Results 1 to 37 of 37

Thread: Dual seeking: Problem about knowledge of socionics

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Dual seeking: Problem about knowledge of socionics

    Hi!

    There is this problem I'm having with dual seeking in theory: What I understood, was that the best way to find a dual was through not knowing about existence of whole socionics theory. Then whatever you try to do based on socionics is not natural, because you would not have done it 'naturally'.

    In this way the socionics tends create problems, cause 'knowing' how something is supposed to work makes it highly likely to start working that way just because you was predicting it to work that way. Say you know your own type and how your supposed to act (according socionics theory) then you can type the other person, find out what relation comes out and start working with the person as if you did know that the prediction was correct. Now from what I have seen it is correct, but knowing about those predictions tend to create more problems instead of solving them.

    Do you find socionics helping you in some manner instead of it creating new problems? Can you 'seek' your dual, or is the best way just go to somewhere where they can erase all my knowledge about socionics and MBTI?

    -Carl G old

  2. #2
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    15,880
    Mentioned
    1505 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Good question. Is it better to be unaware of what you are doing, or to actively try?

    In my experience, the ability to find a dual varies a lot, depending on what other problems you might be dealing with and how much emphasis you place on certain things.

    For example, it has been said that you will most easily find a dual during mutual personal crises, when you both need the other's natural help the most. This happened to me in high school, when a dual approached me and our subsequent discussions and mutual support set the directions of both our lives.

    When it came to choosing a wife, I was already fairly established with a house and a very good job and was far from any crisis, and I ended up not choosing a dual, but rather someone who was really very close to a dual (or a mirror) and who satisfied some of my lesser criteria. She and I were from the same social class, had the same intelligence and world-view and attractiveness levels, earned about the same amount. On Maslow's pyramid of needs, my psychological needs were pretty much already met, and she made a great business partner. Less so an emotionally supportive wife, but everything is a trade, right? Eventually, we divorced.

    At this point, I'm thinking pretty hard about duals. I'm still (of course) sx-first driven to find a great connection, but I'm now aware of the argument of why duality might be best for me. I've seen a lot of non-dual relationships where both partners are struggling with some serious compromises despite genuinely loving one another, and I'd like to avoid building a beautiful house on a cardboard foundation.

    I'm actively looking for an intelligent woman who is a dual who also satisfies my Imago concepts and who is sp/sx. She also needs to be someone whom I find to be hot, although this category encompasses many more individuals than you might suspect, and some of them, I've discovered, look kind of weird but have what I like.

    Here is the problem that I, personally, am running into. I can find dual women who are pretty high in all those categories, but I find them purposefully through VI and by further conversational and observational identification and filtering. The problem is that they are not in crisis, and they look at me and either say "I have no chance with that guy, why is he bugging me? He obviously only wants me for sex, because that's all we could possibly have in common." or "That guy is an alien robot, I can't understand anything he says and we have nothing in common, so he needs to stay the hell away from me." They don't seem to realize that they can't understand me because I'm great at what they suck at, and vice-versa.
    So I'm stuck approaching women who are really attractive duals, and what I get back is misunderstanding and the suspicion that I just want sex. Well, I do want sex, but I can get that without a dual. What I primarily want is an emotional and intellectual connection. When you have that connection, sex pretty much just works as a part of that.

    Here is a typical scenario. I see some woman who might be a dual. I approach her and talk about random stuff. Soon, we are laughing and goofing around and we really click. Eventually, I say, let's talk again. Do you like walks in the park on the weekend? They say, "Maybe. But lets have a burger and a beer at a sports bar instead." Long pause. "But no sex." Adam thinks, WTF? Where did that come from? But agrees. Then we never connect, because their schedule keeps them eternally unavailable. Or their fears do. And there is no immediate crisis to force us together.

    What are missing in these meetings are the practical connections two people make when naturally providing mutual support during mutual crises. I've found that duals are pretty damned useful to have around when I'm having a serious problem and I know they feel that way about me, because I work with two male duals.

