Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 88

Thread: Reinin Dichotomies: Constructivist/Emotivist

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Reinin Dichotomies: Constructivist/Emotivist

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca
    CONSTRUCTIVISM - EMOTIVISM
    KONSTRUKTIVIZM - EMOTIVIZM

    Constructivists (Types with accepting ethics and producing logic):
    Konstruktivisty ("programmnye" etiki i "tvorcheskiye" logiki):

    1. When contacting with other people they try to reduce or completely avoid the stage of emotional contact (To "skip" it). They do not consider emotional attitude as a necessary element of interaction (In communication, conjoined actions, undertakings, they do things without emotionally "adjusting" to the circumstances)
    2. For the constructivist emotional "anchors" are important (Connected to a certain place, a book, a film and so on) which resonate with their internal emotional conditions. With their help they keep or strengthen their internal emotional state. They are inclined to re-reed a book or to visit the same place again just to go through the emotions connected with that place.
    3. They can get "emotionally hooked", they can feel strong experience regardless of whether they like the overall moment (For example, they hate the film but love a scene from it that always makes them laugh, or cry and so on)
    4. They with greater difficulty disassociate themselves from others emotions, experiences then with requests to do or consider something.

    Emotivists (Types with accepting logic and producing ethics):
    Emotivisty ("programmnye" logiki i "tvorcheskiye" etiki):

    1. While interacting with other people they try to get them into the "correct" emotional state (One which they can be "in sync" with). In interaction they are very much "in the spirit" of the interaction (For them conversation are means to "immerse themselves" in the atmosphere). While discussing business they have a tendency to "wander off" and "go off" on an emotional exchange.
    2. Emotivists will rather go for a new impression, experience then return to something already passed, lived. They will re-read a book or revisit the same place frequently only in hope of finding something overlooked or new.
    3. Information (For example, a book, a film, a work of art, construction) perceived as unprofessional, "low quality", does not move the emotivist emotionally, it leaves them cold.
    4. With greater difficulty do they separate themselves form others requests then form others emotions or experiences.

    Hypothesis

    Constructivists less critically accept emotions and as a result can get overwhelmed by them. After achieving an emotional state, constructivists stay in it for a prolonged period of time. They have difficulty switching, "disconnecting" from that state and because of that they try to avoid unacceptable or unpleasant emotions. In emotivists a calls for action/requests are not critically estimated and because of it they can get overwhelmed by them. After getting into a theme they stay in that mode of operation for a prolonged period of time and have difficulty switching, "disconnecting" (And because of it try to avoid unpleasant requests).

    Examples

    Constructivists:
    "I try to reduce emotional contact. I always start with a set of automatic responses (Give slippers, pour some tea, coffee...)" "If somebody has come for a shoulder to cry on I know what to do" "it is so much easier to do "business" style interactions (Interaction by pertaining to the matter at hand)" "I prefer when people offer me concrete solutions to my questions – not comfort or sympathy" "if I wish to help then I will certainly discuss the matter at hand. Very rarely will I be inquiring to find out just "how's it going?" "How's it going" become apparent as we discuss" "I listen to music depending on my mood" " I re-read books for several paragraphs... is that what it means to be "poorly written"?" "Whether or nor it disturbs me is what's important" "When I visit the same places I once visited it's as if I have returned home" "I try not to see movies that I know are emotionally burdening. By seeing it I'll become exactly what I don't want to (Enter an undesirable emotional mood)" "I can long for past experiences even with people I casually met" "The first time you see a comedy is to get a laugh or two, after that it's to relive the experience"

    Emotivist:
    "First of all, I attempt to create a comfortable psychological atmosphere. I try to help people "cope" with a new situation, help them "accommodate" so that they feel at ease." "I do my interaction with words, not actions" "If the emotional atmosphere of a conversation is negative I consider the conversation "wasted" (Unsuccessful)" "Before a dialogue I notice the emotional states of people involved and I try to keep or make their attitudes "positive"" "it's easier to change an emotional background" "I can talk about various things I have no interest in or do not believe in simply for the sake of maintaining a "positive spirit"" "I have a need for new experiences so I will more likely go somewhere where I've never been before. If I do return to a place I visited it's where change occurred since I last visited" "I don't watch bad movies and badly written books leave me cold" "I'll re-read a book - if I'd forgotten it" "If I'm asked to consider/do something what I'll most remember is the act of request itself"
    Constructivism: xxFjs and xxTps
    Emotivism: xxFps and xxTjs
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  2. #2
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is a very interesting dichotomy to me...

