Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Rationals, Irrationals, and Adjacent-Quadra Relationships

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,608
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Rationals, Irrationals, and Adjacent-Quadra Relationships

    So, an interesting idea arose in the Romantic Mirage thread, which I have been mulling over for a while.

    The idea is that, because types in adjacent quadras share only half of their valued information elements (either the Rational elements or the Irrational elements), Rational and Irrational types will have significant differences in the way they experience adjacent-quadra relationships. That would include Semi-Duality, Kindred, Mirage, Look-a-Like, Supervision, and Benefit.

    Essentially, the trend seems to be that partners who share valued Irrational elements will tend to find the relationship comfortable, relaxing, and easy to work together, but ultimately unfulfilling, while parters who share valued Rational elements will find the relationship meaningful, fulfilling, with a deeper personal connection, but ultimately uncomfortable and difficult to work together productively.

    Shared Irrational: comfortable, "safe", sympathetic, harmless, casual, easy to work together to achieve a goal, productive, useful, superficial, shallow, unsupportive, unable to support each other during times of stress, unfulfilling, unexciting, void, lacking intimacy and depth
    Shared Rational: close and satisfying, fulfilling, meaningful, deep, intimate, easy to discuss points of view but difficult to agree on practical implementation, difficult to execute joint activities, not living up to full potential, can't get anything open-ended done, uncomfortable, under-stimulated, growing laziness

    I will call the "shared Irrational" relationship style "Productive-Shallow", and the "shared Rational" style "Unproductive-Deep".

    Productive-Shallow Relationships
    Rational Types: Mirage, Look-a-Like, Supervisee, Beneficiary
    Irrational Types: Semi-Dual, Kindred, Supervisor, Benefactor

    Unproductive-Deep Relationships
    Rational Types: Semi-Dual, Kindred, Supervisor, Benefactor
    Irrational Types: Mirage, Look-a-Like, Supervisee, Beneficiary

    In general, it seems that Productive-Shallow relationships connect in terms of lifestyle, but can't make any deeper, personal connections. Unproductive-Deep relations seem to make those deeper personal connections, but clash in terms of how to go about daily life.

    Anyway, that's the theory I've been working on. Any input, theoretical insights, personal observations, is welcome!
    Quaero Veritas.

  2. #2
    C-ESI-Se 6w7 sx/sp ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    the center of the universe
    Posts
    15,798
    Mentioned
    909 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    In general, it seems that Productive-Shallow relationships connect in terms of lifestyle, but can't make any deeper, personal connections. Unproductive-Deep relations seem to make those deeper personal connections, but clash in terms of how to go about daily life.
    this is how i've tended to generalize how i feel around alphas and gammas, respectively, so it's interesting to see it spelled out like you've done here. thanks i'm curious to see other responses.

  3. #3
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,009
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Eh, works a bit different for me. Irrationals of adjacent quadra > Rationals of adjacent quadra.

    Though I tend to agree it feels different depending on shared pair of values, and more or less with how it works. I disagree this originated in linked thread, but I'm too lazy to look for earlier references.

  4. #4
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,608
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by laghlagh View Post
    this is how i've tended to generalize how i feel around alphas and gammas, respectively, so it's interesting to see it spelled out like you've done here. thanks i'm curious to see other responses.
    Neat. I am also interested in how other people respond. I'm curious whether Se/Ni-valuers, in particular, will relate to this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aiss View Post
    Eh, works a bit different for me. Irrationals of adjacent quadra > Rationals of adjacent quadra.

    Though I tend to agree it feels different depending on shared pair of values, and more or less with how it works. I disagree this originated in linked thread, but I'm too lazy to look for earlier references.
    Yeah, my intent here wasn't so much to show "how well these relations work", but more "in what way do these relations work". Personally, I get along better with LSE (my Mirage) than with SLE (my Supervisor), even though I can tell I would have a deeper personal connection with the SLEs. So the depth of the connection matters as well as the type of connection.

    Also, the linked thread was where I got the idea -- I wouldn't be surprised if someone else had thought of it before me.
    Quaero Veritas.

  5. #5
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    286 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Interesting idea Krig. hmm. will have to think about it.