    So, to answer your question, I dunno. Get educated about duals, then seriously fuck up your life on purpose and grab the first dual who throws you a life preserver.
    Last edited by Adam Strange; 10-11-2017 at 01:15 PM.

  3. #3
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    So, to answer your question, I dunno. Get educated about duals, then seriously fuck up your life on purpose and grab the first dual who throws you a life preserver.
    I do not think it have to be so serious. For example just take a new class or some program where you will eventually face some challenges.

  4. #4
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    15,880
    Mentioned
    1505 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jung View Post
    Hi!

    There is this problem I'm having with dual seeking in theory: What I understood, was that the best way to find a dual was through not knowing about existence of whole socionics theory. Then whatever you try to do based on socionics is not natural, because you would not have done it 'naturally'.

    In this way the socionics tends create problems, cause 'knowing' how something is supposed to work makes it highly likely to start working that way just because you was predicting it to work that way. Say you know your own type and how your supposed to act (according socionics theory) then you can type the other person, find out what relation comes out and start working with the person as if you did know that the prediction was correct. Now from what I have seen it is correct, but knowing about those predictions tend to create more problems instead of solving them.

    Do you find socionics helping you in some manner instead of it creating new problems? Can you 'seek' your dual, or is the best way just go to somewhere where they can erase all my knowledge about socionics and MBTI?

    -Carl G old
    I'd like to add something regarding the idea that knowing what someone's responses might be creates more problems instead of solving them. I'm pretty familiar with the practice of being with a dual who is acting like a dual is predicted to act and saying, Yep, duality confirmed.

    However, if you are focusing on the other person, then you are not focusing on the external problem that they need you to solve, and this can screw things up. You are already superbly able to see their "faults", or areas where they are lacking, but as a dual, you shouldn't feel a need to point them out, you just need to either show them how to solve their problem or solve it for them by doing what is easy for you. The shared quadra values thing is just a bonus for the down times.

    This is why it is always easier to connect with someone while dealing with external problems that need to be solved, rather than lounging around and criticizing them for not understanding your very deep and complex thoughts.

  5. #5
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,934
    Mentioned
    171 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Using Socionics to find a mate would be severely limiting one's prospects. One can be very happy with other than a dual. Socionics should be used to understand from where a potential partner is coming, to explain one's own needs to a partner, or to understand potential relationship weaknesses and whether or not they'll become show stoppers. People shouldn't commit to relationships or the purchase of large ticket items when their eyes are clouded with passion. At least Socionics places in the back of one's mind the avenue for second sober thoughts on the former......
    a.k.a. I/O

  6. #6
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    if socionics has any teeth to it at all, pretending to be another type, or acting a certain way unnatural yet desirable under the circumstances, is still going to fundamentally express itself by type. the very things you value will inform the need to "act" a certain way. in other words, don't worry about it... if it was as easy to upend type as being informed by the theory the theory wouldn't mean anything, rather each person interprets the theory to mean what it does according to their own type and the way they respond to such exposure is itself dictated by their TIM (inasmuch as any other act is).

    this is a non issue based on certain assumptions which are not true... socionics is like any other peice of information, you could pose the same question in regards to learning history, psychology, philosophy, art, law, science, mathematics, watching a season of your favorite tv show, etc they all influence you going forward, but none of it makes you less "you"--it makes you you-with-that-experience. in other words the same framework is now populated by the new information, it does not fundamentally alter the framework

    if you think ignorance is bliss in some sense wrt socionics, it just means you hold that as a tenable maxim in general and you'd likely find it in regards to a variety of things... some people use information destructively but it has more to do with them than the information.. this is why any attempt to blame socionics comes off as projection rooted in a fundamental insecurity in oneself, to me. the issue is not to reject socionics but to correct whatever is causing the underlying anxiety about one's own ways of living and thinking

    how this applies to finding a mate: if you're the type to use socionics to limit yourself in mate selection, I guarantee you're at the same time using other more limiting more arbitrary criterion to likewise "limit mates"--that's just how you roll, at that point... if anything knowledge of socionics is the ladder out of that pit via self awareness

    the other thing is what does it even mean to "limit mates"? you get what you deserve in some sense, whatever criterion you use "limits mates" who's to say socionics wouldn't limit it in a better way? who's to say it would "limit" it at all? because you selected out someone? the mere fact that such a thing occurs doesn't imply "limitation" in any meaningful sense as it applies to "relationships" because its not about going to costco and just getting "the most"... also consider that relationships implicate other people and maybe you're doing them a favor by selecting yourself out under the naive presumption you've selected them out

    in other words, there's a shitload of problems with this way of thinking and I suggest not worrying about it, at least not in this way

