1. Duality
2. Identity
3. Activity
4. Mirror
5. ?
You can also make your list 1-16 of best to worst personality relations.
Printable View
1. Duality
2. Identity
3. Activity
4. Mirror
5. ?
You can also make your list 1-16 of best to worst personality relations.
Kindred, not that I agree with the way you arranged the same-quadra relationships.
Contrary.
1. Duality - Truly completes you. And INTjs are cute when you make them smile. ;)
2. Activity - Closest to duality. And very fun! And ENTps and I can talk forever. :P
3. Identity - Very nice having someone just like me, competitive, someone I can understand.
4. Mirror - Very relaxing. ISFps are so laid-back. So chilled.
5. Beneficiary (Other person is Benefactor) - Receive the Ti help I need in a duality kind of way. SLEs rock! And humorous/fun Se like an Activity relationship.
6. Semi-Duality - More helpful than Beneficiary, yes, but more confusion and misunderstanding. But helpful for growth.
7. Benefactor - Man... ENFps can be all over the place. This can be fun, but it gets frustrating. Tires me out though.
8. Look-alike - I learn a lot from ESTjs. I like the fellow Ej temperament, we understand just wanting to get things done. No BS.
9. Quasi-Identical - Similar to Identity, SO MUCH FUN! EXTRAVERTED SFs LIKE OMG! XD
10. Supervisee (Other person is Supervisor) - INFps are so sensitive, caring, it can be very sexy. ;)
11. Illusionary - INFjs are upbeat and nice. :) Kind of private, shy, but friendly.
12. Comparitive - Fe LIKE OMG! A;LDSFKJASXD;LFJASLKFJA:PS;LDJFZX:biggrin:;LKVJSAL D:lol:KJFAW;EFRJASDFLJ
13. Supervisor - ISTps are cool, I like shocking them with my Fe. :P Lots of trust/help here, maybe I should rank them higher than #13, but oh well. :P
14. Super-Ego - ENTjs are... interesting, informative, but... way too abstract for me. And wayyy overly critical.
15. Contrary - I always feel uncomfortable around ISFjs... like they're going to cut my throat or something. They don't trust my Fe or friendliness either, it's like they expect I'm plotting something. We don't trust each other.
16. Conflicting - Nothing to talk about without disagreeing. I think INTps are very cool, how they have great insight into people, and I have a lot of respect for their intelligence. But just interacting with them personally, it's tough, cause they're so cold. Criticizing everything, they can't just be happy.
XD
Tough to decide in this list. Of course the maturity of the person, and countless other non-socionic factors, are more important. For example, I had a pretty good relationship before with my Supvisor, even though I rank it as #10 on my list. All depends on the person.
probably semi-dual.
Yeah.Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
1. Duality
2. Activity
3. Identity
4. Mirror
5. Kindred
Identity is either too boring or too tense to be better than Activity, which is as smooth as butter and just as interesting.
I agree that activity beats identity.
that's pretty awesome, actually. :love:Quote:
Originally Posted by octopuslove
Actually, I think I would go with this order and because they offer the information one needs; I'll use myself as an example.
1. Duality because it offers both Te and Si in the right dose
2. Activity because it offers both Te and Si in less than the right dose
3. Conflict relations because it offers Te demonstrating (is an ST type)
4. Super-Ego Relations because it offers Si demonstrative (is an ST type to my NF)
5. Identical relations make for a very good friendship.
6. Illusionary Relations, though has many conflicts and is a superficial relations, it offers Si and sometimes roles out Te.
You prefer your conflictor to your illusionary? That's nuts.
Idk. People are cool.
