Does every type fall in love just as hard?

Printable View

03-22-2007, 01:31 PM
intjguy

Does every type fall in love just as hard?

I'm an INTJ - emotionless, insensitive, stoic, whatever you want to call it.

As far as love and personality types, I've only read of the INTJ and ENFJ having distinctive mentions in this area. "Head over heels", "romance being the Achilles heel", that sort of thing.

What I wonder is, do some types, particularly these two (INTJ/ENFJ), fall in love much harder and madly than others?

And perhaps because the iNTj is a complete rookie/thickhead with experiencing emotions and feelings, does love hit us so hard that we simply don't know what to do or how to process? From what I've read from these forums, it's practically dissociating.

I will elaborate for you my only experience of ever "falling in love". When I held this girl's hand... it was a euphoric high, a high far more pleasurable than any sex I ever had. Got that? Just from holding her HAND. Sheesh, if I had sex with this girl I woulda died. As for reminiscing, I was even capable of replicating the scent of her hair (also euphoric) just from listening to a movie's soundtrack that we had once previously seen together.

Insensitive… unusually independent… solitary.. blah blah. It’s all true. Yet being with her I felt a whole new emotion apart from the only two I had known (mellowness and laughter). Try not giving a damn about what people think all your life, try living in your own head of "complex" thoughts because the world for whatever reason is too incompetent for half of your attention, and then you finally meet something that is. It hits hard, but the question is does it hit any harder?
03-22-2007, 01:37 PM
machintruc

Re: Does every type fall in love just as hard?

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

I'm an INTJ - emotionless, insensitive, stoic, whatever you want to call it.

normally, INTj's tend to be oversensitive, because they have weak ethics. The suggestive (5th) :Fe: function could make you dislike many things ethical types dislikes, but in a pretty simplistic way.
03-22-2007, 01:46 PM
intjguy

Makes sense.
03-22-2007, 01:56 PM
machintruc

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

Makes sense.

So, how did you know you were INTj ?
03-22-2007, 02:14 PM
intjguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by machintruc

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

Makes sense.

So, how did you know you were INTj ?

This test: http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp
I've also taken a similar one that consisted of 100+ questions. Can't find it again..

The descriptions here I feel are dead on for the most part: http://www.socionics.com/prof/intj.htm

I've been told by girls "You look so wise.", "you look like you have no emotion."
And my best buddies constantly reminding me "You're so weird."

Do I pass? :lol:
03-22-2007, 02:29 PM
machintruc

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by machintruc

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

Makes sense.

So, how did you know you were INTj ?

This test: http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp
I've also taken a similar one that consisted of 100+ questions. Can't find it again..

The descriptions here I feel are dead on for the most part: http://www.socionics.com/prof/intj.htm

I've been told by girls "You look so wise.", "you look like you have no emotion."
And my best buddies constantly reminding me "You're so weird."

Do I pass? :lol:

I don't really trust tests... your seem more INTp-ish...
03-22-2007, 02:34 PM
intjguy

I see. From what you said about Fe, being that iNTjs are oversensitive due to lacking ethics: doesn't the ENFJ have tremendous ethics? From what I've known they're dramatic and sensitive to criticism. Does this not to relate to sensitivity?
03-22-2007, 02:57 PM
machintruc

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

I see. From what you said about Fe, being that iNTjs are oversensitive due to lacking ethics: doesn't the ENFJ have tremendous ethics? From what I've known they're dramatic and sensitive to criticism. Does this not to relate to sensitivity?

An ENFj has dominant :Fe:, so he will accept ethical material with maturity.
03-22-2007, 02:59 PM
oyburger

New love is exciting, the blood used to rush to my head and make me dizzy when I only thought about their touch or saw them walk in a room. I thought about them constantly and we were rarely apart. It was an intense rush but I think everyone is capable of that, I don't know that I experienced it any stronger than anyone else.

Old love is different. You don't get high off of it, your head doesn't spin anymore and you have other things to think about, but sometimes I can get caught off guard and my heart feels like it's swelling and about to burst. I don't get this feeling just from romantic love either, but from love of my friends, family, small ones I take care of.

Then again, looking back at what I just wrote, maybe I have a severe heart condition. I'm going to the doctor Tuesday.
03-22-2007, 03:00 PM
UDP

INTJs are very sensitive, and you either let it dictate you or you dictate it.

Dual seeking is the final, and I realize now, most important part of being truly proactive and shedding tendencies to blow off accountability and blame other people or situations - to stop being the victim of circumstances around you and choosing how you want to be.. I always thought it was polr, but no, that is just the visible aspect.

We "fall hard" because we are not good with emotions and they are in fact our weakest area
Auras of restraint or distance are necessary as such.

You feel great now, but when something happens, you will feel a 'suffering' as you never have before either. I know, I've been there. But you'll get over it and learn from it as well. Just keep going.

The best way, IME, to not get caught up with emotional overcharges, whether good or bad, is to keep thinking about what is next, especially in terms of practical things.
03-22-2007, 03:27 PM
Joy

Obviously this will vary from person to person, but I tend to think that logical types, being less confident in matters of emotions and relationships and whatnot, are somewhat hesitant to fall in love sometimes because it's more difficult for them to understand their own feelings and the relationship. Other times they'll jump in too quickly, again not totally understanding their own feelings and the relationship. Once totally committed, they have a harder time dealing with losing it. On the surface they may move on very quickly or very slowly, but regardless, it's difficult for them to really understand why things didn't work out and how they feel about the loss. They seem to need to reconcile with themselves. Ethical types may fall into and out of love quickly or slowly, but they recognize how they feel and are confident in their understanding of where the relationship stands and what it means to them.
03-22-2007, 03:29 PM
FDG

I fall hard, easily, and I don't have trouble showing it (unless I'm rejected, of course)
03-22-2007, 03:42 PM
jessica129

I get attached and obsessed very easily. I seem to mistake that for love entirely too much.
03-22-2007, 04:15 PM
eunice

I have infatuations, but I always keep it to myself. I always imagined that if I let it known to the other person and he doesn't feel the same way, the friendship will end there.
03-22-2007, 04:31 PM
Slacker

I bet every type thinks their type falls in love hardest. <3

Kind of hard to know.
03-22-2007, 04:35 PM
oyburger

Quote:

Originally Posted by UDP III

You feel great now, but when something happens, you will feel a 'suffering' as you never have before either.

Very, very painfull. It feels like your heart is being ripped out and you can't breathe, also not only felt with romantic love. However, the more attached you are, the more pain you'll experience. God I hate that feeling, but like everything else, it also fades with time.
03-22-2007, 09:35 PM
Joy

Say what you want to about me, but I define stages of a relationship largely by biology. The first six months to three years is the infatuation (or honey moon) phase, and after that it's a long term relationship (when the lovey dovey chemicals are replaced by endorphins).

That aside... I only have a certain amount of control over who I'm attracted to. I have more control over who I develop feelings for and actually fall in love with. It's like deciding on an investment, except it's an emotional investment. When I leave a relationship it doesn't seem to me like it's affecting me that much, but looking back I can see how I wasn't sleeping or eating much, drank a whole lot, was super stressed and exhausted, and put on a "I don't give a fuck about anything, I do what I want" face... I guess so I don't feel like I've lost control of my emotions and my world is falling apart. It's likely that the only one I fool is myself. I think of ending the relationship as a very tiresome chore and don't admit to myself that it hurts. It's like my brain has to do the emotional work of losing a relationship in the background, and the process is hindered by the thought processes and behaviors on the surface. It takes a major toll, and the whole "healing" process takes a long time. Once in a while I'll be reminded of something that happened during or at the end of a relationship that ended a long time ago and I'll just then realize that I'd been upset about it since then. It represents itself as a strong, irrational bias about a subject that I can't explain and don't understand. I'll react too harshly to situations as a result. But like I said, I don't understand why until years later when I realize that I'd been upset about something. Also, I feel more upset about break ups before they happen than afterwards. It's like... when something upsets me in a relationship, instead of seeing it for what it is and dealing with it, I decide that it doesn't make sense for me to be upset and I push the feelings about it away. Over time these things build. I feel more lonely when I'm trying to reconcile myself to my "illogical" emotions during the relationship than I do after the break up. I miss my partner very much while I still have him, and then I sort of get over it... at which point I end the relationship. Of course, I don't realize that I'm getting over the person I'm with while it's happening. That's why I need a parter who recognizes, understands, and knows how to deal with my emotions... cause I sure as hell don't.