    I used to think that I was an ethical type because I am an emotivist. An example would be in dealing with a customer complaint... I believe that a person is physically incapable of hearing what you have to say until they have had their say... so I let them complain and I say something like, "That sounds really frustrating. Let's see what we can do to take care of this" or something similar that shows that I am validating their feelings... it's a means to an end, not genuine empathy. I do try to put myself in their situation, but it's only because it helps me figure out how to solve the problem. I sorta wanna deal with the emotional aspect of situations first because if you don't emotions can get in the way.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    122
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm definitely a Constructivist. I just realized as soon as seeing these labels
    ex-nameless ixtp
    *** Warning - Risk of poor communication and late response.

  4. #4
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    DO NOT just look at the labels!
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I absolutely cannot identify with emotivist. I am clearly a constructivist.

  6. #6
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I want to make it clear that I dislike dealing with other people's emotions. That's why I get it out of the way first... if I don't, I'll have to deal with their emotions every step of the way, and it'll prevent progress. It would be much more frustrating to deal with someone's protests on a matter halfway into it (especially when you didn't anticipate it) than to address their emotions upfront and get them behind you and your efforts.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  7. #7
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Emotivist.
    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...

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    122
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    DO NOT just look at the labels!
    Don't mind, I read not to misunderstand. But anyway this was quickest and easiest to decide.
    ex-nameless ixtp
    *** Warning - Risk of poor communication and late response.

  9. #9
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Many of the dichotomy labels are very misleading.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  10. #10
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Constructivist. Enuf said

  11. #11
    oyburger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    somewhere overthere
    Posts
    2,528
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I found it hard to identify with either of them, but if I had to chose, I'd say Constructivist.
    All Hail The Flying Spaghetti Monster

  12. #12
    JuJu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield, Massachusetts, USA
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    2,703
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Constuctivist

  13. #13
    implied's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    7,747
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    totally emotivist and the person i am dating is a heavy constructivist.
    6w5 sx
    model Φ: -+0
    sloan - rcuei

  14. #14
    Creepy-Diana

    Default

    .

  15. #15
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,814
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm an emotivist and my husband is a constructivist.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  16. #16
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is one is a bit ambiguous for me.

    I am an Emotivist from my understanding of the basics of the dichotomy and according to items 1,3 and 4.

    However, in item 2 there is a lot of Constructivist in me. I do re-read books or re-watch movies - or bits of them - also for the emotional connections. The same goes for re-visiting places.

    If I associate a particular place with a very strongly negative emotional experience, I will avoid it.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  17. #17
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    However, in item 2 there is a lot of Constructivist in me. I do re-read books or re-watch movies - or bits of them - also for the emotional connections. The same goes for re-visiting places.

    If I associate a particular place with a very strongly negative emotional experience, I will avoid it.
    Hmm...damn I didn't read this stuff well enough. Is that emotionalism? If I find something I like I re-re-re-re it quite a many times. Actually I'm often in search of something good enough to repeat. So many things suck that when you find something that doesn't it is better to repeat it to the death. Or something

  18. #18
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,615
    Mentioned
    235 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    However, in item 2 there is a lot of Constructivist in me. I do re-read books or re-watch movies - or bits of them - also for the emotional connections. The same goes for re-visiting places.

