (=time it takes to become "closer" emotionally) differently for most relations...

     
    I am providing a "range" for most relations. What that means, is that for some situations and/or people, a relation will be more or less attractive or take more or less time to improve. For example, Identity can either be "Good" in attraction, or around "Below Average", depending on the individuals involved. At last, what I describe are the most general experiences of most people regarding relations. There will be certain individuals for whom a particular relation is more attractive "than normal". That would be a personal fixation, which I would explain with the "Imago" principle...


    Identity
    Attractiveness: Good to Below Average.
    Improving Time: Medium to Fast. Slows down over time.

    Supervision
    Attractiveness: Below Average to Good.
    Improving Time: Slow to Very Slow.

    Mirror
    Attractiveness: Fairly Good to Below Average.
    Improving Time: Slow to Medium. Fastens over time.

    Kindred
    Attractiveness: Average to Fairly Good.
    Improving Time: Slow to Medium.

    Super Ego
    Attractiveness: Average to Fairly Good.
    Improving Time: Slow.

    Business
    Attractiveness: Average to Good.
    Improving Time: Medium.

    Conflict
    Attractiveness: Below Average to Fairly Good.
    Improving Time: VERY Slow.

    Beneficiary
    Attractiveness: Below Average to Fairly Good.
    Improving Time: Slow to Medium.

    Benefactor
    Attractiveness: Average to Very Good.
    Improving Time: Medium to Slow. Slows down over time.

    Duality
    Attractiveness: Average to Very Good.
    Improving Time: Medium to Slow. Fastens over time.

    Semi Duality
    Attractiveness: Good.
    Improving Time: Slow.

    Activity
    Attractiveness: Average to Good.
    Improving Time: Medium to Fast. Slows down over time.

    Extinguishment
    Attractiveness: Average to Good.
    Improving Time: Slow. Slows down over time.

    Quasi Identity
    Attractiveness: Below Average to Average.
    Improving Time: Slow to Very Slow.

    Mirage
    Attractiveness: Good.
    Improving Time: Medium. Slows down over time.
    Last edited by Olimpia; 01-04-2017 at 02:04 PM.
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  23. #223

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andreas View Post
    Gold stars mean how much I personally feel when try to interact and understand with. Silver stars mean how much maximum potential feeling which I can wonder to improve. Estimated time to reach maximum potential feeling is described by "Improving time".
    Don't think too much, Myst. Try to feel it. Sometimes it's difficult to explain and to be measured.
    I measure/quantify emotions too, did you think I didn't? Don't tell me when to think and when to feel, tho'.

    The number of the yellow-coloured stars is the initial attraction?

  24. #224

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andreas View Post
    It seems, you didn't, Myst.
    I didn't what exactly? This seems like a complete non-sequitur answer.


    It's like,

    Wonder if we are in a soccer field. Every type have its "unique" ball, so there are 16 different balls in soccer field. More attractive that ball, it will made me more willing to practice soccer with that ball.

    Then, I practice juggling, shooting, dribbling, etc. The ability to mastering my skill with that ball at a first time practice, is being rated by gold star.

    Then, I took a rest, hold that ball with my hand, and look at the sky, wondering, how much I can mastering this ball, if I will to spend my time to practice a lot. That prediction is being rated by silver star. To reach that maximum potential, the next practice time might slower or faster than my first practice. Estimation of that time is being described as improving time.

    Hope this parable about sport practice with soccer ball, can explain about the ratings and make you understand, Myst. Maybe it's a religious gamble for you. , but it's not for me. I really put much effort to measuring it.
    This is what I was saying with initial attraction.

    Who said it was a religious gamble for me? Wtf you are totally out in space with your non-sequiturs.

  25. #225
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    15,766
    Mentioned
    1404 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    From point of long romantic relations I'd avoid anything besides:
    duality, activation, semi-duality

    If you have time, will and possibility to choose - duality only.
    Also don't forget about other important factors. Some duals are worse (in total) than some not-duals. You need to understand a human better to figure our it's key features. Don't become crazy just because you see pretty dual woman wich has sympathy to you - try to know her better.

  26. #226
    Spermatozoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Your most intimate spaces
    TIM
    IEE 379 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,972
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    LIE – Profoundly great and powerful
    ESI – Perfect breeding stock
    ILI – Aggressive and very dark
    EIE – Dramatic flair and style
    LSI – A sullen badass
    ILE – Crazy yet somewhat intriguing
    SLI – no opinion
    LSE – no opinion
    IEI – Emotionally manipulative waif
    SLE – Obnoxious loose cannon
    SEE – Simple, scattered and silly
    EII – Intolerant, a rigid zealot
    IEE – Commitment phobe
    ESE – Micromanaging nag machine
    SEI – Obsessive perfectionist
    LII – Misses the forest for the trees

    Most compatible
    ESI (Dual), LSI (Mirage)

    Least compatible
    SEI (Conflict), ESE (Super-Ego), IEE (Benefactor)

  27. #227

    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    496
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I haven't met all types yet but in my experience the best was Duality.
    I got along with a supervisee once, it was comfortable and we helped each other a lot. Great friendship.
    Identity was a bit weird, we both could see each other flaws, we were not big fans of each other but the understanding was there.
    The worst ones were Business (constant Polr hits) and Quasi Identical.

  28. #228
    Ilamatecuhtli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    TIM
    EIE-Fe or IEI-Fe
    Posts
    36
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silke View Post
    This is the ranking according to Victor Gulenko in one of his older articles. I'm kind of surprised that he placed Business relations on the same level as Superego and hasn't really explained this.

    http://www.socioniko.net/ru/articles/shkala.html

    1. Duality, Semi-Duality
    2. Activation, Direct Benefit
    3. Mirror, Direct Supervision
    4. Identical, Kindred
    5. Mirage, Extinguishment
    6. Quasi-Identical, Reverse Benefit
    7. Conflict, Reverse Supervision
    8. Superego, Business
    Gulenko: "The resulting rankings of intertype relations has a number of aspects that are sure to evoke surprise in many socionists. Therefore, they should be explained.

    5.1. The first surprise. That Supervision falls into the category of relations of average comfort, while the majority of socionists rank Audit (Supervision) as an uncomfortable relationship type. The point here is that traditional Socionics does not distinguish between Direct Revision (DR) Reverse Revision (RR). When in Supervision dyad, the Supervisor takes the leading role and the Supervisee accepts this state of things, this relation is that of Direct Revision. It is characterized by mild condescension and humane treatment by the supervisor of the supervisee. If the supervisee seizes the initiative and begins to play the leading role in the dyad, this relation "reverses" and acquires characteristics of petty control and quarrels. This is the case of Reverse Revision, which I rank in the category of discomforting relations.
    The same applies to the second asymmetric intertype relationship – Benefit/Request. When the benefactor takes up the leading role in the pair, and the beneficiary does not dispute it, this is the case of Direct Benefit – a proactive type of relations of average comfort level. But if the leading role is taken over by the beneficiary, then this relation loses effectiveness and activity, and turns into Reverse Benefit, the comfort levels of which are below average.

    5.2. The second surprise. The most uncomfortable relation turns out to be not Conflicting one, but the relations of Superego. This is explained by the balancing of the intro-static temperament of Relations of Conflict in Socionics. Conflictors can be ignored for some time. Superego partner perceives your actions as deliberate creation of inconveniences and discomfort. Your actions towards him or her are interpreted in the same manner, which starts a vicious circle of mutual complaints. Thus, remember that superego is for you the most uncomfortable partner at close communication distances.
    Would change for:

    (Very positive)
    1. Duality
    2. Activity
    3. Semi-Duality

    4. Direct Benefit

    (Nicely neutral)
    5. Identical
    6. Mirror
    7. Direct supervision

    (A bit draining)
    8. Mirage
    9. Kindred
    10. Reverse Benefit

    (Ok with keeping a distance, otherwise horrible)
    11. Superego
    12. Quasi-Identical
    13. Conflict

    (Ever horrible)
    14. Bussines (ESI imposing Fi on my Ti, so nope)
    15. Reverse Supervision
    16. Extinguishment (can't possibly imagine how anyone may be attracted to them for even a minute. Maybe particularly LSE are such monsters, not sure.).


  29. #229
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    https://t.me/pump_upp
    TIM
    EII-Ne 6w5 SP/SX 629
    Posts
    48
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1. Dual
    2. Identity
    3. Supervision ( K , i'm close with Supervisor too. Not Supervisee )
    4. Benefit ( Damn , i'm close with my beneficiary and benefactor too. Online and irl. )
    5. Semi Dual
    6. Kindred
    7. Activity ( K , the theories it should good relation. But , in reality i suffered a lot ;-;. Coz , i ever close with unhealthy SLI ffs. I hope , i can find healthier SLI. )
    8. Mirror
    9. Mirage
    10. Superego ( Yeah , i don't close with my LSI little brother )
    11. Conflict
    12. Extinguishment ( I ever had EIE ex boyfriend and it was suck )

    That's my review , about business and quasi identical. i don't put in my ranks. coz i never meet LII and IEI before.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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