Conflictors are people, they are not enemies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
But they're not good for spending the rest of your life with either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33Conflictors are people, they are not enemies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
I am offended.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
No, but Illusionary relations are far worse than Conflictory relations by the way that conflicts arise and by how superficial Illusionary relations are. Imagine, with conflict relations there is always a topic that can never be resolved but in Illusionary relations you don't want to and almost can't stand to hear what the other person wants to say because their IM is your ignoring function; you, in essence, ignore them. Cold distance develops between Illusionary relations and eventually you find it very very hard to exchange any meaningful conversations with them. With conflict relations, you have a lot in common, a lot of activities and interests, just that you can't get the other person to do more of their demonstrative function, which comes out in spurs. True that conflicts don't get resolved in conflicting relations, but at least you do things together; an introvert needs to do things. Illusionary relations are so far deactivating that you just waste time doing nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Director AbbieBut they're not good for spending the rest of your life with either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
The bold are lies. Don't type second person to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
Huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by Director AbbieThe bold are lies. Don't type second person to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
You tried to tell me a bunch of things about how I interact with IEIs and LIIs, and it's not true. I work well with my LII brother and I have very little in common with IEIs. My conversations with my LII brother are informative, and my conversations with my IEI coworker irritated her.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33Huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
Oh, the "you" wasn't referring to you directly; it was kind of a generalized "you"Quote:
Originally Posted by Director AbbieYou tried to tell me a bunch of things about how I interact with IEIs and LIIs, and it's not true. I work well with my LII brother and I have very little in common with IEIs. My conversations with my LII brother are informative, and my conversations with my IEI coworker irritated her.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
My ESE cousin irritates me more than my SLE friend.
So now you're generalizing me? Please define "you" for future reference regarding your posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
No. There's a misunderstanding here. Let's change "you" to "one person"Quote:
Originally Posted by Director AbbieSo now you're generalizing me? Please define "you" for future reference regarding your posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
This has to be a joke. You realize that you're just throwing inter-type relations out the window?Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
lol :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Director AbbieSo now you're generalizing me? Please define "you" for future reference regarding your posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
DA, do you seriously not understand her use of the word "you" or are you just being difficult for fun?Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
and Maritsa, although I do think illusionary has problems, I can't see how it would be worse than conflictor. I love my illusionaries -- I have a couple close friends who are ILE. I have zero close friends who are LSE. I think they avoid me.
this works for me as well. although identity can be kind of boring or worse yet, competitive. like the literature says i find it better for a mentor-mentee type of relationship than a let's be friends and hang out type of relationship.Quote:
Originally Posted by octopuslove
agree with this. actually the model A explains illusionary quite well. you connect really well on half the levels and disconnect on the other half. so if you decide to pay attention to the connecting half, the relationship is a good one!Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaronDA, do you seriously not understand her use of the word "you" or are you just being difficult for fun?Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
and Maritsa, although I do think illusionary has problems, I can't see how it would be worse than conflictor. I love my illusionaries -- I have a couple close friends who are ILE. I have zero close friends who are LSE. I think they avoid me.
Super-ego conflict. LOL. XD ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33No. There's a misunderstanding here. Let's change "you" to "one person"Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
P.S. Maritsa, do you still think I'm LSI? :P
I could potentially see this order happening but only on a very superficial basis. The minute you start trying to get closer to conflict or superego, things start going MAJORLY downhill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
In fact, when talking very superficial relationships, I would actually put Duality lower, and Activity & Identity higher, as Activity is more obvious of an attraction initially and is less awkward to start than duality, and Identity just bonds very easily over things they have in common.
Obviously when talking about close interpersonal relationships, of course you probably realize your list goes completely out the window. My list for closer relationships would look like this:
1. Duality
2. Activity
3. Identity
4. +/- Mirror (not sure, but i think intraquadra relationships tend to have more mutual understanding than interquadra)
5. Illusionary or semiduality (depending on subtype)
Change her to three persons, it is less confusing this way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33No. There's a misunderstanding here. Let's change "you" to "one person"Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
.Quote:
Originally Posted by poli
Neither and/or both.Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaronDA, do you seriously not understand her use of the word "you" or are you just being difficult for fun?Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritsa33
I take things as they are said, not as they are meant, and it's pretty offensive for someone to tell you what your relationships are like when they don't know you and are wrong.
youve been here reading posts about socionics for years...are you just now getting offended about this?
:thumbsdown:Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
:hug:Quote:
Originally Posted by poli
I understand and somewhat agree :) I've got the same issue with "we" and when that word gets slung around carelessly; people get accused of things they never did, or get lumped into things they don't want to be a part of... aarrgg...Quote:
Originally Posted by Director AbbieNeither and/or both.Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
I take things as they are said, not as they are meant, and it's pretty offensive for someone to tell you what your relationships are like when they don't know you and are wrong.
I like activation, duality and mirror most :) .
Btw calm down Abbie ;)
can't you people cut some slack. does everyone have to be perfectly specific and correct in their speech all the time???Quote:
Originally Posted by woofwoofl
And, I don't think Maritsa was slinging the word "you" around carelessly, in this instance. "You" is commonly used to mean "the person in question". WORK HARDER to understand WHAT IS MEANT, not only the specific words a person says. Sure it's their responsibility to communicate to the best of their ability but it's TO YOUR BENEFIT to try to see around little errors, inconsistencies and slip-ups (if they even exist and in this case they do not) for the higher goal of mutual understanding.
