Social inclusiveness - Delta or Fe?

[Park]

I'd be surprised if a group of Deltas that I have never met before would actually initiate a conversation with me (if the situation doesn't require it).

It's more about accepting you inside a circle and openly sharing information before getting to know you than about initiating conversations.

are there examples or more specifics to the OP?

I was on a sort of semi-professional trip, bonding and spending quality time with someone I like. A mutual acquaintance arrived later with a friend (profession call) and unintentionally invaded our private space by imposing his ideas about what would be good to do as a group in our spare time and constantly "entertaining" us with his jokes and stories, regardless of whether we want that or not. My friend (not exactly, but let's call him that for simplicity's sake) had no problem accepting this guy's initiative and delegating equal attention to everyone in the group, while I, on the other hand almost hated the fact I had to tag along and listen to stupid stories (meant to keep our spirits/moods up or whatever) and not being able to have more intimate discussions and less restrained interaction with my friend one-on-one, which is always far more satisfying than shallowly socializing on a larger scale. To make things worse, two other not-so-close acquaintances joined our group later (just like, for no reason at all) and contributed to making the rest of our stay as stifled and superficial as possible. Anyways, the act of "letting whoever barge in and impose their presence on a relation/interaction already developed or in progress" is what bugs me, personally.

There have been other situations bringing up this issue, and I'll write another example if I can think of one, but the main theme behind it all is that there's group A that derives satisfaction in exploring relationship potential with individuals and find value in confined and intimate interactions, and there's group B who either don't care or put secondary importance to inter-personal bonding, focusing on social impact, influencing people, promoting image and/or status, or just being equally nice and accepting to everyone with a lesser or non-existent sense or need for discretion and intimacy. All things aside, the key point in all of this is how much one is accepting and inclusive of outsiders in their personal space and relationships, and whether this kind of inclusiveness is indicative of Fe as a valuing information element or to Te/Fi aristocracy. I have seen it being attributed to both, and while I know how I feel about it, I was wondering what others think.

[marooned]

My problem is that I read this and think of too many possibilities. I mean for one it's possible that while you valued this opportunity to spend more one-on-one time with your friend, he perceived/experienced the situation differently and was looking for or valued different things in the situation. For example, if one of his interests was to meet new people or feel like he was "getting out more" or something during the trip, then his behavior would probably reflect that.

I don't know if it's strongly related to different group styles or not.

[Park]

My problem is that I read this and think of too many possibilities. I mean for one it's possible that while you valued this opportunity to spend more one-on-one time with your friend, he perceived/experienced the situation differently and was looking for or valued different things in the situation. For example, if one of his interests was to meet new people or feel like he was "getting out more" or something during the trip, then his behavior would probably reflect that.

I don't know if it's strongly related to different group styles or not.

Yeah. I more or less understand his perspective situation-wise, partly because we talked about it. And even though talking about how I feel is as uncomfortable as it gets, I tend to have a counterphobic attitude towards being emotionally expressive with people I like and feel I can build trust with.

Interesting. So two different groups of Deltas could treat each others as ghosts if they don't know each other or don't know anyone that knows them?

I think they would be reserved and protective of information and stuff that's happening inside their respective group. They would be fair, honest and helpful in all other respects to everyone. However, inter-group communication would most likely tend to be guarded and businesslike, mostly as a sign of respect for everyone's privacy, autonomy, and personal space.

Or I could be projecting and talking about two different groups of Parks. You never know.

Its really hard for me to believe in Socionics. The reason I use quotes a lot is to display the meaning of, so when I say "ENFj", I mean the meaning of but not the reality of. And the ideas of quadras are very easy to me, but I actually dislike the idea of them in practice, because they really begin this turf war animalistic nature in us. That is so dividing to me. Bleh :[

It's not what it's supposed to be, but that's exactly what Socioncs boils down to - a belief system.

[anndelise]

I think they would be reserved and protective of information and stuff that's happening inside their respective group. They would be fair, honest and helpful in all other respects to everyone. However, inter-group communication would most likely tend to be guarded and businesslike, mostly as a sign of respect for everyone's privacy, autonomy, and personal space.

