IEI/INFp and EII/INFj: love or money

[Topaz]

My INFP sister is married to an ESTJ

Do you mean your INFp sister is currently married to an ESTj?

Yeah, theyve been married for about 22 years They dont believe in divorce, though my sister has threatened to leave him several times. I actually like my brother-in-law. He has some good qualities. I never thought he was a good match for my sister though. They got married long before I was old enough to be taken serious by anyone so thats that.

[Joy]

not to be rude... but I hope they don't have children

It drives me crazy to hear about people who spend their whole adult lives miserable because they can't say "Oops. I made a mistake. We're not good for eachother."

[FDG]

My INFP sister is married to an ESTJ and he drives her crazy with his conservation of money, electricity, time... everything. When I say conservation I mean he is TIGHT even by my (tightwad) standards.

an estp would only care that her pussy is tight.


ooook.

[xiuxiu]

not to be rude... but I hope they don't have children

It drives me crazy to hear about people who spend their whole adult lives miserable because they can't say "Oops. I made a mistake. We're not good for eachother."

says the resident baby factory

[xiuxiu]

My INFP sister is married to an ESTJ and he drives her crazy with his conservation of money, electricity, time... everything. When I say conservation I mean he is TIGHT even by my (tightwad) standards.

an estp would only care that her pussy is tight.


ooook.

are you having more fun with your new type, or are you having more fun playing into your new type?

[FDG]

it's not a "new" type, it has never changed, i only got it wrong before.

[Joy]

not to be rude... but I hope they don't have children

It drives me crazy to hear about people who spend their whole adult lives miserable because they can't say "Oops. I made a mistake. We're not good for eachother."

says the resident baby factory

how many children do I have?

[xiuxiu]

i don't know or care

[XoX]

so fix it

I'm working on it Just that those kind of statistics make me think I should be working on it a bit MORE than I currently am Perhaps my natural level of "working on it" is just not good enough

[Creepy-aurora_faerie]

NO WTF KIND OF POST IS THIS

[Creepy-aurora_faerie]

im not THAT bad with money, granted i am lazy and like to spend it


but im not THAT bad


if i married for money, id be depressed constantly.

why are infj's so much better than infp's around here?

[Creepy-aurora_faerie]

grr

[snegledmaca]

im not THAT bad with money, granted i am lazy and like to spend it


but im not THAT bad


if i married for money, id be depressed constantly.

Personally I'm not bad with money at all. Quite the contrary.

why are infj's so much better than infp's around here?

Actually, they're not. I think the problem is in that INFp-s are misunderstood BADLY.

People seem to have a lot of misconception regarding irrational types I've noticed. Could be a reflection of their irrationality

[FDG]

I'm good at making money (in comparison to other people of my age), but just as good as spending it(still in comparison), actually

[Creepy-aurora_faerie]

why are infj's so much better than infp's around here?

Actually, they're not. I think the problem is in that INFp-s are misunderstood BADLY.

People seem to have a lot of misconception regarding irrational types I've noticed. Could be a reflection of their irrationality

lol *nods*

[Wavebury]

im not THAT bad with money, granted i am lazy and like to spend it


but im not THAT bad


if i married for money, id be depressed constantly.

why are infj's so much better than infp's around here?

Its because some people have inferiority comlexes and need to make threads saying their type is better.

[dreamer]

why are infj's so much better than infp's around here?

Not better, just difference.

[Expat]

I think INFj’s just seem to act a little more mature, while INFp’s act a little more childish by nature.

If anything, it would be a combination of the difference between the IJ and IP temperaments and the Serious/Merry dichotomies.

[lapa83]

Whose ass was this pulled out of?

I mean for heaven's sake of course any IEI can see the long term deterioration effect poverty can have on a marriage, and will analyse it in a detached manner when looking for a partner, as opposed to the Fi creative EII who is too Fi valuing to judge life this way at all.
But how in the world does this mean we're gold diggers? There are far too many factors other than poverty that make a marriage, and I'd live in a shack with a man I loved, and with whom I believed I could overcome any struggle (including poverty). Or even endure without overcoming. Yes I do believe IEI will be less romantic than EII when choosing a partner, but almost everything is considered, not money alone.

Also, everything being considered doesn't mean every factor is given the same value. So even if money is considered, doesn't mean it's equally important as personality for example, value compatibility, flaws and virtues of the person... And none of those are remotely as valued as love, intimacy and connection to the person.