I don't know why this really got my goat, but it did. I feel like too many people on this forum PICK ON Maritsa. Sometimes she deserves it but usually, she does not. Stop it.
That said, I like you, woofwoofl, and Abbie, you know I like you too! :)
:lol: :hug: I like you too, and I like Maritsa, and I like Director Abbie, and I don't want any of you to feel thumped on by me :)Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaroncan't you people cut some slack. does everyone have to be perfectly specific and correct in their speech all the time???Quote:
Originally Posted by woofwoofl
And, I don't think Maritsa was slinging the word "you" around carelessly, in this instance. "You" is commonly used to mean "the person in question". WORK HARDER to understand WHAT IS MEANT, not only the specific words a person says. Sure it's their responsibility to communicate to the best of their ability but it's TO YOUR BENEFIT to try to see around little errors, inconsistencies and slip-ups (if they even exist and in this case they do not) for the higher goal of mutual understanding.
I don't know why this really got my goat, but it did. I feel like too many people on this forum PICK ON Maritsa. Sometimes she deserves it but usually, she does not. Stop it.
That said, I like you, woofwoofl, and Abbie, you know I like you too! :)
I agree with the overall message of this; it still feels rotten to get hit by a wild pronoun though, and I hope I haven't been responsible for doing that too much myself...
Maritsa: have you had any good relationships with ESTPs? Do you feel a weird tension when you interact with them, or are you able to open up and feel warmth when you are around them?
Urgh, I can't easily rank my personal intertype relations in this way, but it's interesting to try.
I can see how certain relationships have been really transformational in my life, even if they have their difficult or unpleasant aspects. Also, these are based only on my RL history, and not on online interaction, nor on what I think could have been a meaningful relationship if only there'd been more opportunity. These are strictly the relationships I have had.
Tier 1
Dual with complementary [irrational] subtypes (WCS)
Activity (WCS)
Mirror (WCS)
Identity (WCS)
These are relationships that stand the test of time and feel like "home" in various ways--peace, invigoration, mutual support, and mentorship, respectively.
Tier 2A
People from my quadra, Beta, but with rational subtypes
These relationships seem promising at first but lack real glue--they are a bit more contentious. They don't seem to involve as much learning as the relationships that I have found equally important in Tier 2B.
Tier 2B
INTj-Ne (semidual)
ENTp-Ne (I'm beneficiary)
ESFp-Se (I'm benefactor)
INTp-Ni (I'm supervisor)
ISFp-Si (I'm supervisee)
Tier 3
Non-Beta EJ temperaments with irrational subtype, in this order:
ENTj, ESTj, ESFj
Tier 4
All types with irrational subtype not previously mentioned.
Tier 5
Everything else.
On Tiers 4 and 5, getting along increasingly comes down to individual, not-so-type-driven similarities and differences, as well as the social roles defining interaction.
- - - - -
So that puts all Betas with rational subtypes in fifth place, I suppose.
For closeness and psychological compatibility
1.Dual
2.Activator
3.Identical
4.Mirror
5.Semi-Dual
6.Illusion
7.Beneficiary
8.Benefactor
9.Supervisee
10.Lookalike
11.Kindred
12.Supervisor
13.Contrary
14.Quasi-Identical
15.Super-Ego
16.Conflictor
Really, 5-12 are relatively close.
My long time college BF is my conflict relations; he's a great guy, but he's so lost with my Fi emotions. He loves me and supports me when I need him and we can pray together, laugh together, eat and enjoy life in all kinds of ways together but we just can't live together. I want him to organize my living space, but he doesn't care about that kind of stuff; he wants to go out, enjoy life, eat good food, just a lot of focus on sensory information/experience. My dual BF and I plan to go certain places and he's not at all spontaneous; he want's to be sure of things ahead of time but my conflict friend and I can take a long drive and just pull over at some dinner and eat whatever; not with my BF!!! NO WAY!!! Even if my BF and I do plan to take a drive, he'll talk about his plan about where we're going to eat as we're driving to be sure that all events in the next few hours are covered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Filambee
I have no beef with my conflict relations; we make supportive and loving friends; it doesn't work well for living and covering your weak spots. He always asks me to go out and do things with him, but I can't; I have low low energy. I need my activities planned so that I have plenty of energy for when the time comes to do them. If my dual doesn't have enough facts to build an accurate picture, they simply state, "I don't know" instead of making conclusions as SLE are likely to do.