    If I associate a particular place with a very strongly negative emotional experience, I will avoid it.
    Hmm...damn I didn't read this stuff well enough. Is that emotionalism? If I find something I like I re-re-re-re it quite a many times. Actually I'm often in search of something good enough to repeat. So many things suck that when you find something that doesn't it is better to repeat it to the death. Or something
    I *think* that the best distinction for this dichotomy is that Emotion-creating are able to create a "good mood" which is the necessary background for conversating, whereas CC lack this ability and so when two CC engage in a like, date, it is not easy to build up a good atmosphere
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  19. #19
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Expat, that sounds like the same kind of nostalgic thinking I use, imo, to provide Fi for myself.

    FDG, I disagree, at least for myself. Mine is more like getting rid of potential problems and making the emotional atmosphere neutral. See the two posts I wrote on the first page of this thread.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  20. #20
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,615
    Mentioned
    235 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Mine is more like getting rid of potential problems and making the emotional atmosphere neutral..
    = good mood

    if it's not bad, then it's good
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  21. #21
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I prefer neutral... emotionally charged atmosphere are draining.
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  22. #22
    XoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,407
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    Quote Originally Posted by XoX
    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    However, in item 2 there is a lot of Constructivist in me. I do re-read books or re-watch movies - or bits of them - also for the emotional connections. The same goes for re-visiting places.

    If I associate a particular place with a very strongly negative emotional experience, I will avoid it.
    Hmm...damn I didn't read this stuff well enough. Is that emotionalism? If I find something I like I re-re-re-re it quite a many times. Actually I'm often in search of something good enough to repeat. So many things suck that when you find something that doesn't it is better to repeat it to the death. Or something
    I *think* that the best distinction for this dichotomy is that Emotion-creating are able to create a "good mood" which is the necessary background for conversating, whereas CC lack this ability and so when two CC engage in a like, date, it is not easy to build up a good atmosphere
    I don't know...I can build up a good atmosphrere if I want to but it is VERY draining and generally I can only make myself do it for a short time and then it drops. Thus when I'm one on one with someone I guess I fall easily into constructivist mode. When I'm in a bigger group then I can every now and then "inject" some emotion into the group and they sort of keep it up themselves so I don't have to do it. But somehow I still think I'm constructivist because I like it when other people sustain the emotional atmosphere. I might even be drawn to these kind of people to some extent. Anyways this is perhaps the hardest category.

  23. #23
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    I *think* that the best distinction for this dichotomy is that Emotion-creating are able to create a "good mood" which is the necessary background for conversating, whereas CC lack this ability and so when two CC engage in a like, date, it is not easy to build up a good atmosphere
    No, it's not that construct-creating lack this ability. That would mean that ENFjs and ESFjs are less able to create a good mood than ENTjs and ESTjs, which makes no sense.

    It's rather that construct-creators have difficulty separating the mood they create from their own emotions, so they prefer not to create the mood just for the sake of starting - say - a business conversation.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    USA.
    TIM
    INTj
    Posts
    4,497
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    I want to make it clear that I dislike dealing with other people's emotions. That's why I get it out of the way first... if I don't, I'll have to deal with their emotions every step of the way, and it'll prevent progress. It would be much more frustrating to deal with someone's protests on a matter halfway into it (especially when you didn't anticipate it) than to address their emotions upfront and get them behind you and your efforts.
    could you give an example of how you find "good" emotions draining (maybe from your mother or some other female you find close and mature, not a male who is giving you attention, or from a "weak" female)? Emotional problems are conflicts that I also like to avoid, but I deal with it differently than, say, an F type.

    Btw, I identify with your quote for myself.

