Intertype Relationship Calculator
If anyone is interested, I created an intertype relations calculator that produces the intertype relationship between two types as well as factoring in their subtypes. It also provides a rough analysis of how functions are positively or negatively affected in the relationship and to what degree. The relations calculator is here. Comments and criticism welcome.
sociotype.com
LII
What do you view as the primary value of your tool?
fun to play with for five minutes. would be useful if socionics was really the most determining factor in relationships.
not really understanding some of it, though. like how/why the different subtypes can change the "primary" relationship from duality to semi-duality or whatever (wouldn't it be like a "semi-duality-esque duality?" haha), and what the green shading means - the darker, the more its valued by the other person?
Sorry but I have a criticism. (lol)
I don't think your conflictor will be 0%. I think reality is more complicated than that, and there would be many non-socionics factors that would factor in on why you couldn't or could get along with somebody.
I believe a more realistic approach to this is to make the affluence (influence) a 15-1% range. Like if you are duals, you will probably feel naturally about 15% better with each other. But you can hate and dislike somebody for many many reasons. Hate makes the world go 'round! People have hated me and discriminated against me for the most petty useless bullshit and to be fair, I've done the same to them.
Hell shit I can focus on anybody in the world and grow feelings of intense hatred even my best friends that's why I'm careful with this stuff, it makes people have this convenient excuse of why they can't get along with somebody and not try to work with them. "Okay Sally and Mike we need two people to move the huge barrel out of the way. If you don't then the world will explode and die." Sally: "But we're conflictors that have a 0% compatibility rate! We can't be in the same room together without wanting to sociopathically gouge out each other's eyes! We're JUST BEING OURSELVES DAMNIT YOU CAN'T JUDGE US."
you could take what I'm saying in the reverse: "OH MY GOD LOOK CHARLES, THE INTERNET SITE SAYS WE ARE 100% COMPATIBLE. WE ARE TWU WUV HEROES. THAT MEANS I WILL NEVER PISS YOU OFF OR MAKE YOU ANGRY WITH ME OR HAVE FEELINGS LIKE SOMETIMES YOU WANT TO HIT MY HEAD IN WITH A SHOVEL." (3 minutes later)
WAHHH CHARLES YOU PISSED ME OFF WITH YOUR ARROGANT MACHO MALENESS. FUCK YOU WE'RE NO LONGER DUALS BECAUSE YOU HURT MY FEELINGS OH MY GOT I AM RE-TYPING YOU AS A LESSER TYPE MAYBE NOT MY CONFLICTOR BUT OBVIOUSLY YOU SUCK BECAUSE YOU ABANDONED ME WHEN I NEEDED YOU THE MOST YOU EVIL SOULLESS PERSON. FEEL GUILTY. FEEL GUILTY NOW.
and then there's the fact your feelings about others will change/fluctuate. as long as it doesn't change too often or drive you insane, the relationship probably has empathy, which is predictable and boring but also means you can rely on the person when/if you need it, come to them for some emotional support without being judged, and you might occasionally both do things that threaten the relationship but the point is you love each other and want to work through it.
Hell, I like it!
I went in there and set it to Se-SEE like fucking balls out 3 Irrational and I ran it on Ti-LII 2 Rational, and yeah, turns out a good relation on paper and it did with me and the Ti-LIIs I know. It's kinda like no one's shit gets in the other person's way, but explanations for everything take a fuckton of words, and yeah, feels like it's kinda mutually mystifying? Same with me running the shit for Se-LSI and getting that come out closer to Mirror relations; gonna dick around w this a lot more, intertypes for me always felt kinda colored heavy by subtype, and it's cool to see the numbers haha, and most anything that treats the socionics planes in a more specified manner instead of 16 homogenous states is cool as hell...
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
Educational. For beginners, a simple means of determining the intertype relationship between their type and another type. For others, an easy reference tool for factoring in the effect that subtype has on the relationship.Originally Posted by InvisibleJim
Agree with your first statements (i.e., the limitations of the information). Your subsequent question requires a somewhat complex answer which I will attempt to answer as concisely as possible, but nevertheless requires agreeing upon a couple necessary assumptions (which I'd consider axioms). The first assumption is that all element strengths and values are relative to each other (e.g., a strength in Te implies a weakness in Fe). The second assumption is that each intertype relationship simply describes the positive or negative interaction of two types' Model As. Therefore, it should be possible to describe the intertype relationship from a Model A perspective. For example, a dual relationship is merely a symbiotic relationship where each person's super-id is positively influenced by the other type's ego block (that's obviously a very simplified summary). A supervisory relationship is described as one type's leading function applying coercive force upon the other's PoLR with no reciprocity available.
