• Stress Resistance Groups by Victor Gulenko

    Stress Resistance Groups by Victor Gulenko


    This is an exerpt from Victor Gulenko's article On Waves of Aging and Renewal: Progress Orientation in Combination with Jungian Aspects.
    Article Discussion and Comments


    Among the 16 types of socion, we can delineate four groups of varying ability to resist stress. These groups are formed on basis of dichotomies "Rationality - Irrationality" and "Right(Process) - Left(Result)".

    Indicators of irrationality and leftedness (Result types) grant higher capacity for resistance to disadvantageous external influences. Irrationality allows for greater measure of flexibility for the human nervous system; irrational types have an easier time escaping stressful conditions, switching their attention between different thoughts, events and activities. Left (Result) types naturally presuppose and orient at sudden changes in their own path and direction, as well as irregular development of events, which increases their ability to resist stress.

    Rational, rightist (Process) types have the highest requirement for clarity and certainty, and a measured development of the situation that does not interfere with their arrangements. Irrational, left (Result) types have the easiest time dealing with situations where there is vagueness, instability, potential for haphazard development of some unplanned events.

    Result + Rational = mobilized by stress (democratic)
    Result + Irrational = resistant to stress (aristocratic)
    Process + Rational = vulnerable to stress (aristocratic)
    Process + Irrational = stopped by stress (democratic)

    Process Rational types: EIE(ENFj) EII(INFj) LSE(ESTj) LSI(ISTj) - vulnerable to stress

    This groups is the most unstable in conditions of prolonged stress. They are monolithic, but fragile. When they stick together they can successfully oppose hardships but separately they are easily scattered and taken out as their resistance drops sharply. They bear stress worse than the other types, especially stress of unexpected in nature. Despite their external stoicism, they always have poorly protected and vulnerable points and a need for a solid foundation. If this foundation is removed, they lose any resistance to stress they may have had. Stress threatens these types with challenging doubts and in the end leads them to break inside ("giants with feet of clay"). The defining element for their rational temperament is monolithicism.

    Taking into account that rationality is related to the orientation in time (planning, order) as well as to speech as form of communication, and that progress of right types is much more rational than progress of left types in nature, we conclude that this group of types is strongly dependent on the time factor and verbal signals.

    In dealing with these types, one can observe that they have anchors in time – they develop habits to do specifics actions at specific points in time. Their second dependency is related to the flow of speech. EIE and LSI, for example, need continuous stimulation of their auditory system.

    Result Irrational types: SLE(ESTp) IEI(INFp) SLI(ISTp) IEE(ENFp) - resistant to stress

    These types are elastic, springy. They are the most stress-resistant types which show resilience against immediate stress loads. Their advantage is that they perform well in extreme situations. They are mobilized by unexpected changes in situations – this gives them a new drive. Ability to work effectively in stressful environments adds a new trait to their temperament – elasticity. SLE and IEI maneuver and evade sudden blows. SLI and IEE wait the storm out in a safe location.

    These types have anchors in space – they develop habits to do specific actions at certain locations. For SLEs this is often their home, their territory. For SLIs this is their workplace where he feels relaxed and unrestrained.

    Process, Irrational types: ILE(ENTp) SEI(ISFp) ILI(INTp) SEE(ESFp) - halted, frozen by stress

    These types try to avoid stress. They are viscous. Their communicative environment is similar to a glue-like mass. They have a tendency to lose their resistance to stress over time – at first they react vigorously to a stimulus, but then subside. These types are able to resist stress for quite some time, but with each new wave of stress their strengths dissipate and they change their method of resistance to withdrawal, interiorizing their worries and anxieties. This adds a unique trait to their temperament – viscosity.

    These types as irrational ones are inclined to develop habits in connection to space. However due to their right-ness they place less emphasis on spatial anchors. Kinesthetic sensations are of significance for them: reflexes, touch, smell, taste.

    Result Rational types: ESE(ESFj) LII(INTj) ESI(ISFj) LIE(ENTj) - mobilized, trained by stress

    These types easily withstand small amounts of stress. They are stopped only by very fundamental shocks and even then only for a short while. Life is constantly training these types, making them more hardened (ESE, LIE) or more tolerant (ESI, LII). This is especially evident with the optimists LIE and ESE, who may find themselves restarting their lives from complete zero. Inside they are as if holding light wireframe structures. An additional component to the temperament of these types - crystalinity.

    How do these types build anchors? An anchor to a specific moment in time is not sufficient for them to develop a stable habit. For additional stability a visual anchor is also needed. These types are convinced not only by orderly process of events in time, but also by visual signals. ESE and ESI for example when they see disorder or an unkempt sickly person take measures immediately. LII and LIE start acting if they see signals of emotional response.


    Related discussions:

    Stress resistance by Gulenko
    Temperament and stress
    Feeling stressed
    .
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Stress resistance started by sarinana View original post
    Comments 23 Comments
    1. niffer's Avatar
      niffer -
      The main problem with Gulenko is that he doesn't make his research data readily available. So then he makes some very compelling, yet ultra dubious claims like this one from the article: "EIE and LSI, for example, need continuous stimulation of their auditory system." And people are left thinking "wtf?"

      The ideas are certainly interesting but there's no way to check if his logic and deductions are sound in the first place with his articles if he doesn't even show what his research methodologies or data are like. This shit is the opposite of scientific the way he's left it in this state. Contrary to the beta ST stereotype I do like most of his articles, but a few like these aren't without problems.
    1. FDG's Avatar
      FDG -
      Quote Originally Posted by Wyrd View Post
      I mean how much people can bear, not how good they are at practically dealing with it, sort of like pain tolerance but psychological (psychological and physical pain are basically the same thing apparently).
      well then they bear a lot but then suddenly break, wheraeas probably result-irrationals change quickly but survive over the long term.
      That's how I'd interpret the article.
      Result-rationals don't change quickly but also know they can't bear a lot for a long time so they try to slowly change. That's how I observe the effects of stress on myself.
    1. Tigerfadder's Avatar
      Tigerfadder -
      Quote Originally Posted by niffer View Post
      The main problem with Gulenko is that he doesn't make his research data readily available. So then he makes some very compelling, yet ultra dubious claims like this one from the article: "EIE and LSI, for example, need continuous stimulation of their auditory system." And people are left thinking "wtf?"

      The ideas are certainly interesting but there's no way to check if his logic and deductions are sound in the first place with his articles if he doesn't even show what his research methodologies or data are like. This shit is the opposite of scientific the way he's left it in this state. Contrary to the beta ST stereotype I do like most of his articles, but a few like these aren't without problems.
      I guess, if you find what he had come up with accurate in that way you can relate to them thoughts and in some ways apply it to how you view the Socionics it is successful. After all he is one of the few people in this world that actually get paid researching Socionics. With Te ignoring and Se PoLR I say he can have some slack there as far everything plays out in the way he predicted. I view his theories something of lenses of how you can view the world with Socionics.