This thread got me thinking http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ly-work-2.html about things. Do you want or need someone to actually need you like in a "I cannot live without you way?" Is this related to socionics, maybe quadra?
Yes
No
This thread got me thinking http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ly-work-2.html about things. Do you want or need someone to actually need you like in a "I cannot live without you way?" Is this related to socionics, maybe quadra?
Oops I thought I made the poll public but it looks like I forgot, is there any way to change this please?
I am looking forward to seeing people's responses
Sure, in idealistic romance world, yes. But in real life? I don't want to be that dependent on a person. I mean, if we naturally grow that close, and we are that intertwined (as if I have that level of trust for anybody), then that would just be... fact. I don't think my attitude would really be positive or negative about it. We'd be a unit. That would be fine.
Now, to psychoanalyze a bit, I may be downplaying how much I care about this precisely because it is something that I want so intensely (Enneagram 4 sx/so), but I think it's not something I'd ever strive for or expect in a relationship (except subconsciously). I do suspect that it would be a perennial source of a kind of background radiation of comfort, though, if I were so close to somebody else that we sort of merge or combine (anybody, really; our paradigm for closeness is the romantic relationship, but I don't care what form the intimacy takes; although I do admit that sexual intimacy, as an external manifestation, makes it a lot easier to achieve psychological intimacy, intimacy of the spirit-mind-nous-psyche). But then that person (or I) would be sure to die (and which one died depends on which one is the protagonist of the story; which one is Augustine, Tennyson, Achilles, Montaigne, Orpheus).
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
How about
"I really like you, and I think we'll do together in the long term. You're kind of cute, too, and I see us being able to have a mutually fulfilling life together. Yeah, I think you're someone I'd like to be with, be good to, and invest romantic feelings and strong emotions with. I see us going down the same life path, and I see you as being a good life partner for me - and I think I'd be good for you, too. I'd like to love you - how do you feel about me? I'm up for giving this [love] a go..."
It's flowery in its form there, but, something like that seems a lot more applicable than me saying just "I love you" or "I can't live with out you".
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
It kind of smacks of beta's Ni+Fe, because, there is focus on passionate feelings, almost 'overpowering feelings', which is kind of a common theme in betas that I've seen.
In think overall the more pragmatic approach that I said in my previous post here is somewhat "better" (I don't think feelings in and of themselves are important), but, I don't think it excludes how betas would go about things per se.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
LOL. There are so many quotes of epic comedy in this post, especially "invest" as a verb for "romantic feelings and strong emotions." Would you seriously like that formal of a declaration of... romantic interest? And/or do you seriously expect someone to appreciate that formal of a declaration (I'm not being facetious here; I suppose it's possible that an EII would find it cute, and it's not as if SLEs don't also occasionally make interpersonal moves that some might find ridiculous).
On a serious tip, have you investigated the possibility that your distaste for Fe has more to do with a distaste for a certain romantic thing? I was just thinking that it's not impossible that you actually are a Ti/Fe valuer but you just have a thing (possibly not socionics-related) against a certain way of expressing romantic feelings. I just say that because the whole dry, practical romance thing is, to me, the lynchpin for my agreeing with your LSE self-typing, but then it occurred to me that there are so many factors that go into one's attitude towards romance that have nothing to do with socionics... Not that I'm seriously questioning your type; I just know that others here do and they might have good reasons. I myself do not atm.
But yes, "I cannot live without you" in the conventional, external sense is vaguely beta, insofar as betas want passion and drama in their relationships, but I dunno, I find that nowadays most of those "I can't live without you" feelings are fabricated by one party (as in Madame Bovary) and indulged by the other. It's like people want to feel that passionate so they sort of make themselves feel that passionate without having a real grounding in the respective parties serving positive psychological and practical functions for each other. I think that most of the time when people say "I can't live without you" it has more to do with the feelings that they have attached to their partner (with various degrees of intentionality) rather than feelings their partner has inspired in them, if that makes sense, and as such they could actually very well feel the same way about another person if they made the same "investment" of feeling (darn it, that term isn't as ridiculous as I thought).
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
I think it's not type related and I think it's distasteful to say to someone that you can't live without them. First of all, it's untrue. Obviously. But it also puts a lot of pressure on that person to live up to some ideal. To make them somehow responsible for your happiness? I just think that's too much. You may not WANT to live without someone, but you can. And to tell them that you can't just comes across as needy.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Uhh, that's not what I'd actually say to someone, but that's what I'd be thinking - and if we're both on the same page about that, it would be a lot more important than someone saying to me "I can't live without you". I was addressing thought processes, not how to be romantic with your words.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
No way. What if I die in a car accident? Why would I want the other person to suicide?
Obviously, it'd be different if such a sentence was used as a literary constuct. In that case "live" might mean "feeling alive" rather than simply "possessing a working metabolism along with a self-replicating DNA". I would somewhat appreciate this attitude, however it's still a tricky sentence. Perhaps I would like something akin to "You make me feel alive".
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Not a rule, just a trend.
IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.
Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...
I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.
Looking for an Archnemesis. Willing applicants contact via PM.
ENFp - Fi 7w6 sp/sx
The Ineffable IEI
The Einstein ENTp
johari nohari
http://www.mypersonality.info/ssmall/
I dunno, I think I would potentially want to hear that from someone. To me, intimacy is nothing without total and complete merging; I wouldn't want them to mean, literally, that they would kill themselves if I died, but the sentiment is rather beautiful if it is heartfelt, I think. It just speaks to a level of combined commitment and fulfillment, having found something that is really worth it; when you find something good, you don't want to let go.