  7. #7
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,581
    Mentioned
    132 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Bertrand

    have you thought about how dual-seeking behaviors typically manifest in specific types?

  8. #8
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    yes but its also really nothing more than the flipside to their dominant function, so you don't even need to think in terms of "oh this is so and sos dual seeking" it emerges organically from their dominant function by implication... in other words, very strong Te comes off as inviting a Fi counter stroke by its very nature... it is more a product of strong Te than "dual seeking" because "dual seeking" implies a conscious effort, when its precisely the opposite--an unconscious effort

    any Te dominant who goes around thinking "im going to seek some Fi today" is probably not a Te dominant or has a skewed perspective of what "seeking Fi" would even mean, because "seeking Fi" actually means looking inward and engaging in actual Fi, not trying to find an ESI or some such (in that sense its probably the least likely thing they're going "to do"--repressed Fi).

    the idea that one would "find Fi" in an ESI invites heavy revision in a way not all connected to tangible persons or engagements, but requires an intuitive journey inward and a prompting toward that end (going on an actual hunt speaks to demonstrative Se, as a product of a Te/Si reduction to the concrete, to me)

    in other words, a lot of the provocation in being a lizard man is itself dual seeking behavior, albeit unconscious, which is what people tend to misunderstand about "dual seeking." The provacative quality of what a thing clearly lacks constitutes the "dual seeking" aspect to it, its not some tangible step people go out and take, its something they embody with their dominant function that pervades everything they do or say or think

    its why when asshole #2 jokes about so and so "being triggered" they're actually begging for a response and seeking to provoke one unconsciously... SLI/ILI etc would not do such a thing... SLI provokes by being boring and needing to be shook up conceptually [1], ILI provokes by being too remote [2] etc etc. its the "worst" quality that sticks out to their dual, but one that invites a good faith and loving response, not a destructive misunderstanding. in other words, its the clear perception of the defect in the eye of the other (without projection-- or more accurately, with accurate and appropriate projection) and the sincere willingness to help and the serendipity that such willingness would actually help

    furthermore, the demonstrative/polr relation also factors into this. while Fi base perceives the problem, it puts the solution out in Ni, but in going from Fi->Ni it produces a product that is palatable to the dual, whereas to attack it for its Ni defects on its face and then put out a Fi manifestation would be extremely hurtful (conflictor)

    the problem is, very few people understand that dynamic sufficient to type themselves: they see Ni and think Ni base full stop, etc when information metabolism is a pathway and the Ni base means viewing the world in terms of Ni not necessarily manifesting Ni outwardly, which is more a feature of the demonstrative

    [1] someone like director abbie strikes me as either LSE Si subtype or SLI because she's the poster child for this, its like shes sending the vibe out super hard, whereas someone like slugabed is def Te subtype or could even be LSE (not saying she is, its just that whole "vibe" thing contrasting the two with one another). Chae is the opposite, wherein she puts out a lot of content which invites revision in the form of sorting and grounding and to meticulously filter out the wheat/chaff... its like Ne vomit but it would provide ample work for SLI, whereas idontgiveaf clearly cries out for a conceptual unity to come and organize her crazy vivid and varied perceptions, etc all of this is dual seeking behavior but its more an emergent property of them just being themselves and not really trying to find a dual, just behaving in a way that comes naturally to them. Chae is the most self conscious of her own proclivity so some of it may be artificial but if anything it just amplifies the subtype, it doesn't really change the base, because how they go about consciously being dual seeking is itself a product of their TIM

    [2] "unnaproachable thus desired"--"seeking" Se: often confused with "seeking" Te, sadly to find Se entreaties unwelcome only after its too late, hence the initial allure and subsequent conflict of the "conflictor" relation.. all those people being told to "cheer up!" or "smile!" are probably Te seekers being mistaken for Fe or even Se seekers, etc
    Last edited by Bertrand; 10-12-2017 at 12:08 PM.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    13,331
    Mentioned
    1265 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jung View Post
    What I understood, was that the best way to find a dual was through not knowing about existence of whole socionics theory.
    The knowledge helps to find duals. The only problem - high chance to mistype. Also you may understand is it dual or other type by IR impressions, in some degree.

    > Then whatever you try to do based on socionics is not natural, because you would not have done it 'naturally'.

    naturally is to catch the closest girl with big tits. a little of thinking helps to choose among them with more usefulness for long relations

    > Do you find socionics helping you in some manner instead of it creating new problems?

    it helps in some cases. it may create problems if you'll type incorrectly and will be expecting other than may get

    > Can you 'seek' your dual, or is the best way just go to somewhere where they can erase all my knowledge about socionics and MBTI?

    You may be ok with people of other types, but you'll have problems of IR you'll get. You'll can live with some problems like all do, there are no perfect pairs.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  10. #10
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,397
    Mentioned
    325 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jung View Post
    Hi!

    There is this problem I'm having with dual seeking in theory: What I understood, was that the best way to find a dual was through not knowing about existence of whole socionics theory. Then whatever you try to do based on socionics is not natural, because you would not have done it 'naturally'.
    I find that socionics helps me to act more naturally, not less, because I don't try to put on a facade that is unnatural for my type. This depends on typing yourself correctly though.

    In this way the socionics tends create problems, cause 'knowing' how something is supposed to work makes it highly likely to start working that way just because you was predicting it to work that way. Say you know your own type and how your supposed to act (according socionics theory) then you can type the other person, find out what relation comes out and start working with the person as if you did know that the prediction was correct.
    This kind of fluidity is just not consistent with socionics. You cannot act "against your type" on a permanent basis.

    Socionics can also help you to foresee relationship problems that you might overlook if you didn't know about it. But it's important to not use this to limit yourself, many of the "bad" relationships can be made to work with some effort and understanding. If you're using socionics for relationship/people purposes the main thing is to understand the dynamics and how to deal with them, not to decide "this is a bad relationship according to socionics" and thus get rid of it.

  11. #11
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,581
    Mentioned
    132 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Bertrand
    "SLI provokes by being boring and needing to be shook up conceptually" - Their reticence perfectly balances out the IEE and their chatterbox nature. You've got two contradictory-yet-compatible types that abhor the idea of making a "dent" in the world. SLI are labeled "lazy" and "greedy" because they don't expect anything from the world, therefore they don't give anything in return (unless it's warranted, such as in the case of LOVE). They're self-sufficient, hence why they're commonly portrayed as striving to be the best in their respective field of interest(s). On the other hand, IEE are easily swayed by pity because they hate the idea of impacting the world - specifically negatively - and so they're highly in tune with the implicit emotional needs of other people. They'll spend hours trying to correct a misunderstanding between themselves and another person for the sole purpose of untangling whatever web they've initially tangled. IEE strive to be the "perfect person" - in the sense that they want to do good by everyone, at least on the surface - which is how their contradictory traits result in a compatible end-goal: no "dents" in the world. Like two orbiting planets that occasionally cross paths.

    TL;DR SLI takes care of themselves. IEE takes care of everyone else. SLI seeks out IEE to fill in all the empty spaces they've inadvertently created by being silent. IEE fills in those empty spaces, empties them out, and then fills in those empty spaces once more, and so on and so forth.

    And if we imagine it that way, then it's not that IEE are attracted to SLI, specifically, it's that they're attracted to those empty spaces that emerge in social contexts, so they'd be satisfied with representatives of any other type in the socion, so long as they're capable of manufacturing those empty spaces.

    Constantly. The only difference is that SLI does it best. Which I believe ties into what you hypothesized earlier about TIM influencing how a sociotype goes about masquerading as other types. If a different type takes interest in the IEE, they may put on a silent facade in order to attract the IEE, but eventually they'll grow tired of the endless stream of contradictions, and the complete and utter lack of empty spaces for themselves. So I don't think conflictors are the only deceiving relations. If we're gonna get all stereotypical about it then Ne-leads could be deceived by attractive chefs. Which I first noticed in my IEI friend's relationship with her ILE. She quite literally started taking cooking classes because it was the easiest way to bring him back home, whereas I think a big appeal in him, for her, is that he's socially and fiscally secure. They're obviously in love, too, but I've noticed this pattern in many other romantic relationships. If you were to ask someone what they love and hate most about their partner, it seems that most people would list traits their partner shares (or doesn't share) with their dual, and vice versa, so it could even be argued that you could successfully date your conflictor if they shared enough traits with your presumed dual. It's interesting how these dual-seeking behaviors subtly peek out in relations that aren't even duality relations.

    I think we briefly breached this topic on the IEI/EII & Se-seeking comparison thread a few months ago
    Last edited by wasp; 10-12-2017 at 01:00 AM.

  12. #12
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    yes, totally, in other words, dual seeking is an emergent property of people being themselves and duals are duals because they reciprocate in a helpful and welcome way by likewise just being themselves

    also you make an excellent point in that all relationships that aren't duality have a "false attractiveness" to them wherein they invite comparisons to one's dual and attempts at "forcibly" emulating that dynamic are doomed to fall short by definition, which is not to say they cannot "work" but just that they aren't smooth in the way duality is, and its not a character flaw to want "smoothness" for you and your partner; its just the desire that each of you would get your needs met in an efficient manner, which people "want" either implicitly or explicitly, there's no real getting around it. in essence the idea of duality is just a stand in for "maximally healthy relationship dynamic" so even without knowledge of duality or socionics one is always subconsciously comparing one's partner to their dual whenever something happens they don't like or could be improved from their point of view

    this idea that socionics will ruin you or otherwise influence your relationships negatively, then, if one really understands the foregoing, is nonsense

    because you're subconsciously comparing whatever relationship you're in by standards directed at your dual whether you know about duality or not, it literally only allows for you to forebear on reaching conclusions on the basis of percieved difficulty by offering an explanation as to why said difficulty is a subjective illusion perpetrated by us upon the world based on our own psychological values. in other words, it gives "the world" and everyone in it an excuse for being less than perfect in our eyes, by providing an explanation for why that is; it tells us why our definition of perfect is subjective and to "try and get over it" if we want to really understand and not just be self righteous

    if Ti is all the mathematically and geometrically defined schemes, this is a sort of an Fi codification of the same intuition (Ne)... the language used here is ethical by nature, its crafting a narrative, which is nothing more than a "drama" expressed in such a way as to organize events in time (intuition). in other words, drama is an ethical narrative founded on an intuition that taken together forms a cognizable and relatable scheme of making sense of events, which is a coralary to Ti, which is why LII and EII are kindred... demonstrative intuition is the cohesive picture of events that serve as the end product, one that can be handed off or "go viral" so to speak... its very similar to demonstrative Ti/Fi, but those are authoritative "statements" of a thing [1], whereas demonstrative intuitions could be formulated many different ways, it is the underlying integrity of the picture that is expressed--how it gets codified is secondary, hence LII and EII can "cross talk" in many ways via their role

    [1] in other words its the "dogma" or "scientific theory", their demonstrative products are "hardening" of the intuitions, whereas LII and EII tends to produce "softer" statements that are more maleable but more fundamental.. its the difference between someone like Sam Harris (IEI) producing ethical statements vs Dostoevsky, illustrating ethical intuitions in a more free flowing way, vs the dogma of Harris.. its why EII likes ILI but not IEI so much, because ILI "sharpens" the weakest part of the intuition of EII (the Te aspect to it) in a manner that is helpful (having a high res definitive statement of the "other half" of the same or similar intuition provides a nice way to fill the gap in a congruent way), whereas IEI seems to want to lock down the area EII thinks they know better on, in other words they "battle" over territory each feels a right on how best to express the issue. the reason lirik is a poet is because they're concerned with the precise statement of the thing, the underlying picture is subordinate to the formal quality