We're Se semi-cripples, since when are we being stereotyped as materialistic cunts?

[Persephone]

Whose ass was this pulled out of?

I mean for heaven's sake of course any IEI can see the long term deterioration effect poverty can have on a marriage, and will analyse it in a detached manner when looking for a partner, as opposed to the Fi creative EII who is too Fi valuing to judge life this way at all.
But how in the world does this mean we're gold diggers? There are far too many factors other than poverty that make a marriage, and I'd live in a shack with a man I loved, and with whom I believed I could overcome any struggle (including poverty). Or even endure without overcoming. Yes I do believe IEI will be less romantic than EII when choosing a partner, but almost everything is considered, not money alone.

Also, everything being considered doesn't mean every factor is given the same value. So even if money is considered, doesn't mean it's equally important as personality for example, value compatibility, flaws and virtues of the person... And none of those are remotely as valued as love, intimacy and connection to the person.

We're Se semi-cripples, since when are we being stereotyped as materialistic cunts?

Now, embrace your darkness.

[Skepsis]

Whose ass was this pulled out of?

I mean for heaven's sake of course any IEI can see the long term deterioration effect poverty can have on a marriage, and will analyse it in a detached manner when looking for a partner, as opposed to the Fi creative EII who is too Fi valuing to judge life this way at all.
But how in the world does this mean we're gold diggers? There are far too many factors other than poverty that make a marriage, and I'd live in a shack with a man I loved, and with whom I believed I could overcome any struggle (including poverty). Or even endure without overcoming. Yes I do believe IEI will be less romantic than EII when choosing a partner, but almost everything is considered, not money alone.

Also, everything being considered doesn't mean every factor is given the same value. So even if money is considered, doesn't mean it's equally important as personality for example, value compatibility, flaws and virtues of the person... And none of those are remotely as valued as love, intimacy and connection to the person.

We're Se semi-cripples, since when are we being stereotyped as materialistic cunts?

One of the thing I enjoy about socionics is the weak traits being incorporated with the strong ones with each of the type descriptions. Each type has a stereotype that can rightly be objected to, but with sterotypes, there is always some sort of truth. I think it is important to try an understand the core truth of the stereotype and see where it diverges from that truth. So, with the gold digger stereotype, I ask: What is it about the cognitive functions that may lead to choices that may reinforce a stereotype?

Since Ni doms seek Se, there is this sort of love/hate relationship with materialism. Most of the time ILI/IEIs are quite oblivious to the world around them, material comforts, etc, but it is not because they despise them in an absolute sense; it is because they just are not as important as their perceptions of the world. Sometimes, they get tired of their monochromatic Ni life and need Se to spice things up a bit to achieve a feeling of balance. But, since an IEI doesn't have a strong will to attain the power and status, or even the spontaneity, it seeks on its own, it would rather that it be supplied by someone else. How the IEI and ILI differ is that the ILI has Te and that makes them concerned to a greater extent than IEIs with being productive, making their own money, seeking credentials. It gives them a slight advantage over IEI when it comes satisfying their Se desires.

But Te isn't exactly focused on attracting a mate, while Fe is naturally good at that. So, the IEI, by using Fe brings Se to themselves. ILIs struggle with this. With this in mind, it makes sense to a large extent that if one highly values their intuition over pursuing status, wealth, etc. that they would like to be financially taken care of so they can invest in their creative endeavors. This doesn't mean that they highly value money in and of itself, but that they're willing to use it to buy themselves the Time needed to pursue these interests. These interests aren't likely to be realized if trapped working in a job that continuously demands time they don't want to give up.

When it comes to the stereotype, what is over emphasized is that it is the IEI seeks money and not love, which you're right [lapa83], contradicts the fact that IEI values immaterialism over materialism. It's not that the IEI is in fact digging for gold, but that there is a perception that that is what they are doing. Also, as a judging, ethical function, Fe isn't going to reject a relationship that is enjoyable because the person is wealthy, as that goes against the positive atmosphere Fe is known for projecting. I also don't think they would reject a relationship solely by them being poor for the same reasons.

Now comparing the EII with IEI, the EII has a love/hate with Te, not Se. First of all, EII start out viewing the world with a judging function that looks for ethical order/consistency around them. In order to attain that level of consistency, the EII must turn away from Te because in order to maintain a consistency of relations, they must place relationships above any system. I think that an EII is going to be more critical of a partner who is status seeking because a person that is seeking status is not as interested in rigid ethical codes to begin with, which is the EII's world. So, they may be more likely to reject someone who is wealthy and status seeking, while an IEI wouldn't feel the need to reject someone for these same reasons. The IEI wouldn't mind as long as their need for flexibility in relations are met.

The IEI stereotypes seem to be coming from Fi/Te valuers.

These are my conjectures.

[wacey]

^ Say whaaat?

[powerrainbowcrystal]

well a person i date has to at least come from similar background as me. growing up in church I knew what the 'poor smell' is like and tbh it's hard not to feel superior to that in some way. I guess it's easy to look at how other people are being stuck up Oprahs and chastise them for their snobbery and marrying a guy just for his money - BUT HOW DO YOU FIGHT THE OPRAH INSIDE YOURSELF? HUH!

i realize before anybody criticizes me that yeah im posting on a thread that's from the year 2006. oh well. good conversations are timeless.

[Beautiful sky]

IEI are much more oriented towards financial gain or position than I am this is because of their orientation to sensate qualities and realistic expectations whereas I am more idealistic and about comfortable life style, trust, transperancy and sharing to grow together rather than expecting the worst situation for myself in the future...which if it happens anf it has i trust in the Lord to free myself of my body's needs and feed my soul and survive the best I can. I'm more infantile...I scare of big ventures and risk than IEI like a simple scary dream about New York will stop me from going there. I like routine and familiarity. I am also much more about relationships warmth and people oriented...like managing my relations. I think IEI are a bit more for themselves.

[Skepsis]

People from opposing quadras are actually more easily recognized, and thus typed, because from our own perspective their stereotypes is what makes them stand out in the first place, and it's also because behavioral aspects related to these stereotypes are experienced as threatening to ourselves:

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...ing-duals.html

My personal Delta based opinion on Betas in general: I'm inclined to stay away from them, because in general they take a lot more than they give back.

Now, as a Gamma, I agee with that to some extent, but I see Deltas as giving more than they should. Unfortunately, I'm not very giving, but like things to be 50/50 and will reciprocate generosity, but rarely initiate it.

[Fragment]

These responses seem to imply that Se is fundamentally about money and material possessions, when it is more along the lines of sensing the here and now without internal disruption. One manifestation of this is that Se-seekers may be more inclined to materialistic desires, but that's one interpretation.

An Se-seeker may be after only "rudimentary Se," that is: basal sensate pleasures. It may be only towards having good food, good sex, and good/efficient possessions. Gold digging/leeching is a very extremized version of these basal desires. Also, with Fi at a demonstrative function, and Ti as an activating function, it is likely that many IEIs have difficulty with the concept of being dependent and taken care of, from an ethical/logical integration.

In addition, Se-Seeking doesn't imply the desire for inundation; there's still a lower threshold.

I don't know this woman's type, nor do I claim her to be any enna/whatever, but this is something that may be seen as "beautiful/desireable" for an Se seeker:

very basal and about mindfulness (e.g. turning the internal cogs off enough to absorb the beauty of simple pleasures.)

[wacey]

These responses seem to imply that Se is fundamentally about money and material possessions, when it is more along the lines of sensing the here and now without internal disruption. One manifestation of this is that Se-seekers may be more inclined to materialistic desires, but that's one interpretation.

An Se-seeker may be after only "rudimentary Se," that is: basal sensate pleasures. It may be only towards having good food, good sex, and good/efficient possessions. Gold digging/leeching is a very extremized version of these basal desires. Also, with Fi at a demonstrative function, and Ti as an activating function, it is likely that many IEIs have difficulty with the concept of being dependent and taken care of, from an ethical/logical integration.

In addition, Se-Seeking doesn't imply the desire for inundation; there's still a lower threshold.

I don't know this woman's type, nor do I claim her to be any enna/whatever, but this is something that may be seen as "beautiful/desireable" for an Se seeker:

very basal and about mindfulness (e.g. turning the internal cogs off enough to absorb the beauty of simple pleasures.)

Some of this is in essence quite true I believe. IEI are have complex and individualized motivations regarding money, although I would say it has something to do with virility and immediacy and less to do with basal sensate pleasures.

The quoted examples and justification of Se-seeking seems very little to do with Se and much more to do with Si. Introverted sensing, from my understanding, is "very basal and about mindfulness". The women swirling the glass and teaching the viewer about mindfullness might also be said to be teaching about introverted sensing.

[Beautiful sky]

One of the thing I enjoy about socionics is the weak traits being incorporated with the strong ones with each of the type descriptions. Each type has a stereotype that can rightly be objected to, but with sterotypes, there is always some sort of truth. I think it is important to try an understand the core truth of the stereotype and see where it diverges from that truth. So, with the gold digger stereotype, I ask: What is it about the cognitive functions that may lead to choices that may reinforce a stereotype?

Since Ni doms seek Se, there is this sort of love/hate relationship with materialism. Most of the time ILI/IEIs are quite oblivious to the world around them, material comforts, etc, but it is not because they despise them in an absolute sense; it is because they just are not as important as their perceptions of the world. Sometimes, they get tired of their monochromatic Ni life and need Se to spice things up a bit to achieve a feeling of balance. But, since an IEI doesn't have a strong will to attain the power and status, or even the spontaneity, it seeks on its own, it would rather that it be supplied by someone else. How the IEI and ILI differ is that the ILI has Te and that makes them concerned to a greater extent than IEIs with being productive, making their own money, seeking credentials. It gives them a slight advantage over IEI when it comes satisfying their Se desires.

But Te isn't exactly focused on attracting a mate, while Fe is naturally good at that. So, the IEI, by using Fe brings Se to themselves. ILIs struggle with this. With this in mind, it makes sense to a large extent that if one highly values their intuition over pursuing status, wealth, etc. that they would like to be financially taken care of so they can invest in their creative endeavors. This doesn't mean that they highly value money in and of itself, but that they're willing to use it to buy themselves the Time needed to pursue these interests. These interests aren't likely to be realized if trapped working in a job that continuously demands time they don't want to give up.

When it comes to the stereotype, what is over emphasized is that it is the IEI seeks money and not love, which you're right [lapa83], contradicts the fact that IEI values immaterialism over materialism. It's not that the IEI is in fact digging for gold, but that there is a perception that that is what they are doing. Also, as a judging, ethical function, Fe isn't going to reject a relationship that is enjoyable because the person is wealthy, as that goes against the positive atmosphere Fe is known for projecting. I also don't think they would reject a relationship solely by them being poor for the same reasons.

Now comparing the EII with IEI, the EII has a love/hate with Te, not Se. First of all, EII start out viewing the world with a judging function that looks for ethical order/consistency around them. In order to attain that level of consistency, the EII must turn away from Te because in order to maintain a consistency of relations, they must place relationships above any system. I think that an EII is going to be more critical of a partner who is status seeking because a person that is seeking status is not as interested in rigid ethical codes to begin with, which is the EII's world. So, they may be more likely to reject someone who is wealthy and status seeking, while an IEI wouldn't feel the need to reject someone for these same reasons. The IEI wouldn't mind as long as their need for flexibility in relations are met.

The IEI stereotypes seem to be coming from Fi/Te valuers.

These are my conjectures.

Yes, I have made several rejections in a partner who is about status and wealth who are quite rich. I seek a passionate connection full of mutual concessions and teamwork, ethical values and moral values to align.

[Fragment]

Some of this is in essence quite true I believe. IEI are have complex and individualized motivations regarding money, although I would say it has something to do with virility and immediacy and less to do with basal sensate pleasures.

The quoted examples and justification of Se-seeking seems very little to do with Se and much more to do with Si. Introverted sensing, from my understanding, is "very basal and about mindfulness". The women swirling the glass and teaching the viewer about mindfullness might also be said to be teaching about introverted sensing.

Ugh, I keep confusing this with MBTI, which states that Se is more in the moment. I think the lack of processing the data/stimuli is still related. IMO, she isn't really internalizing much. FWIW, she's like an ISFj, But it can go either way (Se/Si) depending upon how its appraised.

[Ver]

Hm, I find this thread interesting because I had totally different point of view. I've always thought the reason I'm not so much into money is that I naturally attract men who are really good at earning, saving, being responsible.
Actually, I don't think I will be attracted to someone who isn't responsible. I'm not saying about being wealthy but being responsible in that matters is sth I find attractive. I guess I will never marry someone for money but I like responsible men and they are likely to be good with money.
To sum it up - I guess I'm subconsciously drawn to men who - if not rich, wealthy - show a sense of possibility that they will be well-off int he future. I don't think I will be attracted to someone who is homeless and has no ambition to change it.
Also, it depends on my state as well. If I had nothing to eat and had no perspective of finding a job and marrying someone would be the only possibility to survive I guess I would do that. But not to have more money to travel/ buy things/ have bigger house.
My ISTj aunt very often talks about the money,how she needs it, how she feels she should have more, she complains about the society, politics, about the state etc.
I never do that but whenever I try to show her good sides and that there are many possibilities she just wouldn't listen.
Conflictor thing probably.