Back to the topic, I am very selective about who I will allow myself to have feelings for... I have to be sure that it's a good investment, meaning that my partner must be someone who I absolutely positively without a single doubt KNOW will be loyal. Openess, honesty, and fidelity are qualities that MUST be very obviously present in an individual in order for me to allow myself to love him.
03-22-2007, 10:09 PM
Ms. Kensington

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slacker Mom

I bet every type thinks their type falls in love hardest. <3

Kind of hard to know.

Well, I do think that relationships are in the realm of F so it can kind of be really confusing and disorienting, in addition to upsetting, for T types to fall in love, especially if the relationship doesn't turn out well. Myself I have definitely felt unable to function because of relationship matters. But, not being an F type I wouldn't be able to compare really overall who has the "most intense" experience. That said, knowledge and knowing how to orient oneself will always be a factor in one's comfort level and I think it makes sense to say that T types can have a rough time if they fall too hard.
03-22-2007, 10:46 PM
BLauritson

The only relationship I've had to date was with an INFj girl a couple of years ago. Compared to other relationships that people have, it seemed to move relatively fast (the honeymoon period, if you can even call it that, lasted about a month. Things went downhill after that. Lasted about 3 months overall). I wasn't happy in the latter stages of the relationship for the most part, although I was unaware of it until I spilt my guts (metaphorically speaking) to a close INFp friend who advised me to break up with her. I was bitter for about half a year after that. So in summary...weak F makes me emotionally blind (which one would it be in this case, Fe or Fi?)
03-23-2007, 12:15 AM
aestrivex

it would make sense that different types falll in love differently.

Fe types might seem like they fall in love at a glance.
Te types might fall in love, if at all, only after a long period of association and mutual understanding.
03-23-2007, 12:36 AM
Joy

Ni/Se types need to feel they've met their match.
03-23-2007, 02:16 AM
meatburger

I would say i dont fall in love nearly as hard as most. I think thats a personal difference though.
First and foremost i hold myself back and analyse the situation before i get wrapped up in it. I know that doesn't sound very ENFp but I seem to regard people who say "I love XXX so much" after 2 dates damn foolish
03-23-2007, 02:24 AM
jessica129

Quote:

Originally Posted by meatburger

but I seem to regard people who say "I love XXX so much" after 2 dates damn foolish

Yeah, people are entirely too quick to say that. It's happened to me before where the guy expressed that to me all the time way too soon and I didn't know how to deal with it. It pushed me further and further. Those types seem very shallow and fake. Call me strange, but i feel like the less the words 'i love you' are said, the more meaning they have.
03-23-2007, 02:32 AM
meatburger

Quote:

Originally Posted by jessica129

Quote:

Originally Posted by meatburger

but I seem to regard people who say "I love XXX so much" after 2 dates damn foolish

Yeah, people are entirely too quick to say that. It's happened to me before where the guy expressed that to me all the time way too soon and I didn't know how to deal with it. It pushed me further and further. Those types seem very shallow and fake. Call me strange, but i feel like the less the words 'i love you' are said, the more meaning they have.

Yeah. Im not going to utter those words hastily again
03-23-2007, 02:47 AM
Jonathan

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by machintruc

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

Makes sense.

So, how did you know you were INTj ?

This test: http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp

Wait a sec! That's not a Socionics site. That's an MBTI site. If you're new to Socionics, you should recognize that there are very significant differences in the theories. It happens that you still may be INTj, but don't be surprised if you hear people saying things on this site that don't begin to make sense from an MBTI perspective.

Instead of www.socionics.com, you should use www.socionics.us. Much better site (by Rick on this forum).
03-23-2007, 03:31 AM
intjguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by machintruc

Quote:

Originally Posted by intjguy

Makes sense.

So, how did you know you were INTj ?

This test: http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp

Wait a sec! That's not a Socionics site. That's an MBTI site. If you're new to Socionics, you should recognize that there are very significant differences in the theories. It happens that you still may be INTj, but don't be surprised if you hear people saying things on this site that don't begin to make sense from an MBTI perspective.

Instead of www.socionics.com, you should use www.socionics.us. Much better site (by Rick on this forum).

Cool. I took the test and got LII.
03-23-2007, 03:45 AM
Cone

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joy

Ni/Se types need to feel they've met their match.

What do you mean by that exactly, Joy?

Oh, and hi again.
03-23-2007, 04:01 AM
XoX

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cone

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joy

Ni/Se types need to feel they've met their match.

What do you mean by that exactly, Joy?

Oh, and hi again.

Hi!

It of course means that they have met someone who can light their fire.
03-23-2007, 04:14 AM
Diana

.
03-23-2007, 04:35 AM
Joy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cone

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joy

Ni/Se types need to feel they've met their match.

What do you mean by that exactly, Joy?

Oh, and hi again.

Cone! :D

I could go on about Ni/Se stuff for a while, but I can't right now. I'll PM you some links to other stuff I've written in other threads. The short answer is that Ni/Se types need a partner who is strong. They need a partner who challenges them mentally, and they will feel restless and bored in a relationship with someone who does not challenge them. Perhaps I'll post more on this later. Gotta go watch One Piece.
03-23-2007, 04:40 AM
Cone

Just wondering about that...I'm currently in a relationship with my dual (in fact I'm waiting for her to come over now), and I'm trying to see the whole "match" thing. I guess we are sort of competitive in things like life experience, knowledge, and sexual skill. I am always trying to match up to her life experience (which is by far very extensive compared to mine) by striving to be more popular or a better lover. I think she tries to match up to my intellect. I know at least we are very physical and playful (and we embarrass ourselves in public I think really, heh). I know the best thing about her for me is that she's never afraid to really push me physically, to completely violate my personal space wherever we go.

On the topic at hand, I wouldn't say I fall too hard. I mean I can fall really hard really quickly, and that has gotten me into trouble in the past.
03-23-2007, 04:42 AM
Cone

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cone

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joy

Ni/Se types need to feel they've met their match.

What do you mean by that exactly, Joy?

Oh, and hi again.

Cone! :D

I could go on about Ni/Se stuff for a while, but I can't right now. I'll PM you some links to other stuff I've written in other threads. The short answer is that Ni/Se types need a partner who is strong. They need a partner who challenges them mentally, and they will feel restless and bored in a relationship with someone who does not challenge them. Perhaps I'll post more on this later. Gotta go watch One Piece.

Oh hey!

Ok, I think I see your point.
03-23-2007, 05:03 AM
olduser

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cone

Just wondering about that...I'm currently in a relationship with my dual (in fact I'm waiting for her to come over now), and I'm trying to see the whole "match" thing. I guess we are sort of competitive in things like life experience, knowledge, and sexual skill. I am always trying to match up to her life experience (which is by far very extensive compared to mine) by striving to be more popular or a better lover. I think she tries to match up to my intellect. I know at least we are very physical and playful (and we embarrass ourselves in public I think really, heh). I know the best thing about her for me is that she's never afraid to really push me physically, to completely violate my personal space wherever we go.

On the topic at hand, I wouldn't say I fall too hard. I mean I can fall really hard really quickly, and that has gotten me into trouble in the past.

oh gosh, that first section is unbearably similar to most of my relationships. That said, I like girls who are older than me.

as for the topic: I think all types fall in love the same amount. Betas are probably the most passionate. But also the first people to storm out of a party in tears, or break furniture. Alphas are great, but are the types most likely to let themselves go. Gammas are the most reasonable in relationships. Deltas are secretly demanding in relationships. We must better ourselves, they say, and then hold eachother to it.
03-23-2007, 06:49 AM
FDG

Quote:

Originally Posted by XoX

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cone

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joy

Ni/Se types need to feel they've met their match.

What do you mean by that exactly, Joy?

Oh, and hi again.

Hi!

It of course means that they have met someone who can light their fire.

rotfl...
03-23-2007, 09:07 AM
snegledmaca

Personally I don't fall at all. I've had crushes but I don't consider that falling for someone as after some time there is always the what was I thinking thing. I ease myself gently and generally learn to accept a person through expose to them. But I've never had a dual or semi dual "push" their way in so I'm not sure how I would respond in such a situation.
11-02-2015, 09:24 AM
Flutterfly

ENFJ

"As far as love and personality types, I've only read of the INTJ and ENFJ having distinctive mentions in this area. "Head over heels", "romance being the Achilles heel", that sort of thing.

What I wonder is, do some types, particularly these two (INTJ/ENFJ), fall in love much harder and madly than others?"

I'd personally say it's true, at least in my case. I'm an ENFJ and I fall so fast and hard for people, and I constantly hear it from my friends. Don't know if it's like that for everyone, but it is to me :)
11-02-2015, 01:48 PM
ashlesha

does every type have the same levels of adrenaline, dopamine, and serotonin?

different types could make different choices in response to love - some might dwell on thoughts of their lover more, or be more inclined to intellectualize it and distance themselves from it, or be more or less single-minded, or pursuing, or retreating. and since our thoughts kind of create our reality, the way we think when we are in love might influence how intensely we feel about it. but sometimes the people who seem the most stoic can be the most inwardly turbulent.
11-03-2015, 04:05 AM
Beautiful sky

I fall in love very hard
11-05-2015, 10:19 AM
Erk

Falling in love has nothing to do with the types and is unique to each individual.
11-05-2015, 11:24 AM
Olimpia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluebird

I've never liked the idiom 'falling in love', personally.To fall can be something uncontrolled or unwanted. To fall in love is like a development, like a seed grows into a plant. I find to be in love or to fall in love also represents love as a place one can fall like a sticky sludge, water at the bottom of a well spiked with endorphins, or a valley where birds chirp love songs and roses fall from the sky, like the honeymoon phase of relationships. I like the unconditional sort of love, like the love a mother feels towards her child. A love that has always been there. I don't like to think those I love have been a recent development, but rather something that has always been there that I have come to realize. So I wouldn't say I fall in love hard and madly, but that I love those that I love unconditionally and deeply.

When people talk about "falling in love", they are usually just describing "Infatuated Love" and/or "Romantic Love":

Quote:

Infatuated love: "infatuation results from the experiencing of passionate arousal in the absence of intimacy and decision/commitment...like Tennov's limerence." Romantic relationships often start out as infatuated love and become romantic love as intimacy develops over time. Without developing intimacy or commitment, infatuated love may disappear suddenly.

That is why "true/real Love" (in this model, "Consummate Love") is a choice: it includes being committed to the person (commitment is a choice), alongside passion and intimacy.
11-05-2015, 11:25 AM
Olimpia

I believe every (Socionics) type of person can potentially "fall hard" for someone, depending on various conditions. How much a person will experience infatuation seems largely be dependent on how much the other person fits your love map, your hormone levels, attachment style and perhaps even Love style. I would say all of these factors add up to the whole experience of "falling in love (limerence)".

You could make the statement that Logical types *generally* fall not in love as hard as Ethical types. However, with the right mixture of love map, hormones, attachment style, etc., I believe some Logical types do "fall harder" than some Ethicals.

Before I suggest what type (combination) would "fall the hardest/least hard", let me preface this by pointing out the fact that the whole experience is subjective. For some people, just randomly thinking about the person and wanting to be with them is already a big sign for loving them greatly. Whereas others only testify someone as "in love" when they cannot sleep and eat due to their obsessive focus on the person. I base my assessment on the general idea of someone "falling in love hard". I list the attributes from the order of most to least importance.

Falls in love the hardest: SX instinct first, Preoccupied Attachment Style, Mania Love Style, Eros Love Style, SX/SP stacking, E2 or E4, Ethical type (esp. ExFx).
Falls in love the least hard: Avoidant/Dismissive Attachment Style, Ludus Love Style, SO/SP stacking, Pragma Love Style, SX blindspot, E5 or E1 (may not apply if SX first), Logical type (esp. xxTj).

Edit: I have come up with scorings. First three aspects count 3 points each, following three count 2 points each, last aspect counts 1 point.
Whatever list contains more aspects that apply to you, this list's scoring will count (more). (You can be a mixture of the two lists, I suppose. It is like the two different sides of you. :p )
(Also, you may only choose one Love Style as your main one for the scoring.)
If little (1 point) from either list applies to you, consider yourself: Average Joe/Plain Jane. Your Love is "Average". :P

List 1 scoring:
16-10 points: Love Stalker. Your Love is "Burning".
9-5 points: Hopeless Romantic. Your Love is "Hot".
5-2 points: Cupid's Student. Your Love is "Warm".

List 2 scoring:
16-10 points: Frozen Heart. Your Love is "Freezing".
9-5 points: Pragmatist. Your Love is "Cold".
5-2: points: Love Newbie. Your Love is "Coolish".
11-05-2015, 02:59 PM
Beautiful sky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erk

Falling in love has nothing to do with the types and is unique to each individual.

This
11-05-2015, 03:12 PM
hatesyardwork

Quote:

Originally Posted by lungs

does every type have the same levels of adrenaline, dopamine, and serotonin?

different types could make different choices in response to love - some might dwell on thoughts of their lover more, or be more inclined to intellectualize it and distance themselves from it, or be more or less single-minded, or pursuing, or retreating. and since our thoughts kind of create our reality, the way we think when we are in love might influence how intensely we feel about it. but sometimes the people who seem the most stoic can be the most inwardly turbulent.

This is excellent. You kind of wrapped up romance styles, egos, functions and type in a nice nutshell and metaphor for typology without mentioning typology once. Beautiful.
11-06-2015, 05:33 AM
DirectorAbbie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slacker

I bet every type thinks their type falls in love hardest. <3

I've never thought my type fell in love hard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aestrivex

Te types might fall in love, if at all, only after a long period of association and mutual understanding.

Yes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lungs

does every type have the same levels of adrenaline, dopamine, and serotonin?

I would expect chemistry to be NTR.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SisOfNight

You could make the statement that Logical types *generally* fall not in love as hard as Ethical types.

I've always thought NFs fell in love more frequently and suddenly and STs much less frequently and more gradually.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SisOfNight

Falls in love the hardest the most often[/U]: SX instinct first, Preoccupied Attachment Style, Mania Love Style, Eros Love Style, SX/SP stacking, E2 or E4, Ethical type (esp. ExFx).
Falls in love the least hard the most often: Avoidant/Dismissive Attachment Style, Ludus Love Style, SO/SP stacking, Pragma Love Style, SX blindspot, E5 or E1 (may not apply if SX first), Logical type (esp. xxTj).

The sx-first falling in love the hardest and most often makes sense.
But I think you have your categories wrong. Both say "most often." Shouldn't the latter be "least often"?
11-06-2015, 07:57 AM
Sol

Quote:

Originally Posted by Director Abbie

I've always thought NFs fell in love more frequently

Besides NF, the other factor - irrational types have passions/likings more frequently. Love probably is rare for all types. It's different feelings.
11-06-2015, 08:57 AM
Olimpia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Director Abbie

The sx-first falling in love the hardest and most often makes sense.
But I think you have your categories wrong. Both say "most often." Shouldn't the latter be "least often"?

I meant that for the second list, these characteristics make them not fall hard most times. Whereas the traits for the first list make people fall in love hard most times. (Implying people of both the first and second list have moments where they seem to act "unlike" themselves, like people of the second list suddenly falling in love hard, etc.)

"Most often" would have to be translated into "this applies the most times".
11-06-2015, 09:00 AM
Olimpia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sol

irrational types have passions/likings more frequently.

How so? Could you elaborate on that?
11-06-2015, 12:55 PM
mu4

I don't want to fall in love with the Mania style at all, it happens but that's because I'm stupid. Here's to Storge.