  25. #25
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Good" emotions can be draining when people are trying to emotionally engage others. I think that's the key... but they're also just eshausting to watch. I don't think that's what this dichotomy is about though... I think that is more of the Merry vs. Serious dichotomy perhaps?
    SEE

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  26. #26
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,615
    Mentioned
    235 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    I *think* that the best distinction for this dichotomy is that Emotion-creating are able to create a "good mood" which is the necessary background for conversating, whereas CC lack this ability and so when two CC engage in a like, date, it is not easy to build up a good atmosphere
    No, it's not that construct-creating lack this ability. That would mean that ENFjs and ESFjs are less able to create a good mood than ENTjs and ESTjs, which makes no sense.
    Definitely true IME with them, they tend to get pissed at me for being unresponsive
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  27. #27
    limNol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Philadelphia
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w5 sx/so
    Posts
    130
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Constructivism and Emotivism

    What are your thoughts on the constructivist/emotivist dichotomy (good description on WS if you're not familiar with it)? In particular, d'you relate to it in light of your self-typing?

    Personally, I think it seems like one of the most obvious traits in people I know pretty well, and I'm surprised people don't make more use of it in typing people.

    Also, a random observation- I think constructivist types are more likely to have obsessive tendencies. Obviously this is a general statement and this stuff isn't always type-related, but I think the way constructivists make more use of 'emotional anchors' makes them more likely to fall into obsessive, even addictive patterns, of relying on specific activities to reproduce certain emotional states.

    I think Reinin dichotomies in general deserve more discussion and exploration, even if said exploration reveals that some of them are bullshit, but constructivism/emotivism in particular keeps catching my eye because it seems very sharply defined IRL.

  28. #28
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,629
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree. This trait really seemed to be one of the most obvious in most people I tried to type. However, combined with the other Reinin dichtotomies and the jungian ones, there are too many contradictions in my opinion. It's the same with most subtypes. You can't comprehend every factor which is given with both types, main- and subtype. Some traits of the subtypes even neutralize the other ones, which is very confusing.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  29. #29
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,682
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's easy to spot. However you must take in to consideration peer pressure. With INFps I sometimes find the discussion switching between matters of recent and old experiences, & accomplishments, productivity and professional development.

    It seems that conversation with other constructivists tend to be more structured and directed, while conversation with emotivists are free associative and dependent on impulse.

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    236
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I chose when one of the dichotomies I related to the most...and it turns out all the ones I thought I was are the ones EIIs are. Wow.

    Anyway, the constructivist description explains why I'm an empath (emotionally, not magically *rolls eyes*). So I do agree with it. But it's given me a reason to be jealous of emotivists.

    Sometimes personality theory helps you understand others...and sometimes it makes it easier to hate others. *facepalm*

  31. #31
    limNol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Philadelphia
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w5 sx/so
    Posts
    130
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegaDoomer
    It's the same with most subtypes. You can't comprehend every factor which is given with both types, main- and subtype. Some traits of the subtypes even neutralize the other ones, which is very confusing.
    I'm skeptical of subtypes in general. They can be helpful sometimes, but it also seems like people can use them to try to make socionics into something it's not. Like when people realize that socionics is limited by virtue of the fact that there are only a few socionics types and six billion people in the world, they panic and start trying to find ways to pull new socionics types out of thin air. Obviously, this isn't always the case -- splitting types into two subtypes based on the emphasis of different ego functions in particular makes sense a lot of the time -- but I do think there's this tendency to play fast and loose with subtypes that can add a lot of ambiguity to socionics in the way you describe.

    Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold
    It seems that conversation with other constructivists tend to be more structured and directed, while conversation with emotivists are free associative and dependent on impulse.
    Yeah, this is why it surprises me that duals are opposite in terms of this dichotomy. You'd think they'd drive each other crazy sometimes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Random Ness
    Sometimes personality theory helps you understand others...and sometimes it makes it easier to hate others. *facepalm*
    Haha, but the more we understand people, the easier it is to hate them. Isn't that why so many people hate themselves?

  32. #32
    Creepy-male

    Default

    I never liked it. It seems broken in my case. Emotivist doesn't apply in any specific or useful way, and Contructivist is mixed being a very good fit and completely contradictory to how I am.

    The same criticisms I can level at most Reinin dichotomies.