  6. #6
    Poster Nutbag The Exception's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    my own personal bubble
    TIM
    LII-Ne
    Posts
    4,097
    Mentioned
    103 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thanks for your insight Krig. I've noticed the productive-shallow relationship with LSEs I've encountered. I haven't studied the other types enough to have a strong impression one way or the other.
    LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP



  7. #7
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,714
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    So, an interesting idea arose in the Romantic Mirage thread, which I have been mulling over for a while.

    The idea is that, because types in adjacent quadras share only half of their valued information elements (either the Rational elements or the Irrational elements), Rational and Irrational types will have significant differences in the way they experience adjacent-quadra relationships. That would include Semi-Duality, Kindred, Mirage, Look-a-Like, Supervision, and Benefit.

    Essentially, the trend seems to be that partners who share valued Irrational elements will tend to find the relationship comfortable, relaxing, and easy to work together, but ultimately unfulfilling, while parters who share valued Rational elements will find the relationship meaningful, fulfilling, with a deeper personal connection, but ultimately uncomfortable and difficult to work together productively.

    Shared Irrational: comfortable, "safe", sympathetic, harmless, casual, easy to work together to achieve a goal, productive, useful, superficial, shallow, unsupportive, unable to support each other during times of stress, unfulfilling, unexciting, void, lacking intimacy and depth
    Shared Rational: close and satisfying, fulfilling, meaningful, deep, intimate, easy to discuss points of view but difficult to agree on practical implementation, difficult to execute joint activities, not living up to full potential, can't get anything open-ended done, uncomfortable, under-stimulated, growing laziness

    I will call the "shared Irrational" relationship style "Productive-Shallow", and the "shared Rational" style "Unproductive-Deep".

    Productive-Shallow Relationships
    Rational Types: Mirage, Look-a-Like, Supervisee, Beneficiary
    Irrational Types: Semi-Dual, Kindred, Supervisor, Benefactor

    Unproductive-Deep Relationships
    Rational Types: Semi-Dual, Kindred, Supervisor, Benefactor
    Irrational Types: Mirage, Look-a-Like, Supervisee, Beneficiary

    In general, it seems that Productive-Shallow relationships connect in terms of lifestyle, but can't make any deeper, personal connections. Unproductive-Deep relations seem to make those deeper personal connections, but clash in terms of how to go about daily life.

    Anyway, that's the theory I've been working on. Any input, theoretical insights, personal observations, is welcome!
    well said and in an organized easy to understand way. agree completely.

    i've been sayiing this for awhile, or variations of it. but you've put it into words quite nicely and your credibility on this forum is high.

    my theory has been that you are more comfortable with the quadra in which you provide some supervision rather than the quadra from which you receive supervision. that you have something to bequeath to the quadra in which you benefit someone; that you provide an endowment to the adjacent quadra that you benefit. this makes this quadra more interesting than the quadra which gives you an endowment and supervises you. since you want to see what they will do with what you gave them. i am always very interested in what EIE will do with my crazy ideas and encourage them in how they will develop a cause and get things moving in what i see as the best direction. but perhaps this says more about the relations between rationals and irrationals of adjacent quadras.

    if i compare lookalike and illusionary to semi dual and comparative, i'd much rather spend time with lookalike and illusionary; i do feel closer to them than to semi dual and comparative. comparative in particular creates a feeling of uneasiness and over the long term, strife.

    in practical application, it seems that the connection along the rational elements have more staying power and lasting value than the connection along the irrational ones, at least for irrationals. i have often noticed that LII and ESE spend more time with delta than beta, while ILE and SEI spend more time with beta than with delta. i'm much more drawn to beta and have had long term relationships with 3. betas. rarely do i find an LII who likes hanging out on a personal level with betas. although i have seen them work together, mostly as musicians. ESE's at least the ones that i know are more connected to delta than to beta as well.

    although i notice that i always have a close EII "guardian angel" in my life.

    i also have produced some of my best professional work of my career so far with an SLI, my semi dual, but we could not connect at a deeper level.

    i come home every day to an IEI and we are quite close but our lifestyles are quite different. for recreation, we tend to go in different directions, i enjoy dancing, hiking, skiing, kayaking, yoga and he likes to play guitar, go to the speedway for car racing...to me this is a classic alpha-beta difference in values.