What my conflict relation doesn't do that creates a shallowness of relations is that they don't take information and factor them in to come up with conclusions of what something is in it's reality/real picture; they persuade a belief, which makes it very confusing for me because some of those persuasions, though it may have facts, may lack in factuality.
This is all mostly theoretical, but with a lot of application of theory, taking into consideration Club interaction, Romance styles, Collaboartion, Communication, Temperament, and of course Quadra Values (but Values are not necessarily given first priority in every case). I came up with the following lists, different for Rationals and Irrationals.
If you are Rational:
1. Dual
2. Semi-Dual
3. Identical
4. Activator
5. Kindred
6. Beneficiary
7. Mirror
8. Look-A-Like
9. Benefactor
10. Supervisee
11. Mirage
12. Quasi-Identical
13. Extinguishment
14. Conflictor
15. Supervisor
16. Super-Ego
If you are Irrational:
1. Dual
2. Mirage
3. Identical
4. Activator
5. Look-A-Like
6. Benefactor
7. Mirror
8. Kindred
9. Beneficiary
10. Supervisee
11. Semi-Dual
12. Quasi-Identical
13. Extinguishment
14. Conflictor
15. Supervisee
16. Super-Ego
1 dualityQuote:
Originally Posted by Filambee
2 identity
3 semi duality
4 activity
5 mirror
7 illusionary
6 benefactor/beneficiary
when you stop and think about it, this is a dumb question. because by the time you get down to FIFTH best types, too many other factors trump type, imo. like enneagram and instinct stacking and background and values and religion and even age and proximity.
A minute ago I read the title of this thread for the first time and realized that it wasn't asking to order relationships, but to identify the 5th best. I think your response aptly summarizes what I was about to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
In other words: +1
Is it a dumb question? The answer has turned out to be subjective but so far I've found it to be interesting learning what different people think.
Ok, let me rephrase. It seems pretty arbitrary to ask what the fifth best relationship is. Additionally, it automatically assumes that intraquadra relationships are the best, which I find to be presumptuous.
Essentially I think it would have made more sense to discuss which relationships people seem to value or enjoy most rather than to specifically ask about the fifth one.
As an example, I prefer the company of my Semi-Dual over Activity and find my Supervisee to be more entertaining company than my Mirror. Additionally, I generally find perceivers to be better company than rationals. I think if I were to rank them in order, I would probably end up putting my Mirror in 5th place. However, I don't think that is necessarily reflective of best or worst relationships (how can you make a universal qualitative assessment like that?), that's simply my preference.
If I simply answered the question in the title, my answer would be pretty meaningless because who cares what the fifth best relationship is? It becomes especially ridiculous for someone like me to answer because your answer would not end up being "Which relationship do you think is the best outside of your quadra?" but rather "Which relationship do you rank number 5?"
SUMMARY: I think this thread should have asked which relationship you value most outside of your quadra, to which I would have answered "My Semi-Dual" :love:
LOL which was exactly my answer, too!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vero
Semi-Duals are the shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
Maritsa: I truly do not intend to cause any offense when I say this, but when you listed your conflict as third and super-ego as fourth, then said that you "make supportive and loving friends" with your conflict relations, it made me think that you need to reexamine your type.
As everyone knows, there are pretty much two ways to type people. You can examine them individually as you find behaviors, mind sets, body types, "vibes", etc. about them and then categorize them into one of the 16 personality types. Then, there's the other way of typing people which is learning how they interact with other personality types and then typing them according to that. Often, I'll use one way to type someone, then I'll use the other way to "check my work." Say if I ask someone a whole bunch of questions and I figure that they are an ISFP, but when I see them interact with an ESTP, they are able to relax and open up much more than they were when they were interacting with me. I would then go back to square one in my evaluation because my first typing was not congruent with their interaction with other types in their environment.
my thoughts exactlyQuote:
Originally Posted by Filambee
who cares
:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
i sort of agree but then its like why is it silly once it gets to the fifth? why not the third? is there some kind of line drawn where humans start mattering more than types? does it come just after duality?