  33. #33
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,615
    Mentioned
    235 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ashton2 View Post
    I also have a difficult time envisioning how an Emotivist+Constructivist pairing wouldn't aggravate or alienate one another.
    They do aggravate each other a bit, that's the point. Emotivists prefer to bullshit around (when talking, of course) and speak non-seriously, constructivists like to get to the point. Both force each other either to take yourself less seriously (Emo vs Constr) or to actually carry out a serious conversation without diverting from the main topic (Constr vs Emo).
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  34. #34
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by limNol View Post
    Also, a random observation- I think constructivist types are more likely to have obsessive tendencies. Obviously this is a general statement and this stuff isn't always type-related, but I think the way constructivists make more use of 'emotional anchors' makes them more likely to fall into obsessive, even addictive patterns, of relying on specific activities to reproduce certain emotional states.
    As an LII I'm supposed to be emotivist but I'm rather obsessive about alot of things.

    Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold View Post
    It seems that conversation with other constructivists tend to be more structured and directed, while conversation with emotivists are free associative and dependent on impulse.
    I do both. I do like some structure and purpose to conversation and easily get impatient when others can't quickly get to the point. Yet I do alot of the free association stuff and can easily go off on tangents. Oh, that reminds me of X! But I guess that's just my creative talking.

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    They do aggravate each other a bit, that's the point. Emotivists prefer to bullshit around (when talking, of course) and speak non-seriously, constructivists like to get to the point. Both force each other either to take yourself less seriously (Emo vs Constr) or to actually carry out a serious conversation without diverting from the main topic (Constr vs Emo).
    I don't really like bullshitting around. I'd rather get to the point.

    Of all the reinin dichotomies, the constructivist/emotivist one is the hardest one to place myself one because I relate to a fair amount in both of the descriptions. I did a poll a while back asking forum members which dichotomies they saw in me and people were voting emotivist but I'm still not all that convinced. As an LII, I should be emotivist but feel like I'm on the constructivist/emotivist line with this. Maybe it's because I also relate alot to the EII and ILE types, both of which are constructivists.
    LII-Ne with strong EII tendencies, 6w7-9w1-3w4 so/sp/sx, INxP



  35. #35
    Breaking stereotypes Suz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    On a chatbox diet
    TIM
    ESI maybe
    Posts
    6,479
    Mentioned
    173 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    same. I related to some aspects of both, actually leaning more constructivist if anything. (IEEs are supposed to be emotivist theoretically).
    Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx

  36. #36
    Serious Left-Static Negativist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    3,527
    Mentioned
    361 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Constructivist and Emotivist

    Which one are you? Any thoughts?

    Constructivist
    1. Tend to minimize the emotional elements of interaction, preferring to focus on the 'business' elements.
    2. Have emotional 'anchors' (eg, books, films, places) which they use to support their internal emotional state.
    3. Can become 'emotionally hooked', and can have a strong reaction to a particular part or section regardless of their feelings towards the entirety.
    4. Have greater difficulty disassociating from others' emotions and experiences than from requests for action or consideration.
    5. “I prefer when people offer concrete solutions instead of comfort or sympathy.”

    Emotivist
    1. Tend to concentrate foremost on the emotional background of interaction, with 'business' a secondary concern.
    2. Prefer the new and novel over the old and known.
    3. Information perceived as unprofessional or low-quality can leave them indifferent.
    4. Have greater difficulty disassociating from requests for action or consideration than from others' emotions and experiences.
    5. “If a conversation is emotionally negative, I consider it wasted.”

    Constructivists
    Constructivists try to get into the right mindset for an activity and it takes time for them to get from one mindset to another. When they are at home, they are mentally prepared for anything that could happen at home and when they are at work, they switch over to work-mentality. They can get overwhelmed by emotions because once they get into an emotional state, they stay in that emotional state for a long time. Constructivists avoid emotional contact with others and they don't think it's necessary to adjust to the conversation emotionally. They use automatic polite responses and customs, like starting with "how are you?" or offering their guests coffee or tea. Practical conversation (talking "business") is easier for them. They like to repeat emotional states - rereading books, watching movies that they have already seen and revisiting places they liked. They avoid movies, situations and people who give them a negative mindset, because they have a difficult time getting rid of that mindset. Constructivists use emotional anchors (carefully chosen music, books, movies) to keep or strengthen their internal emotional state.

