1. Duality
2. Identity
3. Activity
4. Mirror
5. ?
You can also make your list 1-16 of best to worst personality relations.
1. Duality
2. Identity
3. Activity
4. Mirror
5. ?
You can also make your list 1-16 of best to worst personality relations.
Contrary.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
1. Duality - Truly completes you. And INTjs are cute when you make them smile.
2. Activity - Closest to duality. And very fun! And ENTps and I can talk forever.
3. Identity - Very nice having someone just like me, competitive, someone I can understand.
4. Mirror - Very relaxing. ISFps are so laid-back. So chilled.
5. Beneficiary (Other person is Benefactor) - Receive the Ti help I need in a duality kind of way. SLEs rock! And humorous/fun Se like an Activity relationship.
6. Semi-Duality - More helpful than Beneficiary, yes, but more confusion and misunderstanding. But helpful for growth.
7. Benefactor - Man... ENFps can be all over the place. This can be fun, but it gets frustrating. Tires me out though.
8. Look-alike - I learn a lot from ESTjs. I like the fellow Ej temperament, we understand just wanting to get things done. No BS.
9. Quasi-Identical - Similar to Identity, SO MUCH FUN! EXTRAVERTED SFs LIKE OMG!
10. Supervisee (Other person is Supervisor) - INFps are so sensitive, caring, it can be very sexy.
11. Illusionary - INFjs are upbeat and nice. Kind of private, shy, but friendly.
12. Comparitive - Fe LIKE OMG! A;LDSFKJAS;LFJASLKFJAS;LDJFZX;LKVJSALDKJFAW;EFRJASDFLJ
13. Supervisor - ISTps are cool, I like shocking them with my Fe. Lots of trust/help here, maybe I should rank them higher than #13, but oh well.
14. Super-Ego - ENTjs are... interesting, informative, but... way too abstract for me. And wayyy overly critical.
15. Contrary - I always feel uncomfortable around ISFjs... like they're going to cut my throat or something. They don't trust my Fe or friendliness either, it's like they expect I'm plotting something. We don't trust each other.
16. Conflicting - Nothing to talk about without disagreeing. I think INTps are very cool, how they have great insight into people, and I have a lot of respect for their intelligence. But just interacting with them personally, it's tough, cause they're so cold. Criticizing everything, they can't just be happy.
Tough to decide in this list. Of course the maturity of the person, and countless other non-socionic factors, are more important. For example, I had a pretty good relationship before with my Supvisor, even though I rank it as #10 on my list. All depends on the person.
Last edited by Snaps; 06-27-2011 at 07:27 PM.
probably semi-dual.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Know I'm mistyped?
Why I am now.
Why I was , once.
DISCLAIMER
The statements expressed in this signature may not necessarily reflect reality.
I agree that activity beats identity.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Mirage. Superid-complementary relations are typically better than ego-complementary relations, and of the two off-quadra relations that are, I've seen enough semi-dual relations fail in more or less the same way to conclude that Creative/HA interaction is more important (though less instantly attractive) than dominant/suggestive interaction; given primarily that the former is necessary to assuage fears related to the PoLR. For example, consistent clear and convincing displays of open affection counter the xLE's innate interpersonal paranoia, and a quick push into action can counter the XIE's innate squeamishness. Further, providing others with role information is obviously easier than providing PoLR information; and in fact people use the role regularly, provided it doesn't conflict with the goals set up by the dominant (LIE's constant upbeat cheerfulness and LSE's occasional surly demeanor are good examples of this).
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Actually, I think I would go with this order and because they offer the information one needs; I'll use myself as an example.
1. Duality because it offers both Te and Si in the right dose
2. Activity because it offers both Te and Si in less than the right dose
3. Conflict relations because it offers Te demonstrating (is an ST type)
4. Super-Ego Relations because it offers Si demonstrative (is an ST type to my NF)
5. Identical relations make for a very good friendship.
6. Illusionary Relations, though has many conflicts and is a superficial relations, it offers Si and sometimes roles out Te.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I could potentially see this order happening but only on a very superficial basis. The minute you start trying to get closer to conflict or superego, things start going MAJORLY downhill.
In fact, when talking very superficial relationships, I would actually put Duality lower, and Activity & Identity higher, as Activity is more obvious of an attraction initially and is less awkward to start than duality, and Identity just bonds very easily over things they have in common.
Obviously when talking about close interpersonal relationships, of course you probably realize your list goes completely out the window. My list for closer relationships would look like this:
1. Duality
2. Activity
3. Identity
4. +/- Mirror (not sure, but i think intraquadra relationships tend to have more mutual understanding than interquadra)
5. Illusionary or semiduality (depending on subtype)
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Probably Benefit>Semi>Illusionary
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Maritsa: have you had any good relationships with ESTPs? Do you feel a weird tension when you interact with them, or are you able to open up and feel warmth when you are around them?
My long time college BF is my conflict relations; he's a great guy, but he's so lost with my Fi emotions. He loves me and supports me when I need him and we can pray together, laugh together, eat and enjoy life in all kinds of ways together but we just can't live together. I want him to organize my living space, but he doesn't care about that kind of stuff; he wants to go out, enjoy life, eat good food, just a lot of focus on sensory information/experience. My dual BF and I plan to go certain places and he's not at all spontaneous; he want's to be sure of things ahead of time but my conflict friend and I can take a long drive and just pull over at some dinner and eat whatever; not with my BF!!! NO WAY!!! Even if my BF and I do plan to take a drive, he'll talk about his plan about where we're going to eat as we're driving to be sure that all events in the next few hours are covered.
I have no beef with my conflict relations; we make supportive and loving friends; it doesn't work well for living and covering your weak spots. He always asks me to go out and do things with him, but I can't; I have low low energy. I need my activities planned so that I have plenty of energy for when the time comes to do them. If my dual doesn't have enough facts to build an accurate picture, they simply state, "I don't know" instead of making conclusions as SLE are likely to do.
What my conflict relation doesn't do that creates a shallowness of relations is that they don't take information and factor them in to come up with conclusions of what something is in it's reality/real picture; they persuade a belief, which makes it very confusing for me because some of those persuasions, though it may have facts, may lack in factuality.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 06-29-2011 at 05:18 AM.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
This is all mostly theoretical, but with a lot of application of theory, taking into consideration Club interaction, Romance styles, Collaboartion, Communication, Temperament, and of course Quadra Values (but Values are not necessarily given first priority in every case). I came up with the following lists, different for Rationals and Irrationals.
If you are Rational:
1. Dual
2. Semi-Dual
3. Identical
4. Activator
5. Kindred
6. Beneficiary
7. Mirror
8. Look-A-Like
9. Benefactor
10. Supervisee
11. Mirage
12. Quasi-Identical
13. Extinguishment
14. Conflictor
15. Supervisor
16. Super-Ego
If you are Irrational:
1. Dual
2. Mirage
3. Identical
4. Activator
5. Look-A-Like
6. Benefactor
7. Mirror
8. Kindred
9. Beneficiary
10. Supervisee
11. Semi-Dual
12. Quasi-Identical
13. Extinguishment
14. Conflictor
15. Supervisee
16. Super-Ego
Last edited by pianosinger; 06-29-2011 at 03:43 PM.
My life's work (haha):
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/blog.php?b=709
Input, PLEASEAnd thank you
I don't necessarily agree with the ranking of this list, but I do like the idea behind separating Ps and Js and implying that outside of interquadra relations, there's probably a lot more asymmetry rational/irrational relations than just benefactor/beneficiary relations.
IEE Ne Creative Type
Some and role lovin too. () I too...
!!!!!!
I like this idea a lot, but I don't agree with some of them. Personally I would place Activator higher than Identical and in most cases, higher than Mirage (although if the subtypes match up, Mirage could probably be higher than Activator). It would be really interesting to create a thread/poll of some sort for this idea though I think.
Um, I guess I'm the only one that would say business/look-a-like, then.
N-EII ~~~ 6>1 sp/so ~~~ INFJ
No type is smarter, better, more difficult to handle, or harder to be than another.
Personality theory doesn’t predict what a person will think or do.
Any type in one theory can be any type in another.
Urgh, I can't easily rank my personal intertype relations in this way, but it's interesting to try.
I can see how certain relationships have been really transformational in my life, even if they have their difficult or unpleasant aspects. Also, these are based only on my RL history, and not on online interaction, nor on what I think could have been a meaningful relationship if only there'd been more opportunity. These are strictly the relationships I have had.
Tier 1
Dual with complementary [irrational] subtypes (WCS)
Activity (WCS)
Mirror (WCS)
Identity (WCS)
These are relationships that stand the test of time and feel like "home" in various ways--peace, invigoration, mutual support, and mentorship, respectively.
Tier 2A
People from my quadra, Beta, but with rational subtypes
These relationships seem promising at first but lack real glue--they are a bit more contentious. They don't seem to involve as much learning as the relationships that I have found equally important in Tier 2B.
Tier 2B
INTj-Ne (semidual)
ENTp-Ne (I'm beneficiary)
ESFp-Se (I'm benefactor)
INTp-Ni (I'm supervisor)
ISFp-Si (I'm supervisee)
Tier 3
Non-Beta EJ temperaments with irrational subtype, in this order:
ENTj, ESTj, ESFj
Tier 4
All types with irrational subtype not previously mentioned.
Tier 5
Everything else.
On Tiers 4 and 5, getting along increasingly comes down to individual, not-so-type-driven similarities and differences, as well as the social roles defining interaction.
- - - - -
So that puts all Betas with rational subtypes in fifth place, I suppose.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
For closeness and psychological compatibility
1.Dual
2.Activator
3.Identical
4.Mirror
5.Semi-Dual
6.Illusion
7.Beneficiary
8.Benefactor
9.Supervisee
10.Lookalike
11.Kindred
12.Supervisor
13.Contrary
14.Quasi-Identical
15.Super-Ego
16.Conflictor
Really, 5-12 are relatively close.
I had a theory that EP-IP energy exchange was the best (for an INFp I mean), along with EJ-IJ for an EJ or IJ type. So the relationship energy was classified in order of IP-EP energy exchange being the best for INFps, and then IP-IP, then IP-IJ and then IP-EJ.
You don't get along with your Mirror as well as you do your Semi-Dual. You just don't.
Quadra relationships aren't based on your emotional compatibility with somebody, but what works best for the objective world...
I mean in gamma quadra you have entjs and isfjs which I don't get along with that well much at all on a personal level, and then you have intps which I get along with okay. (it's like medium good) and then ESFps which I get along with great. An ESFp gets along with an ENTj better than me but it's still not likely to work out so much.
I guess the main point I'm making is it kinda depends on how much you want to view socionics as 'society based' and how much you want to use it to find your romantic partner... or people you just really mesh well with. I think getting a job is important but it's not the be end of life, if you don't find people you are magically excited about that's just sad, no matter how much money you make. =/
My (constantly morphing and varying) take on it is roughly as follows:
1. Duality, same subtypes
2. Duality, different subtypes
3. Activity, same subtypes
4. Activity, different
5. Identical, same
6. Identical, different
7. Mirror, same
8. Mirror, different
9. Semi-dual, accepting / Illusory, creative
10. Comparative, accepting / Business, creative
11 - 525. I don't have the patience for this
1 & 2. Dual & activator. Maybe I don't have enough experience with duality but ime there have been enough cons in duality to say that it's not as great as it seems. Of course it could have been a number of factors. I have an LSI sister and boyfriend. I think growing up with her helped me get used to the drawbacks of the type. I know that when they withdraw and act kind of cold it's not personal.
3. Semi-dual.
4. Mirror.
5. Identity.
@Braingel
taking your SEI. that LIE can be ILE or LII
if it's LIE then conflictors can be perceived positively in surface interactions and have mutual interest. revisors are separated and it's felt in them, a border from their side. it's doubtful to think people with this IR among best in the experience
I have revising type for you, as an example. hehe
Please listen carefully: ITR is not a cookie cutter. If it was, you would not see duals divorce, you would not see supervisors marry, or the liking. As you can see from my interactions back at you, I value Se way too much to be of an SEI, and you still will have seen that LIE-Ni supervising my Te, indicative of it being PolR. You would have seen if read carefully, he is a Te ego, as would you have seen I am that of Ni.
You cannot just type someone solely by ITR by itself, though, it can indeed be helpful as a complementary means. I do not expect you to listen me, given I perceive you as the rigid, narrow-minded person who just thinks always, they are right. So.. I should not have even bothered.. Moe Te PolR, wasting my own time.
I am in my head; not society.
Yes, that is who I am, hence the bold am. Also, a brain angel. (+ my own incarnation of a Zelda concept).
My thoughts align w action to succeed what needs (at least in my dreamed ideal, they do)…
Dragons:
Babies, click them to make them grow up into Kara’s Dragon Museum
My favorite adult Museum Exhibits
And by the way, you do not even pay attention to what you write. You meant IEI, but put SEI instead. That is how conceited you are; thinking you are right and can make no mistake. I admittedly do not often read through my own things and make typo, however, I do not have the other piecing patterns as do you, showing you as conceited, arrogant, hubristic individual.
Do not talk to me anymore. I don't have any respect for someone who acts like they can tell others who and what they are (without a care to even see them for how really, they are), even though I know that the behavior is bred in early childhood, with pressure from parents, or adults around them conditioning in that way, I do have sympathy for it, but I am not going to fuel that ego.
Get off the high horse and face a fall. It may hurt, but will set you free far sooner and give you liberation of the pain you so desperately avoid of.
Your ego will only allow you to see me as mean and cruel, the construct adults bred into you in childhood. But you need a slap to reality and to focus on it, because you are separated from it with your own mind and living in your mind as if it is reality.
I am in my head; not society.
Yes, that is who I am, hence the bold am. Also, a brain angel. (+ my own incarnation of a Zelda concept).
My thoughts align w action to succeed what needs (at least in my dreamed ideal, they do)…
Dragons:
Babies, click them to make them grow up into Kara’s Dragon Museum
My favorite adult Museum Exhibits
5th place: Semi-Duality
also, lol at Maritsa putting Conflictors at the 3rd best place for relationship. She probably just provocating to get attention.
Semi-Duals although from the looks of it I'd describe it as the 11th worst rather than the 5th best. (Talking strictly of long-term serious relationships)
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
when you stop and think about it, this is a dumb question. because by the time you get down to FIFTH best types, too many other factors trump type, imo. like enneagram and instinct stacking and background and values and religion and even age and proximity.
IEI-Fe 4w3
ILE
7w8 so/sp
Very busy with work. Only kind of around.
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Is it a dumb question? The answer has turned out to be subjective but so far I've found it to be interesting learning what different people think.
Ok, let me rephrase. It seems pretty arbitrary to ask what the fifth best relationship is. Additionally, it automatically assumes that intraquadra relationships are the best, which I find to be presumptuous.
Essentially I think it would have made more sense to discuss which relationships people seem to value or enjoy most rather than to specifically ask about the fifth one.
As an example, I prefer the company of my Semi-Dual over Activity and find my Supervisee to be more entertaining company than my Mirror. Additionally, I generally find perceivers to be better company than rationals. I think if I were to rank them in order, I would probably end up putting my Mirror in 5th place. However, I don't think that is necessarily reflective of best or worst relationships (how can you make a universal qualitative assessment like that?), that's simply my preference.
If I simply answered the question in the title, my answer would be pretty meaningless because who cares what the fifth best relationship is? It becomes especially ridiculous for someone like me to answer because your answer would not end up being "Which relationship do you think is the best outside of your quadra?" but rather "Which relationship do you rank number 5?"
SUMMARY: I think this thread should have asked which relationship you value most outside of your quadra, to which I would have answered "My Semi-Dual"
ILE
7w8 so/sp
Very busy with work. Only kind of around.