not saying you guys dont value humans lol...just my frustration in general
Well now I don't value you ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by laghlagh
pffft fi polr what do you know about values
har har
Semi-duals are quite awesome. Me and ESFps get along like peas an' carrots.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3591/...f7c6c17a93.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves
I think socionics plays a higher role in intraquadral relationship and opposing quadra relationships for that matter. Not that you'll automatically dislike your opposing quadra or even that you'll tend to dislike them. Just that there will tend to be a barrier in communication with opposing quadra types.Quote:
Originally Posted by laghlagh
It's okay, I don't value humans. I value cheesecake.Quote:
not saying you guys dont value humans lol...just my frustration in general
that seems reasonable i guess.
i worry that i come across histrionic or preachy sometimes when i talk about this stuff. cheesecake is good.
:cry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vero
true. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by laghlagh
Probably Benefit>Semi>Illusionary
Moar Si pls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew:cry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vero
:Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::S i::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si: :Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::S i::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si: :Si:Quote:
Originally Posted by VeroMoar Si pls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
This is the opposite of what is good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew:Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::S i::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si: :Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::S i::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si::Si: :Si:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vero
I th ink that it's a cop out to call t hings 'dumb questions'. You know it's about the simplest, most obvious response to say "other factors trump type". Well who gives a fuck - we're talking about type right now. So construct an imaginary playset in your head with the various types, and then answer the question..
:Se: :thinking: ... :Ne: :thinking: ..... :confused2:Quote:
Originally Posted by VeroThis is the opposite of what is good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
You exude too much of this :hyper: and not enough this :cool:
Yes, turn into someone else to satisfy Vero.
My :Si: is creative cause I can change it, yo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vero
:thumbsup: I give up. :P Was fun though haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by crazedratsshadow
I don't necessarily agree with the ranking of this list, but I do like the idea behind separating Ps and Js and implying that outside of interquadra relations, there's probably a lot more asymmetry rational/irrational relations than just benefactor/beneficiary relations.Quote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
If everyone did, the world would be a better place. For me at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by crazedratsshadow
I agree with this aswell.Quote:
Originally Posted by crazedratsshadow
While other factors may trump type, it doesn't change the fact that certain types relations will be preferable to others, all else equal.
i'm sure there could a ranking of all on paper, using ideal types. if theres a point to that.
There's no point in eatting cheesecake, but people still like to do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by laghlagh
i guess just as eating cheesecake can be done safely in moderation, prioritizing relationships based on a theoretical model can be done safely with sanity and an eye on reality. sigh
i know this is a socionics forum. im just here for the free refreshments. later brah
5th place: Semi-Duality
also, lol at Maritsa putting Conflictors at the 3rd best place for relationship. She probably just provocating to get attention.
Semi-Duals although from the looks of it I'd describe it as the 11th worst rather than the 5th best. (Talking strictly of long-term serious relationships)
I agree with this. And yes, we're talking about theory. But in real life, everything else is NEVER equal. Which we all know. I'm just reminding. As long as we talk about it theoretically, fine. but once people start talking about specific experiences, it doesn't make sense to me because I'm thinking about how one SEE is different from another, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azeroffs
Quote:
Originally Posted by laghlagh
This just seemed like an appropriate way to conclude my involvement in this threadQuote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...8jnXk10fW1f4Ag
yum. but I could never eat the whole thing. give me four bites and I'm good.
That's funny to me, because for me it's the opposite. I mean, if someone wants to spin a theory about which interrelations are better than others, fine--that's been done and will continue to be done. But I can only speak of my personal experiences thus far. It doesn't mean I think what I say will apply to other people--or that it will even continue to apply for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
I semi-consciously rank all my interpersonal relationships anyway, more or less as I did here, but without applying types to them. The inner circle, the mid-circle, the outer circle, and the messy rest of it.
lol:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
This is a pretty good example of Fi demonstration.Quote:
Originally Posted by werlkjlakjeraoiaeswroiaerThat's funny to me, because for me it's the opposite. I mean, if someone wants to spin a theory about which interrelations are better than others, fine--that's been done and will continue to be done. But I can only speak of my personal experiences thus far. It doesn't mean I think what I say will apply to other people--or that it will even continue to apply for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by redbaron
I semi-consciously rank all my interpersonal relationships anyway, more or less as I did here, but without applying types to them. The inner circle, the mid-circle, the outer circle, and the messy rest of it.
I don't think I could categorize my relationships with people to this extent since I known people from all types who I've had different degrees of closeness with, whether by circumstance or personal differences
This is pretty much a breakdown of my closest good type relations from memory
Dual-best friends for about 13 years until moved away in childhood. Probably the most satisfying bond I've had
Mirror- had multiple close friendships over my life. Very easy to start and maintain and the only time they've ended is from lack of contact through moving about.
Activator- takes a little time to develop closeness, usually instant feeling of ease though. I've initiated all of these relations and they've all been good yet a bit boring at times.
Identical- similar to activator to start, yet sometimes the other has initiated first. Always a feeling of ease yet haven't always been close (usually due to different beliefs, values, interests, etc). I don't have any close EII's relations atm
Semi-dual- almost feels like duality with a dash of mirror when started, a feeling of closeness with an underlying inadequacy. I've enjoyed talking to and working with them, but day to day things have been harder to do together longterm. My closest relation was with one I knew through doing group outdoor adventure stuff with, still have contact with
Beneficiary- best friend through most of high-school, at the time I was more frivolously minded and went along with her lifestyle. I matured out of the relationship although there was some non-type related issues that pushed this even more
Mirrage- good friend for years though I've found it difficult to maintain the sort of closeness I like since she's a more socially driven person who bounces from person to person. I don't think she cares about needing close friends as much as having currently enjoyable relations with people. We still like each other though
Benefactor- Used to be good friends with one for 3-4 years but it grew apart when she became too isolated and at the time I didn't know how to get her out of that state. I liked her and have liked the ILI's I've known and have a lot of respect for their bluntness and find their distaste of Fe comes across as funnier than it dose in SLI's, but at times a bit too mean for my taste
Business- One of the easiest types to get along with at work and 2 have grown into friendships. They're the most pleasant Ti's to be around (IMO) and tend to be very willing to help with things, especially explaining things, if they're asked. The best way of evaluating them has been mutually platonic but in a good way
I like this idea a lot, but I don't agree with some of them. Personally I would place Activator higher than Identical and in most cases, higher than Mirage (although if the subtypes match up, Mirage could probably be higher than Activator). It would be really interesting to create a thread/poll of some sort for this idea though I think. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
Um, I guess I'm the only one that would say business/look-a-like, then.
1. Dual
2. Activator
3. Semi-Dual
4. Identity
5. Mirror
6. Mirrage
7. Kindred
8. Supervisee
9. Extinguishment
10. Look-A-Like
11. Beneficiary
12. Benefactor
13. Quasi-Identical
14. Conflictor
15. Supervisor
16. Super-Ego
OHOHO I AM SPECIAL
1. Conflict
2. Super-Ego
3. Quasi-Identity
4. Supervisor
5. Extinguishment
6. Beneficiary
7. Benefactor
8. Supervisee
9. Look-alike
10. Extinguishment
11. Semi-dual
12. Kindred
13. Mirror
14. Identity
15. Activation
16. Duality
or maybe u INFpQuote:
Originally Posted by Taknamay
Oh? Is that based on my defiance, or my answers themselves? Because if you're talking about the answers themselves, I wasn't serious. >_>
If:Quote:
Originally Posted by Taknamay
Then:Quote:
1. Conflict - SLE
...
16. Duality - LSE
you're probably IEI
It's a joke.
Oh, okay. That's what I figured you meant >.<
I had a theory that EP-IP energy exchange was the best (for an INFp I mean), along with EJ-IJ for an EJ or IJ type. So the relationship energy was classified in order of IP-EP energy exchange being the best for INFps, and then IP-IP, then IP-IJ and then IP-EJ.
You don't get along with your Mirror as well as you do your Semi-Dual. You just don't.
Quadra relationships aren't based on your emotional compatibility with somebody, but what works best for the objective world...
I mean in gamma quadra you have entjs and isfjs which I don't get along with that well much at all on a personal level, and then you have intps which I get along with okay. (it's like medium good) and then ESFps which I get along with great. An ESFp gets along with an ENTj better than me but it's still not likely to work out so much.