    Emotivists
    Emotivists try to enter the emotional atmosphere of the conversation and they try to keep the emotion in the conversation positive. They can talk about various things they have no interest in or do not believe in simply for the sake of maintaining a "positive spirit". Talking business is more difficult and the conversation topic can wander off into emotional exchange. They try to get new experiences and new emotions, which is why they travel to new places and rarely watch movies they have already seen. In emotivists calls for action/requests are not critically estimated and because of it they can get overwhelmed by them. After getting into a theme they stay in that mode of operation for a prolonged period of time and have difficulty switching, "disconnecting" (and because of it try to avoid unpleasant requests).

    Examples
    In forum conversations when a person asks a question, emotivists reply with conversational posts trying to find out what caused such a question and trying to see if they can make the person feel better. They can also include an answer to the question, but that's secondary. Constructivists give as good of an answer as they can to help find a solution. They might also include a question about why the question was asked by this particular person, but only when they are curious about it. It's not important for the thread (conversation) itself.
    Constructivists don't mind seeing a movie that they have already seen, but emotivists would only do that if there might be some new information that they missed the first time or if they have forgotten a lot about the movie. Constructivists might prefer re-watching a movie that gave them a good emotion to seeing something brand new that they don't know if they'll like. This is because constructivists have inert ethics and it's difficult to get rid of the wrong emotional state, but emotivists have contact ethics so they want to experience new emotions.


    Who is what:
    - The constructivist IM types are: ILE, ESE, EIE, SLE, ILI, ESI, SLI, and EII.
    - The emotivist IM types are: SEI, LII, LSI, IEI, SEE, LIE, LSE, and IEE.
    - Using the four-letter code: constructivists are TP or FJ, emotivists are TJ or FP.


    Intertype relations
    constructivist/emotivist in common:
    identity · activation · conflict · extinguishment

    constructivist/emotivist not in common:
    duality · mirror · super-ego · quasi-identity

    constructivist/emotivist in common if rational:
    kindred · illusionary · supervision (j>p) ·

    constructivist/emotivist in common if irrational:
    semi-duality · business · benefit (p>j) ·

  37. #37
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    25,960
    Mentioned
    669 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am constructivist because I'm slightly, let's be serious, really serious. you'll notice this about me in the Unofficial Member's pic thread and the convo between Agarina and I; she's just joking around while I remove the emotional elements and get down to the important info, aka the facts and keep the conversations rather informative and dry. This doesn't mean I'm not emotional, because I am. This is one reason why I type Agarina an Emotivist type. Does this make sense?


    Quote Originally Posted by Agarina View Post
    How much do you? I'd also want to know your bra size, I'm trying out a new subtype theory that I just created and it is very important to know a person's bra size in order to get the type right. Thanks!
    ^ is an Emotivist post because it is partly in jest but with the intention to maximize emotional background.

    My post here is very serious, because I'm saying "let's talk about the serious stuff first."
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    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

  38. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    17,948
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa Darmandzhyan View Post
    I am constructivist because I'm slightly, let's be serious, really serious. you'll notice this about me in the Unofficial Member's pic thread and the convo between Agarina and I; she's just joking around while I remove the emotional elements and get down to the important info, aka the facts and keep the conversations rather informative and dry. This doesn't mean I'm not emotional, because I am. This is one reason why I type Agarina an Emotivist type. Does this make sense?

    My post here is very serious, because I'm saying "let's talk about the serious stuff first."

  39. #39
    . willekeurig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,506
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It seems like I'm a constructivist. I try hard not to use "emotional anchors" too much and engage in new kind of activities, travel to new places etc, because I know from experience that that kind of life is much more interesting and you will learn and grow more, but it is outside of my comfort zone and it usually takes conscious effort to do so. I also very strongly prefer old friends over getting to know new people. I bolded the parts I can relate to the most.