    we have actually accomplished a lot in the last 4 years....mostly on the strength of my will and on his flexibility. our lives are a little more separate than i think it would be with a dual, but overall he is quite easy to live with, i'm somewhat temperamental which he does not find that hard to deal with. the relationship remains exciting going on 5 years, a good sign.

    i am glad that someone else is finally noticing what i've been noticing. thanks, krig! :-)
    Last edited by Blaze; 02-14-2011 at 12:09 AM.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  8. #8
    Nevero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    426
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Shared Irrational: comfortable, "safe", sympathetic, harmless, casual, easy to work together to achieve a goal, productive, useful, superficial, shallow, unsupportive, unable to support each other during times of stress, unfulfilling, unexciting, void, lacking intimacy and depth
    Shared Rational: close and satisfying, fulfilling, meaningful, deep, intimate, easy to discuss points of view but difficult to agree on practical implementation, difficult to execute joint activities, not living up to full potential, can't get anything open-ended done, uncomfortable, under-stimulated, growing laziness
    Very insightful, this has also been my experience. What do you think makes shared rational elements feel more satisfying and fulfilling?

  9. #9
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,313
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    I will call the "shared Irrational" relationship style "Productive-Shallow", and the "shared Rational" style "Unproductive-Deep".
    That seems rather opposite, in that same judging functions should usually yield a better productivity. I don't know about personal "depth," since that could mean anything. I know about perceptive depth, ie. Ni/Ses are typically very attuned to the polar duality mechanism imagination/action-adventure, while Si/Nes are more attuned to the polarity mechanism of groundwork/idea flow. How productive those will be however, depends immensely on the rational functions. I don't see how I could be overall that productive in Ni with a Beta NF, since Fe would ultimately color it with a more humanistic or personable flavor, or an ESTp would want to in a large way depersonalize their Se so its in terms of technicalities. Though I do find semi-dual relations to be quite positive and energizing psychologically because of their polarity, but I definitely have a feeling of the opposite for these terms you supply. That we're not typically productive stably using each others strengths, because it seems to me like ESTps see Ti as more a game and it's interesting but not useful to me, easy to grasp but hard to stay conscious of, nor does it peak my sense of goal-orientation (not that I'm a J, but I'm talking about J functions). Were very good in terms of easy connectivity, instant gratification and relational development with one another though. Your whole thing might be more intertype relation based, or it could just be I'm not understanding parts of it, but I do think there are some good points, which could just be a coincidence.

    I would find an ESTj on the other hand to typically fit with the former, shallow but easier to be productive with. You know: "Let's not talk, lets just do our job and get along "comfortably," ie. without any Fe-influence or strong focus on Ti." And if I do so utter a trace of Ni, it will confuse the ESTj, and I will find him to lack depth and imaginative spirit, but it won't effect the way we interpret our decision making, our logic will continue to be sound and what shallow operations we have will flow smoothly. I think they would call INTp of ISTp, or INTp of ESTj the "suitemate" relations, idealistically speaking.

    I think our perception of this relation, on the other hand, is truly opposite from one another, because you as a rational type would find those of your polarity to be deep. You ask yourself: Why would someone with Ti/Fe be shallow? I ask myself a similar question about Ni/Se. Betas are more distorted to me than shallow, and unpleasant, ie. semi-duality: "the moth and the flame," but there's a big difference between semi-duality and Fe-PoLR.

    When dealing with the rational elements, betas can then be rather hard to "get in on." I will often be left out of Fe/Ti conversations because it requires a style of performance, like something colorful and emotive, that I am not used to. Yet I will listen in and understand everything being said. Sometimes I'm surprised by how I'm expected to respond to others comments when I speak, and how much I'm left out, until the Fe/Ti style atmosphere cools down. Fe/Ti has a very combined playful/informatic feel in discussing information and exchanging topics. It often seems as though there is a lack of care and attention to what I feel should be externally established. I don't have a lot of knowledge on this yet, but I definitely think that Ti and Fi can be sort of tactless and ignorant, in their own realm, while Te and Fe try to establish what's being said with people. To me it feels like Fe/Ti types "spam" more technical information to trigger a more efficient logical tracing process on the inside, to where not a lot logically needs to be established or discussed each time, where as ethics are what need to be firmly established on the outside. I won't go too much in to that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •