Quasi-Identical Relations: Stories and Experiences

[silke]

What do you guys think? Stratievskaya
Please link the article I can't seem to find it.

How do they compare with the pessimistic gulenko, who believes that they are a bit terrible since supposedly its difficult to understand each other?

She has never made blog posts on quasi-identical, contrary, benefit, and supervision relations. I have no idea whether she ever plans to write about these. She hasn't updated her blog since '11. If she ever does, I would assume that her take would be even more pessimistic than Gulenko's. I've translated some posts from Russian socionics forums written by people who have been in quasi relations. You can see them here and judge for yourself: http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...ical_relations

ie:
INTj: find INTp Ni difficult to decode when they try to work out the objective basis of their ideas.
INTp: find INTj Ti difficult to decode when they try to work out the objective basis of their logic.

I think this topic might have been touched on but what do you forum veterans of the overall diverging views between socionists on this topic? Any new analysis you garnered up from this article? http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ical-Relations

The general take is that quasis have an exceptionally difficult time influencing each other's reasoning and addressing each other's arguments in a way that is meaningful to the other person. A lot of this has already been addressed in this thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-Relationships