If you agree with these assumptions, then isn't it possible for a conventional "dual" pair to actually manifest behavior more similar to a semi-dual depending on the subtypes involved--making the semi-dual relationship really the more dominant one? If you stop for a second and define the essence of a semi-dual relationship by its Model A interaction, you could say that a semi-dual relationship occurs where each type's suggestive function benefits from the other type's leading function, but also where each type's creative function is left unvalued by the other and each type's mobilizing function is left somewhat unfulfilled (again, this is a simplified definition).
Taking that definition, it's entirely possible that an otherwise "dual" relationship will begin to fit the definition of semi-dual more than it fits the definition of a dual relationship. As an example I'll use an LSE-2Si and an EII-3Fi. What occurs here are mismatches in how elements are valued that are uncharacteristic of normal dual relationships: the LSE values Si and Ne more than the EII values them, leading to a result where the elements in the accepting functions remain similarly valued between both types but the elements in the producing functions are not as similarly valued (i.e., more of a semi-dual relationship).
Two points. First, the percentages are all relative and should not be considered as absolute or even approximate characterizations of the strength of the overall relationship. And second, I assumed (perhaps erroneously) that people would understand these results are limited to the socionics modeled aspect of the relationship and that there are a myriad of other external factors that play equally if not more important determinants in the relationship's success. I should probably make that more clear.
Thanks everyone for the input. I will continue working on it, particularly on making it more clear what the results actually mean.
sociotype.com
LII
Can someone please explain the 1 Rational 3 Irrational stuff to me?
I believe it is the intensity of the subtype in either direction. Whether it be irrational or rational.
Because technically (I mean, as much as "technically" makes sense in a pseudoscientific psychological theory) say a LIE-Ni and an ESI-Fi of the extreme gradation will be more akin to an EIE-Ni and EII-Fi rather than to a LIE-Te or ESI-Se (basically, the behavioral distance between two extreme EIE-Ni and LIE-Ni is smaller than the behavioral distance between extreme LIE-Ni and extreme LIE-Te; similarly for ESI-Se and ESI-Fi). So their relationship will be "more like" semi-duality than duality.
It would be interesting to understand how the "distance" is actually being computed - that's quite a big assumption.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
The asymmetrical relations are sometimes getting switched and not displaying properly, e.g., the supervisee is showing as the supervisor and vise versa. Trying to fix this.
sociotype.com
LII
As if it really matters in the middle of made-up bullshit.
You seem to focus a lot on the information only. I don't understand how subtypes could affect relationships that much. Position in model A is a totally different thing than subtype emphasize. If I for example protest against Te coming from the partners base then that's totally different from protesting against a subtype manifestation of Te. In the first case I neglect my partners whole world-view and being, not in the second case. The quality of the input is also different. Base information is designed for the partners suggestive and is assumed to be accepted without criticism. Other manifestations, although strong, don't have this same flavour to them.
A dual relationship is not only about the information. It is about the fine tuning and connection of two model A:s, creating "resonance". This could never happen if the preferred information is coming from some subtype manifestation.
"Valued" in terms of position in model A, and "valued" in terms of subtype are very different things.
eh, we're all going to die anyway (perhaps euthanized...)
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Smells like FB talk.
The calculator shouldn't be relied on as a means of deterministically charting real relationships between actual people of supposed types. What it's good for is illustrating how intertype works for the unfamiliar, and also as sort of cubic kaleidoscope to gawp at and draw ideas from. Since it serves those functions well I say it's dandy. My objection was to the general nature of the system within which it's intended to work.
Well, the calculator already gives a kind of probabilistic estimate, so I don't think it's that bad compared to standard socionics - it does add a measure of uncertainty.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Theory and reference is interesting but not very practical. It can be a waste of good time. I understand the OP meant this is as an educational reference device so I'd categorize the usefulness to its level. I relate people who apply socionics relationships as principle in how they interact with others in life as akin to studying monopoly and applying it to your real life finances. I'm sure we could make up a fun board game based on socionics relationships though. Roll the dice, move ten steps forward, you met an ILE woman at the bar, you're an ESI so turn over a conflict card and follow instructions.
Yeah i just don't get the whole duality thing. Either it is a load of old tosh ....or i'm not IEE, or SLI's not SLI's, or i not met any duals.
Looking at the calculator though...idk maybe i could get along well with EII...mirror!
Mirror is the new dual! Or Mirage...Mirage is also the new dual! all hail a new monarch is born.
Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.
In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.
When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.
So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.
InvisibruJim
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