Hm, the whole world is about the money. Being into money has different faces. It's too simplified to say one type is more into money that another. The question should be more WHY this type is/isn't into money and WHAT their life situation is.

[Words]

Hm, I find this thread interesting because I had totally different point of view. I've always thought the reason I'm not so much into money is that I naturally attract men who are really good at earning, saving, being responsible.
Actually, I don't think I will be attracted to someone who isn't responsible. I'm not saying about being wealthy but being responsible in that matters is sth I find attractive. I guess I will never marry someone for money but I like responsible men and they are likely to be good with money.
To sum it up - I guess I'm subconsciously drawn to men who - if not rich, wealthy - show a sense of possibility that they will be well-off int he future. I don't think I will be attracted to someone who is homeless and has no ambition to change it.
Also, it depends on my state as well. If I had nothing to eat and had no perspective of finding a job and marrying someone would be the only possibility to survive I guess I would do that. But not to have more money to travel/ buy things/ have bigger house.
My ISTj aunt very often talks about the money,how she needs it, how she feels she should have more, she complains about the society, politics, about the state etc.
I never do that but whenever I try to show her good sides and that there are many possibilities she just wouldn't listen.
Conflictor thing probably.

Hm, the whole world is about the money. Being into money has different faces. It's too simplified to say one type is more into money that another. The question should be more WHY this type is/isn't into money and WHAT their life situation is.

Money brings independence so it's important as a way to achieve independence.

There are other ways like living in a shack which can also work eg plenty people around the world get buy on 2 dollars a day and they are perfectly happy, like rural thailand for instance

[Fragment]

No. At it's core, the social character of Se is about self-assertion and in it's more pathological manifestations, entitlement:

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...-elements.html

That being said, in some way feeling entitled to 'take' other peoples money and material possessions, in whatever legal or illegal way, is an important part of the Beta character. It does not always have to be 'take' literally, it cab also be in a way of e.g. putting as little effort into work as possible, and still take all the money.

No. At it's core, the social character of Se is about self-assertion and in it's more pathological manifestations

Correct, as another member called out.

That being said, in some way feeling entitled to 'take' other peoples money and material possessions, in whatever legal or illegal way, is an important part of the Beta character. It does not always have to be 'take' literally, it cab also be in a way of e.g. putting as little effort into work as possible, and still take all the money.

And this would be dependent on the individual's moral base, not the quadra. This doesn't seem type related. It has to do with feelings of entitlement that can arise from any function stacking.

[wacey]

Warning, slight derail.

Ugh, I keep confusing this with MBTI, which states that Se is more in the moment. I think the lack of processing the data/stimuli is still related. IMO, she isn't really internalizing much. FWIW, she's like an ISFj, But it can go either way (Se/Si) depending upon how its appraised.

An ethical introvert? Maria strikes me as a logical base for some reason.

Here she is in interaction with James Franco, whom some people type as ESI. They don't strike me as being identicals, but there is some resonance between the two of them so I am curious about the intertype relationship they may share.

Semi-duals?

[Beautiful sky]

Would somebody please translate this into a more palatable form? In any case whatever IEI is, as described here I would NEVER do...

So, for example, coming to a new family of the previous one, a young man (IEI) took with him one of the entrained from the former home of "trophies" - a set of expensive imported soap. When he was presented a gift to his new friend, fell out of an opened box remnant (a piece before been used soap), neatly attached to his old wrapper to create the appearance of novelty and the integrity of the gift. If, in addition to the gift did not come yet, and a bunch of flowers, impressed the young man would immediately and irreparably flawed. Seeing the remnant, which fell directly under his feet, he was pretty embarrassed, explained that this sister, apparently, in his absence, took advantage of pre-prepared gift. Then it turned out that none of his family (including his sister and mom) This behavior is not peculiar. Apparently, when he - that took advantage of this piece, and then secretly planted it in a box and "disguised" traces of previous use.

[Beautiful sky]

it's gifting something used? LOL

[Olly From Wally World]

Sounds about right, I'll marry anyone, even a male, if I don't have to work at Walmart and can live off their money. Bring on the Benjamins!

Any takers?