I guess the main point I'm making is it kinda depends on how much you want to view socionics as 'society based' and how much you want to use it to find your romantic partner... or people you just really mesh well with. I think getting a job is important but it's not the be end of life, if you don't find people you are magically excited about that's just sad, no matter how much money you make. =/
My (constantly morphing and varying) take on it is roughly as follows:
1. Duality, same subtypes
2. Duality, different subtypes
3. Activity, same subtypes
4. Activity, different
5. Identical, same
6. Identical, different
7. Mirror, same
8. Mirror, different
9. Semi-dual, accepting / Illusory, creative
10. Comparative, accepting / Business, creative
11 - 525. I don't have the patience for this :(
1 & 2. Dual & activator. Maybe I don't have enough experience with duality but ime there have been enough cons in duality to say that it's not as great as it seems. Of course it could have been a number of factors. I have an LSI sister and boyfriend. I think growing up with her helped me get used to the drawbacks of the type. I know that when they withdraw and act kind of cold it's not personal.
3. Semi-dual.
4. Mirror.
5. Identity.
yes, well not every dual is going to be fireworks. People are people and the only thing you can pretty much count on with duals is that communication seems to be easy and misunderstandings are few and cleared up quickly. There's also a feeling of calm I get when I'm around them--no matter who or what subtype. But you're right that it's not always nirvana with a dual and there's a LOT more to relationships than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenna
Right. I dated an SLE 7w8 a few years ago, but I think the problems I had with him were enneagram related. The past few months I've been thinking that rather than a 4, I'm a 2. Not that I'm basing that solely on that relationship. I've had SLE friends, too. But I agree with you. SLEs seem to be able to get me to open up to them, whereas with other types I put up defenses and barriers.. They just seem to get past that, lol
Mirage. Superid-complementary relations are typically better than ego-complementary relations, and of the two off-quadra relations that are, I've seen enough semi-dual relations fail in more or less the same way to conclude that Creative/HA interaction is more important (though less instantly attractive) than dominant/suggestive interaction; given primarily that the former is necessary to assuage fears related to the PoLR. For example, consistent clear and convincing displays of open affection counter the xLE's innate interpersonal paranoia, and a quick push into action can counter the XIE's innate squeamishness. Further, providing others with role information is obviously easier than providing PoLR information; and in fact people use the role regularly, provided it doesn't conflict with the goals set up by the dominant (LIE's constant upbeat cheerfulness and LSE's occasional surly demeanor are good examples of this).
I don't think such a list is existent, without factoring in enneagram and subtype.
There are some SLE I love, and some who are just for me, okay.
I definitely am going to be going by subtype here, with enneagram:
1. SLE (both Ti and Se), enneagram 8. (Dual and true dual, true dual being the one that complete me with -Ti):
Nirvana. Match made in heaven. Understand one another, complete one another. Fill their need to seek meaning and what is meant for, the underlying answer, and they bring me out and help me to take action. They are protective, and they let me express myself emotionally and do not mind my enneagram 4 behaviors..
2. Older IEI-Ni's (partially my identical, if I am Fe sub, really):
Enjoy seeing how they have reached to their mature adulthood, since I one day there will destine if meant live. Understands me well, do not need explain myself to them... Just "get me". Prefer enneagram 5w6 ones. Don't as much care for other 4 core IEI, as it is too much my own self and drowns out and makes to feel vague.
3. Healthy SEE's:
Good chemistry. They knock me out of myself, and with me being a 4 core and MBTI INFP (do not get me here, started, but yes, you can be a different type in MBTI with the placement of functions differing, as well as functions altering slightly in definition) can appreciate of some Fi aspects, even if I am going to be more expressive.. They have 4D fe and I have 4D Fi, anyhow, and it is demo... Tend make one another laugh.
4. Self-aware LIE-Ni's My partial supervisor. (More lenient than -Te, and not my "true" supervisor, being -Ni):
Theycan be hard on me, but overall, they are more helpful and they even are more tolerating of me. It is repeated pattern where the LIE-Ni lets me get away with certain things other people cannot, such as with my emotional expression, and being immature. I have been attracted to several LIE-Ni.. Yuri Lowell is SLE in the anime, but LIE probably in the videogame, and I love him... They are not as barren as is toward me, -Te. Who is a far more ruthless ruler of me... And they hurt and burn me all the more. Stugg has burned me a little bit, but nothing third degree as how in -Te.
5. Other types of SLE aside from the kind I enlisted, LSI, and 5w6 LII's
Whilst LII is a bit too soft, we do not clash and they admire greatly of me. They are helpful and tend care about me much. I am indifferent oftentimes to their advisory, but the sentiment and care they put in towards me is valued. Other SLE who are not the enneagram 8 are just meh, okay, to me. LSI are a complementary relation, and we stimulate of one another.