hmmmm. You can look at it this way:
- there are many factors that determine how a relationship will turn out
- socionics is one of those factors, according to socionics theory
- It is still uncertain to what extent socionics is a considereable factor compared to the others(like looks, individual personality, money, etc)
My opinion/experience: Intertype relations don't necessarily predict how well you get along, but it can predict where conflicts (and otherwise) are likely to occur, and where there is likely to be the most misunderstanding.
Knowing this, if I get into an argument with an ESTj about the way things should be done, I won't take it personally.
I think I like your husband! (yay hidden agenda!)Originally Posted by maizemedley
I just thought of a good anecdote to illustrate my point, actually. One of my brothers is ESTj (recipe for disaster!). We actually get along really well, and surprisingly I'm more patient with him than most of the others in my family.I was thrown off by the idea that others don't match up with the relations descriptions and I started to think if that was reason enough to DOUBT the theory, or if their experiences were simple due to other factors. Thanks again! Damn doubt.
When we fight, we fight. It's quite spectacular, actually (as well as mightily unpleasant). Unfortunately, unlike the regular fights between siblings the insults are meaningful (though not usually accurate or justified), the attacks are on character
I can enjoy a "fight" with either of my other brothers, but with the ESTj it is really terrible.
Exactly like ishy, the disputes with my brother, who is my Contrary are based on differences of character. hey, you beta believe it!
Hehe, the worst my ESFp brother will say to me is "you smell"
Really? That's funny, ishy, how you and your brother "talk" to each other. It's rather comical, then a serious fight. I wish I had a brother like that too . He is also older than me with 7 yrs, so that makes it even worser, imagine that
Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it! :wink:Originally Posted by gugu_ baba
No, I'm joking. I love my brothers, they're wonderful even if we fight sometimes. Unfortunately for me, they're all at the obnoxious (early to mid teenage) ages, and there are three of them and like to gang up on me. Sometimes I think "brother" was originally a misspelling of "bother" that stuck
#1 is ESFp, 16yo
#2 is type unknown (lol), 14yo
#3 is ESTj, 13yo
They're all wonderful, loveable pains in the neck.
You can borrow them, if you like
Ah, no thanks, they are little But I'd like to have "bothers" or sisters of my own age, because we rarely even change a word and when we do once a week or so, it's rather constant argueing and some *advice from your older bro, yo* rather than saying smth nice and comfortingOriginally Posted by ishysquishy
Intertype relations are about the information interaction between types. Out of this interaction arises one's subjective experience of a "relationship."
If we take super-ego relations, for example, the relationship is all about having your attention constantly drawn to your 3rd and 4th functions (4th is secondary in this case). All descriptions of intertype relations are simply attempts to describe what this feels like on the subjective level and how it manifests itself externally.
I think you need to have a knowledge first and an ability to analyse second. Even if you have it, it does not necessarily mean that it is easy and understanding comes in a right moment. I can explain on a simple example what Rick meant (if I have understood it right).
I am ISFJ and my boss is ESTP. S means we both are powerful that is similarity but all other functions are completely different. If we talk about pure business: do this, do that -its fine. Then ...if I get any step aside I get into the sh.... According to socionics' interactions I am a reviser for my boss(her). That means I am putting pressureon her weakest function with my base function. It is all good in thory and how jit wroks in practice? You can only understand it if you both will communicate what bothers you about each other. For example, I start to bring my perspective on the subject. How I do it ? I put my feelings into it - or will be honestly sincerely talking my heart to her in hope that she will understand me better. Notice, I do not talk here about powerful emotions . And what do I get in responce? Exactly- critics! Why? Because the task to understand somebodies internal feelings is too hard for her! Her third functions is . I am on the other hand a honest and sincere person and dont mind to say how I feel -short distance of communication. So, attention drawn to first function: we like to be in the "base" mode and we selectivele use our attention to the subjects of our interests and strengths (1function). On the other hand if the info is too complicated to diagest - we feel pressure on our 3function.
God, help me to survive!.....!
School of Associative socionics: http://socionics4you.com/
If I see this for myself, I conclude that I have incorrectly typed them. I'm always a bit skeptical of other people's statements because it's always very hard to know exactly what they mean. But when I see for myself that super-ego partners do not exchange information in a super-ego way, I look for new types. Information interchange determines types.What do you make of it when people tell you that they DON'T experience, using your example of super-ego relations, their attention constantly drawn to their 3rd and 4th functions? Instead they experience attention being drawn to their 1st function or 2nd function? I just want to make sense of why other people don't experience the subjective feelings that are theorized/observed/expected? And if their observations are reason enough to challenge the relations theory...
Sometimes you have to choose what to think: either people have correctly determined their type and socionics is a bunch of baloney, or they have incorrectly determined their type and socionics works.
My socionic relationships with other types all work. However, to 'make' them work, I occasionally have to disagree with what other people think about their own type.
To me this is the biggest mystery of all -- how to figure out what other people are experiencing inside. Often people hide their experiences and tell you something else (or don't realize yet what kind of information interchange is going on). My experience is that socionics almost always gets the upper hand in the end.My socionics relations all work too. I can feel the pressure on certain functions when I'm around certain types, totally. But when others don't feel the expected pressure, and I think that they have typed themselves correctly...I'm just baffled. I tend to think that they are lying to themselves. Or are in the honeymoon stage. Or have become super human and don't have functions like the rest of us!
For example, an EII and an ILE (supervision relationship) get to know each other and form a long-distance relationship, meeting every month or so for a couple days at a time. Your friend is the EII, and you eventually get to know the ILE, too. You've checked their types through your own informational interaction with each of them. Judging by appearances, everything is super. They write to each other all the time and your EII friend obviously likes the ILE very much. One year goes by, two years... And you think, "are they just oblivious to the supervision relationship, or what is going on here?" Eventually you get closer to the EII, and at some point she tells you that she is exasperated with a lot of things about the ILE -- that he doesn't tell her about his plans far enough in advance, that he can't make decisions, that he always asks her what she would like to do (instead of taking the lead), etc. etc. And gradually the socionics aspects fit into place... but you never would have found out if you hadn't gotten close enough to get a taste of things for yourself.
It's hard to figure out what people are really experiencing subconsciously. Some people (and types) always seem to be overly positive about things, while others overemphasize the negative. But by being observant and internally sensitive you can figure a lot of it out.