This description feels right to me.

I think the initial "feeling out a person" can seem from an outsider's perspective to be "guarded and businesslike". Until some kind of mutual connection is found, and that gets felt out to see how deep the connection might go, etc. Learning what is safe to talk about or do, and what to avoid.

Your story resonanted with some of my experiences.
But I also have to admit that I might have a desire to invite someone to join a 2 person group if the 3rd person seems lonely or isolated. For example, before Richard came into my life, and while my daughter was quite young, my brother and I would eat Thanksgiving dinner at a restaurant. We would often see older people eating their Thanksgiving dinner by themselves while looking around at the other families. In those cases, we would invite one to join us, or ask if they would like some company. But as my daughter got older, and Richard was now with us, the group was already too large (4) to really discuss anything everyone might enjoy discussing or hearing. Once a group reaches 4, I withdraw, becoming socally introverted.

In the story you described, I would likely have felt overwhelmed, even dizzy with all the talking and activity. In such cases I've tended to excuse myself and leave the group. Or, when Richard's there, we sit a bit off to ourselves and just listen in to other convers, and commenting just to each other.

[Inguz]

It's more about accepting you inside a circle and openly sharing information before getting to know you than about initiating conversations.

Interesting. So two different groups of Deltas could treat each others as ghosts if they don't know each other or don't know anyone that knows them?

[Kim]

Interesting. So two different groups of Deltas could treat each others as ghosts if they don't know each other or don't know anyone that knows them?

Yes, I would say most definitely. And I at least would be more likely to get to know the other group through somehow bonding with one member rather than through two groups colliding.

[Inguz]

Yes, I would say most definitely. And I at least would be more likely to get to know the other group through somehow bonding with one member rather than through two groups colliding.

Alright, so the need to be introduced by someone else actually is a very real thing? Anyway Gamma and Beta seems to be the opposite of you guys. Gammas introduce themselves to people on their own initiative and Betas actively invite others to participate in group activities. To me that is social inclusion.

The way I perceive it, newcomers can actually invite themselves to become accepted in a Beta group. This is because Beta groups often come together around some kind of activity where participation is voluntary and gives outsiders an opportunity to both join in and to be accepted.

[Kim]

There have been other situations bringing up this issue, and I'll write another example if I can think of one, but the main theme behind it all is that there's group A that derives satisfaction in exploring relationship potential with individuals and find value in confined and intimate interactions, and there's group B who either don't care or put secondary importance to inter-personal bonding, focusing on social impact, influencing people, promoting image and/or status, or just being equally nice and accepting to everyone with a lesser or non-existent sense or need for discretion and intimacy.

That sounds to me like Fi vs. Fe although I wouldn't say that Fe peeps don't find value in intimate interactions. They are just more likely to put them on the backburner for the benefit of the group.

In this particular scenario, I would value the more intimate setting with a selected few in the spirit of bonding as individuals (Fi), personally and possibly professionally, and wouldn't feel as interested in inserting myself into a larger group context or determine/establish my position in the professional setting. However, if I had been in your place, I would have probably felt less uncomfortable with the changing group dynamics (since I am more comfortable with Fe); but, like you, wouldn't have valued them and would have felt I am missing out on individual bonding time. I have been in situations where such changes in group dynamics almost felt like a violation of my space, but in professional settings I can sort of go with the flow (even if it is slightly frustrating). So I think this is a delta reaction on your part, exacerbated by Fe PoLR, obviously.

All things aside, the key point in all of this is how much one is accepting and inclusive of outsiders in their personal space and relationships, and whether this kind of inclusiveness is indicative of Fe as a valuing information element or to Te/Fi aristocracy. I have seen it being attributed to both, and while I know how I feel about it, I was wondering what others think.

I think it is Fe, but I can see a gamma/delta type go out of his/her comfort zone if the professional setting calls for it. In my view, the Te/Fi aristocracy is built upon the individualized bonding you were seeking. The inclusion of outsiders over Fi-bonding, if this person is delta or gamma, might have been purely temporary and professionally motivated (sense of obligation, etc.).