I'd say so. I get along way better with Ne-EII than with Fi-EII. Ne-EIIs I find hilarious and even a little cool/intimidating, whereas I usually find Fi-EII to be overly-critical/serious and delusional. This is all IME though and I'd be open to feeling differently.
Subtypes: Intertype Relationships
If you were to be put in a group and couldn't know anyone's type beforehand, but could choose their subtype, would you rather be with people of the same rational/irrational subtype as yourself, people of the opposite rational/irrational subtype as yourself, people of the same extrovert/introvert subtype as yourself, or people of the opposite extrovert/introvert subtype as yourself?
If you have any other thoughts about subtype preferences in any sort of relationship, please share them.
I would honestly not care. I've had good experiences with both. Te-Fis are usually slightly less sparky and a bit more conservative, but very open, honest and tolerant. Se-Nis are sometimes very creative, insightful and have the right amount of drive, but in other cases they may be career obsessed, phony and abrasive.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
From first hand experience, I've found that subtype plays a major role in your chances of success with anyone. I've experienced this especially with my identicals.
IEEs tend to be of two kinds: those who are nerds and happy about it (Ne subtype) and those who are nerds but try to hide it (Fi subtype). From my perspective, IEE-Fi are stubborn, unreasonable, impulsive, inconsiderate and overly proud. I can't really stand them. IEE-Ne, in the other hand, are much calmer and secure about themselves. I'd say, Fi subtypes are more self-centered (more infantile) and Ne subtypes more humble (more mature).
I've noticed similar things with other types. For example, I tend to dislike SLI-Te while at the same time adore SLI-Si.
[]
| NP | 3[6w5]8 so/sp | Type thread | My typing of forum members | Johari (Strengths) | Nohari (Weaknesses)
You know what? You're an individual, and that makes people nervous. And it's gonna keep making people nervous for the rest of your life. - Ole Golly from Harriet, the spy.
Mikemex, would you say you prefer irrational subtypes to rational subtypes?
I have had the same experiences with IEEs and their subtypes.
I read that a more dualish dual will have the same (base or creative subtype) as you, but I'm an LSE-Te and I find XII-Nes to be the more interesting subtype.
I seem to get along better with ILI-Tes for obvious reasons, and with IEI-Fes for not-so-obvious reasons.
I guess I find that I get a more innate sense of connection in communication and lifestyle with rational subtypes. With the irrational subs, even when Ne/Si, I kinda feel compelled to shift my brain to think the way they do, react to things a bit differently from how I'm normally accustomed. This of course assumes that all else is normal and that the people in question aren't complete asshats.
I also find that I'm more drawn towards creative subtypes than inert ones. Inert subtypes can come off a little WYSIWYG, and I see creative subs has having some greater complexity of character in some respects.
?Originally Posted by Galen
Which subtype is good for you could actually have a lot to do with how comfortable your childhood relationships have been: "what type are your parents and other childhood acquaintances?" I find that rational subtypes are usually, for some reason, simply easier to get along with, a more sane temperament, and I find that irrational subtypes are usually just more interesting and less predictable/adjusted, ime. So depending on if the acquaintances that formed your childhood are closer or further to your quadra, could easily give weight to which subtype you're more drawn to. If you've on average had a more conflicting quadra lifestyle, rational subtypes will seem comparatively much more peaceful and stable. If you've mostly been comfortable or bored with your quadra's lifestyle, irrational subtypes will seem more refreshing with more potential for good change.
I tend to get along with other irrational people. But Maritsa said I was a rational type myself.
When somebody makes a socionics post I usually try to 'humanize' it and generalize it, to read between the lines of what I think the person is saying. Then I am just criticized for oversimplifying but you can't win with people. They either like you or they don't, the older I get the more I realize this is true and I try not to people please so much.
What I think of most people on this forum, and the internet in general- is they are afraid to really relate to people. ((and idealizing others as 'duality' is a form of not relating to them.)) This isn't true of *everybody* on here but it's true of a lot of people. They might make excuses like 'I'm a logical type' but really - for some reason they just can't properly empathize. It's sociopathic and pathological. And so caring people try to help them show they can relate to people because it's awkward. It's weird. People aren't robots. Not everybody is going to take advantage of your emotions. The person who has proper empathy levels is really the person who has the most control. The other person is reactive and self-defensive.
And then we Mary Sue people who go on the internet but also learn more balanced real life relationships. They learn they can relate and connect with almost anybody if they learn different skills instead of hatefully psychoanalyzing the person and picking apart all they don't like about them. It's not really that they act super 'gay' with them, they just warm up a little. And they will like not like certain people and still love people but they learn that they don't have to look at others so darkly.
What You See Is What You Get
Reply With Quote