Eros is kind of the romantic ideal, but that's hard to find. There's a lot of ways to get here but it's probably a long road.
11-07-2015, 03:34 AM
End

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maritsa

This

Perhaps. I think we all fall in love in different ways. It's probably a nexus of type, instinct stacking, personal bullshit, your culture, and physical appearances. We'll never figure this one out, or at least I pray we don't. I mean, there is a story out there. The "love" potion is sold for peanuts, but it induces a very, very "unhealthy" form of love in the victim. The one who bought it thus requests a non-lethal antidote in short order. The seller just happens to have it... for a VERY exorbitant fee.

Evil? Yes. Good businessman? Why he most certainly is! Made the fact we're mostly ignorant of our own desires work for him but good. Gotta give the devil his due!
11-22-2015, 03:44 AM
ghost of forum past

I think that logical types might "fall for" people less often, but when they do it seems very intense because of the rather foreign emotions that it involves. Then again, maybe that's just being LII.

On another note, I think that logical types are less emotionally mature than ethical types, though this also has to do with temperaments in general. Emotions are seen as static to static logical types.
11-22-2015, 10:08 PM
hatesyardwork

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hacim

I think that logical types might "fall for" people less often, but when they do it seems very intense because of the rather foreign emotions that it involves. Then again, maybe that's just being LII. Or puberty. :D

On a more serious note, I think that logical types are less emotionally mature than ethical types, though this also has to do with temperaments in general. Emotions are seen as static to static logical types.

IF the OP is about how types fall in love you makes sense. Logical types are less experienced and unconfident in analyzing their own/my emotions. I have never related much to poetry and metaphor as it relates to the "expression" of love as a logical type. Feeling it and saying it are whole different worlds for me. Static is well said. The language of love, speaking from the heart...... seems like a different language. I truly analyze attraction thru a weird logical spectrum that it very individualized and way too complicated because I often truly have a difficulty dealing with some of the overwhelming feelings that come with deep attraction, because my program is to analyze it the way I do everything else and struggle because my "ethical" lens is not a strength. It's a conscious realization that I am not good at this........the language and expression of love and what it even is Am I in love with her? Why am I in love with her? Is this physical or emotional?...........and knowing I am not good at assessing or expressing either. Truth is it is always emotional attraction if I ask this question to myself and probably analyze it as such. "OK lets get some objectivity here......calm down, how do I feel about her?" I can't communicate confidently and mentally break things down as I do with other things. So I have as much fear and doubt as anyone with how to assess whether I am in love and if this love is going to reciprocated. Gamma SF (if we are into each other) have this look in their eyes and body language that communicates everything without saying anything that I for some reason can decipher immediately and confidently after 8 hours of sweating the last thing she said. And then the look and it all goes away. The sincerity and acceptance and their desire, which was in doubt is communicated effortlessly and I am in. So love is about the doubt (dealing with ethics) and then the relief of that doubt (acceptance of love) with the look. If I am even sweating the emotional side of things......I am really into this person, because I just don't care otherwise. Very clumsy and unsure where I am usually walking between the raindrops of not giving a shit. As verbal as I am in all other things, I am far more comfortable with a look than a love letter and with the girls who come off this way.
It's never love at first sight, I become more attracted to someone over time. So it can't be unrequited for me..........my attraction to others often begins with me realizing they like me from a look I get, or a lot of looks, because I am oblivious. But if they do show interest and I convince myself it's genuine and I am willing ( I don't chase every girl who shows interest, the opposite, I auto reject mostly) but the odd one usually Gamma SF will interest me and maybe something will happen without going into the benefits of Duality or Activity and why I like these type of girls and consider if I want to explore this with them. But it's always a slow buildup where a lot of trust and loyalty has been established and I allow myself to be emotionally committed. I don't give my heart easily but I can let myself get there.
11-26-2015, 05:38 AM
Muddy

It wouldn't surprise me if the love styles were strongly correlated with the IEs in the following manner:

Eros: Ti/Fe
Ludus: Se
Storge: Si/Ne
Pragma: Te
Mania: Ni
Agape: Fi
11-26-2015, 05:44 AM
Contra

I'm pretty certain this is something that falls outside of the realm of socionics since the model primarily deals with how one takes in and manages information rather than predicting the exact effect of a given stimulus. It might be more accurate to say that some types manage the relationship/their feelings better, which allows them to control how 'far' they fall in love.