You think Mimosa isn't? o.o;
I think it's actually sx/so in particular; we basically have the least sense of the self as being something defined by borders between the self and others; sx/so's have the least resistance, and the most impetus, to merging and become totally one with something beyond physical contingency. sx/sp merging consists of grinding gears and worlds colliding; sx/so merging is the empty being filled by the whole and dispersing into the great single explosion. Or something.
I don't know how to answer this, because I don't really need to hear anything from my partner to know that they care about me. If it's the right relationship, I'd know it without them saying anything, or maybe just saying "I love you."
Are you using the phrase literally? I can't imagine saying it to anyone, but if I were to marry someone, that person would be my best friend and essentially someone I "can't live without." And I would want him to marry me because he wants me in his life, not because I'm "good enough" and he's tired of looking.
What is that line from Sleepless in Seattle when she dumps her fiancee..? I think he says, "Marriage is hard enough without bringing such low expectations into it." Exactly.
But I'm not taking that phrase to its ultimate neurotic conclusion like I'm a codependent person. Of course my life would go on if they left me, died, whatever. I'd probably marry again eventually.
IEE
BTW, "marriage" and "living with" are not the same thing
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
There is a motto in Spain (or elsewhere):
"You don't love whom you want to love, but whom you can't help loving"
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
I feel this way about duality."You don't love whom you want to love, but whom you can't help loving"
IEE
yeah, this.
someone deciding that they cannot and will not live without you is pretty scary/fucked up. it's not romantic, it's selfish and burdensome. it degrades life. every fight becomes this overdramatic thing, where say you want to pursue something else, you're indirectly causing someone to off themself.
i mean it's cool to be passionate in general, but when someone's only passion is me, i just get sick of them. how am i supposed to be excited with you when your only excitement is me? it's like some incestuous romance, only doomed to burn out in the end. like i'll always show people i care about new things, crave new experiences with them, etc. and i would want the same in return. otherwise they're just some emotional parasite, feeding off my passions and it's annoying as fuck.
edit:
although i said no as well, your mentality for it is just gross lol. like wtf, no it is NOT like a business you cold bitch ahaha
maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
go ask the frog what the scorpion knows
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp
DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
The statement can come off as needy if spoken too soon, but there comes a certain point in a relationship when a level of codependency is a good thing. It takes some vulnerability to tell someone you rely on them that much, and you can't have a relationship without vulnerability. I've said this to people and I would like it to be said to me sometime, because I want to feel needed, I want to know that I've had enough positive impact on my SO's life that she feels she can't have it any other way. Of course I would never want someone to kill herself because of a lack of me. But at the end of the day love is simply an emotion you feel; it's temporary. Expressing how you feel in terms of necessity speaks more towards a long-term commitment than just a simple "I love you."
Stan is not my real name.
That's not what codependency means. That's more like interdependency or something.
I think it`s not only about if someone says that but also why. Maybe one wants to show the intense of his or her love by exaggerating. like a sort of visualization or something. Some people may see it being a lie, because everyone is able to survive without a loved person. Others may not, because it is the ebullient but true feeling of the moment. (Truth seems relative sometimes )"I love you and I cannot live without you."
This expression seems kind of dramatic. Therefore I can imagine some types having a stronger tendence doing that or appreciating it than others. And maybe there is a tendence related to type feeling a "pressure" caused of that or not!?
When I read this sentence the first time it sounded unhealthy to me. It`s an extreme situation but If there is a constant feeling of inability living without someone there could exist some "emotional" dependence/addiction to a person (sorry my english is not the best). The intention of this sentence would be pressure, probably out of fear of being left by the partner.. It`s really sad. It`s like a mutual dependence, because in this case the sentence "I can`t live without you" is something like a means of might . There could develope something like mutual dependence, because the other person starts feeling responsible for one`s life and happiness in an extreme way. This kind of pressure seems a bit like wielding power on one`s conscience in order to make the other person to care or not to leave or something.
I don`t think "emotional dependence" to someone is type related.
I think it`s not so much about the sentence itself but what it represents.
These two possibilities are extreme but they are the once ones being in my mind at the moment. I`m not very imaginative, there are much more...
This is really interesting Silverchris9, because in a way it expresses an impression I receive in this forum.On a serious tip, have you investigated the possibility that your distaste for Fe has more to do with a distaste for a certain romantic thing? I was just thinking that it's not impossible that you actually are a Ti/Fe valuer but you just have a thing (possibly not socionics-related) against a certain way of expressing romantic feelings. I just say that because the whole dry, practical romance thing is, to me, the lynchpin for my agreeing with your LSE self-typing, but then it occurred to me that there are so many factors that go into one's attitude towards romance that have nothing to do with socionics... Not that I'm seriously questioning your type; I just know that others here do and they might have good reasons. I myself do not atm.
Absolutely. Can you imagine a single SLE saying he can't live without someone?
Just look at who supports the phrase in this thread vs. who doesn't. It seems like a most of the Fi-valuers support the sentiment, and Fe-valuers are the ones who think it's unhealthily dependent.
This might also have to do with Se and the need to be independent...which brings me to think it might also be related to romance styles. It seems like Infantiles especially would develop such dependency.
Anyway, it's not too much of a stretch to think this issue is type related, considering most of the people who voted "yes" are delta.
Stan is not my real name.