    I have a professor which is the only ILI I've ever met in academia, to my knowledge, and I love hearing him explain the far side basis of a common intuition we share (where there is strong crossover between logic and ethics--as is the case in law), whereas with IEI I just feel like they're trying to nail down something that is more complex than they realize and so they do harm to the subject by limiting it in such ways, but its largely a matter of perspective--an LII might view ILI as being guilty of the same thing, because they priveledge the perception not the judgement (in their finished product, which is a reversal of how we tend to think of things by defining type by the properties of the products as a manifestation of base, rather than demonstrative)

    to put it another way, no one reads Dostoevsky for the plot (the objective series of events), but rather the underlying intuitions he's conveying. if you reduced his books purely to the this happened then this happend with a scientific explanation of the physics and causation it wouldn't make for a very edifying manual. literature itself is the promulgation of ethical intuitions via dramatic narratives. which is why its funny to watch certain types collect the books themselves as if it signifies anything
    Last edited by Bertrand; 10-12-2017 at 05:01 AM.

  13. #13
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,581
    Mentioned
    132 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    OH MY GOD I HAVE SO MANY THOUGHTS THAT I WANNA PUKE OK GIVE ME A SECOND

  14. #14
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,068
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There's this girl that has eyed me a few times at this restaurant (she's a waitress). She is pretty good looking. But the problem is that I know she is SEI-Fe, so I won't bother attempting anything with her. Does this answer your questions?

    Socionics is both a blessing, and a curse.

  15. #15
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    praise Ausra she saved that poor woman from beyond the grave

  16. #16
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,581
    Mentioned
    132 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    okay I just caught up on the last-minute edits in your second-to-last post

    Here's where dual-seeking gets iffy for me. Ne-leads (at least from what I've read and observed) are masters at identifying holes in the external world - including other people, as well as themselves - and they're prone to employing "smoke and mirrors" tactics in order to create the impression of perfection. For this reason, they're capable of identifying where holes exist in their partner / the state of their relationship, and they're usually adept at accounting for those holes ("filling them in", so to speak). So, wouldn't that make them capable of successfully masquerading as faux-duals?

    They're seeking Si ("home", comfort, familiarity, harmony, aestheticism) and they find someone who exemplifies those traits, someone who isn't Si-lead - THEN even if their non-Si-lead partner has flaws, the Ne-lead would be capable of mitigating those flaws (especially ILE, positivism + Ne-idealization) and giving their partner a positive relationship experience, for as long as the relationship is beneficial to the Ne-lead, which, if their chosen partner consistently displays those traits, then it could last indefinitely and they'd think they were duals but they're not. NOW I know you could easily argue: "well, if they're doing those things consistently then they most likely ARE Si-leads!" and you'd have a point there.

    A good point, at that. So good that I need a minute to think of a rebuttal. Still thinking.

    OK, what I'm getting at here is that I don't believe Ne-leads really NEED anybody in particular. Ne in the leading position devalues reality ("nothing really matters in the grand scheme of things") and Ne-ego = "the world revolves around me", so their primary concern is themselves, they're absolved of "want" for other people and things, unless they're fueled by novelty... Anyway, the REAL appeal of Si-leads for Ne-leads isn't the Si-lead themselves, it's that Si = conventional path in life ("go to school, get a job, settle down, have babies, kill somebody, etc etc) which Ne-leads can then latch onto since they're all over the map and they lack a home-base, which the Si-lead gladly provides, so long as the Ne-lead remains cute and interesting. Without that home-base, I genuinely believe that it's extremely difficult for Ne-leads to maintain a stable sense of self, especially IEEs.