    Constructivist
    1. Tend to minimize the emotional elements of interaction, preferring to focus on the 'business' elements.
    2. Have emotional 'anchors' (eg, books, films, places) which they use to support their internal emotional state.
    3. Can become 'emotionally hooked', and can have a strong reaction to a particular part or section regardless of their feelings towards the entirety.
    4. Have greater difficulty disassociating from others' emotions and experiences than from requests for action or consideration.
    5. “I prefer when people offer concrete solutions instead of comfort or sympathy.”

    Emotivist
    1. Tend to concentrate foremost on the emotional background of interaction, with 'business' a secondary concern.
    2. Prefer the new and novel over the old and known.
    3. Information perceived as unprofessional or low-quality can leave them indifferent.
    4. Have greater difficulty disassociating from requests for action or consideration than from others' emotions and experiences.
    5. “If a conversation is emotionally negative, I consider it wasted.”

    Constructivists
    Constructivists try to get into the right mindset for an activity and it takes time for them to get from one mindset to another. When they are at home, they are mentally prepared for anything that could happen at home and when they are at work, they switch over to work-mentality. They can get overwhelmed by emotions because once they get into an emotional state, they stay in that emotional state for a long time. Constructivists avoid emotional contact with others and they don't think it's necessary to adjust to the conversation emotionally. They use automatic polite responses and customs, like starting with "how are you?" or offering their guests coffee or tea. Practical conversation (talking "business") is easier for them. They like to repeat emotional states - rereading books, watching movies that they have already seen and revisiting places they liked. They avoid movies, situations and people who give them a negative mindset, because they have a difficult time getting rid of that mindset. Constructivists use emotional anchors (carefully chosen music, books, movies) to keep or strengthen their internal emotional state.

    Emotivists
    Emotivists try to enter the emotional atmosphere of the conversation and they try to keep the emotion in the conversation positive. They can talk about various things they have no interest in or do not believe in simply for the sake of maintaining a "positive spirit". Talking business is more difficult and the conversation topic can wander off into emotional exchange. They try to get new experiences and new emotions, which is why they travel to new places and rarely watch movies they have already seen. In emotivists calls for action/requests are not critically estimated and because of it they can get overwhelmed by them. After getting into a theme they stay in that mode of operation for a prolonged period of time and have difficulty switching, "disconnecting" (and because of it try to avoid unpleasant requests).
    Last edited by willekeurig; 10-17-2012 at 10:17 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    Axis of Evil: Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Agarina
    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa Darmandzhyan
    Agarina does not like human beings; she just wants a pretty boy toy.
    Johari Nohari

  40. #40
    . willekeurig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,506
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa Darmandzhyan View Post
    I am constructivist because I'm slightly, let's be serious, really serious. you'll notice this about me in the Unofficial Member's pic thread and the convo between Agarina and I; she's just joking around while I remove the emotional elements and get down to the important info, aka the facts and keep the conversations rather informative and dry. This doesn't mean I'm not emotional, because I am. This is one reason why I type Agarina an Emotivist type. Does this make sense?

    ^ is an Emotivist post because it is partly in jest but with the intention to maximize emotional background.

    My post here is very serious, because I'm saying "let's talk about the serious stuff first."
    No. This is not about being constructivist or emotivist, it's about me not taking you seriously and you being too much of a dumbass to get that. Btw I deciced I'm Si-EIE now, EIIs are boring pussies anyway plus I am forced to engage in social activities today so better arm myself with some Fe, huh? Is that a constructivist or an emotivist type, I'm too lazy to check?
    Last edited by willekeurig; 10-17-2012 at 09:56 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    Axis of Evil: Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Agarina
    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa Darmandzhyan
    Agarina does not like human beings; she just wants a pretty boy toy.
    Johari Nohari

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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