    WHICH
    LEADS
    ME
    TO
    MY
    NEXT
    POINT

    Are the TIMs really fixed? I mean, if a big part of being Si-lead is following a conventional life path, then could you not make the nature VS nurture argument? As in, I think it could be possible for a person to change their TIM. I'm sorry, I'll be honest right now, ESI descriptions are god-awful in some cases but at one point I had to wonder if the reason they focus extensively on flaws and shortcomings isn't because they're trying to rid the world of evil (I feel like there's a lot of "tiptoeing" in certain socionics descriptions) but if it's a function of a lack of a self which results in a fluid identity which differs between Ne-leads and ESI in the sense that the former is easily bored + has a wide variety of interests, which produces a multi-faceted, childlike personality ("wind", air metaphors) whereas the latter is afraid of change/conflict and for this reason they adjust their moods and wants and needs to correspond with the current situation (Fi-Se; "happy among happy, sad among sad") and this "sense of duty" they speak of is merely a lack of self.

    And it's because they fear change/conflict that they feel held down by societal expectations and it's like... they fell off the conventional life path, and now they feel stuck in a life they hate but they're too attached to present people/circumstances to enact positive change, but, if they did, could they rework their TIM to correspond with a different type? As in... they have too much time on their hands, and so they focus extensively on flaws/shortcomings, but they trap themselves in this head-space even further by refusing to change their ways and/or the direction of their life. And it's similar for EII... Since if Si = conventional life path, then Ne-creatives are like Ne-leads who desperately want to be Si-leads, so they're constantly at odds with debunking boredom and losing themselves in their interests, whilst not straying from the conventional life path they've set out for themselves.

    NOW what if the only difference between ESI and EII here is that ESI has a fight response where EII has a flight response so when you hear about EIIs like our lovely Dostoevsky over here, writing long and descriptive plots or character evaluations, then maybe that's just a byproduct of being passive by nature. Maybe it isn't so much that they're morally infallible people, maybe the only difference here is that they chose flight instead of fight and that's how Ne develops - because they didn't fight (Se), they have to mentally justify what happened to themselves in order to feel better about it, and that's pretty much ALL Ne is. So what if Se-creatives took it upon themselves to choose flight instead of fight, would they over time begin to develop stronger Ne? And what if Ne-creatives did the same thing, what if they learned to choose fight instead of flight and, as a result, they became less reliant on Ne and more reliant on Se. And did you ever watch the video where some psychologist dude ran brain scans on people of different types and he found that INTJs and ISFPs brought back very similar results? I think he claimed that it had something to do with their ages, that the older they get, the more similar the brain scans.

    NEVERMIND
    THAT
    WASN'T
    MY
    INITIAL
    POINT

    What if Pi-HAs decided to "slow down" and immerse themselves in the moment (or "process") like Pi-leads? Essentially biting down on their "static" type urges and attempting to becoming "dynamic" types. I'm pretty sure that mindfulness and meditation are codes of living that Pi-leads unconsciously abide by and that this is essentially what it means to be Pi-HA. (Are you familiar with the psychological concept of "flow"?) And in doing so they'd be switching types. Which plausible now that we know NEUROPLASTICITY exists. And there was someone who hypothesized that introversion is actually a psychological disorder of sorts so what if all the types are just psychological disorders because there was a website somewhere on the internet where a guy correlated socionics types with personality disorders which I found hilarious because they matched up almost perfectly. But if there's CBT and if there's a correlation between socionics types and personality disorders then does that not make changing your TIM even more of a realistic possibility?

    I don't think any of these observations or little spaces in between the real words that are written about socionics invalidate the system at all. But even though I agree with what you've written here which echoed a similarity in thought processes between us:

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    also you make an excellent point in that all relationships that aren't duality have a "false attractiveness" to them wherein they invite comparisons to one's dual and attempts at "forcibly" emulating that dynamic are doomed to fall short by definition, which is not to say they cannot "work" but just that they aren't smooth in the way duality is, and its not a character flaw to want "smoothness" for you and your partner; its just the desire that each of you would get your needs met in an efficient manner, which people "want" either implicitly or explicitly, there's no real getting around it. in essence the idea of duality is just a stand in for "maximally healthy relationship dynamic" so even without knowledge of duality or socionics one is always subconsciously comparing one's partner to their dual whenever something happens they don't like or could be improved from their point of view

    this idea that socionics will ruin you or otherwise influence your relationships negatively, then, if one really understands the foregoing, is nonsense

    because you're subconsciously comparing whatever relationship you're in by standards directed at your dual whether you know about duality or not, it literally only allows for you to forebear on reaching conclusions on the basis of percieved difficulty by offering an explanation as to why said difficulty is a subjective illusion perpetrated by us upon the world based on our own psychological values. in other words, it gives "the world" and everyone in it an excuse for being less than perfect in our eyes, by providing an explanation for why that is; it tells us why our definition of perfect is subjective and to "try and get over it" if we want to really understand and not just be self righteous
    If this elusive concept of "self-dualization" really does exist then do you think that once we make serious attempts to correct our own flaws and shortcomings, that socionics doesn't necessarily cease to exist, but maybe intertype relations DO cease to exist. Because your PoLR, HA, Ignoring, whatever else, those hits don't hurt you anymore because you've made attempts to work on those aspects of yourself OR you've come to term with your weaknesses. And maybe intertype relations when used as an excuse not to get along with types whose brains operate differently from our own is just a form of silent admission that "I don't want to work on myself, other people need to work on or around my flaws for me." And if SLI are the most self-sufficient type and IEE are most self-effacing and least expecting of reciprocity and they're the most independent duality pair in the socion THEN is that the only duality where true love could ever exist? And if other types learned to self-dualize, could that be the only time where they would ever truly know what it feels like to love for love's sake rather than utility's sake? Or would romantic love cease to exist entirely for some of us? Which sounds like I'm invalidating my previous point but I think this is still well in line with what we previously agreed on.

    And do you remember what you wrote about DarkAngelFireWolf69's forms of cognitions, that it is very much possible that people can shape-shift between types that belong to their respective right/left process group? As in they take on different types in different circumstances.

    Omg I feel like I'm lost in a maze right now. I just went off on 50 different tangents but I did read what you said and even if I didn't address much or any of it in this post I thought it was all very insightful and I may get around to answering the other stuff you wrote but right now I'm wondering more about your experiences with these intertype relations. Mainly ILI-EII. here I wonder if after being on the receiving end of benefit relations, does that temporarily alter your cognition? There's another socionics theory that ties into what you've written that proposes the idea that you find it most difficult to read content written by your lookalike type... I think that's what they're called (IEI/EII, in this case)

    AND here's another thing that's been on my mind lately because I disregard intertype relations in my dealings with other people because I have too many different friends and social groups to discriminate like that, but I did notice that the only real difference between my ILE best friend and my ESI friend is that they both have very similar things, but where the latter sees an endless sea of potential in the world around him, the former just sees what's missing, and it results in the latter being depressed whereas the former is usually happy. It's just a matter of perspective, that's all TIM is, they could be the exact same person from our POV but when you step inside their heads then you realize the disparity in assessments of the outside world and themselves. But worldviews are very easy to change if you're willing to disregard everything that you know aside from basic memories which have ingrained themselves into your brain (which is Ne, Se is about the acquisition and distribution of resources, which is probably why beta and gamma values are often most closely correlated with capitalist values [more so gamma] while alpha and delta are more closely correlated with communist values [more so delta])

  17. #17
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    it sounds kind of pompous to self identify as the type most inclined to self actualization or to define actualization in terms of one's own creative function, but if you think of Se as primary and Ne as secondary, or direct and indirect forms of tracking movement--primary being through space, secondary being through time. And then you think of how one organizes oneself, if its going to be in time, which the self exists in time, and Fi is the rational framework from which you define the world it is something of a tautological statement to say EII understands self development as the process of Ne nudging Fi into a move towards more overall positive affect which is defined as "threat sensitivity", in other words, its really just one big word game wherein "Ne" "moves" "Fi" which is another way to say its the piagetian scheme of trying to "win all games" (one game: the present; all games: time) i.e. to conquer the environment for all time, but via introversion rather than say extroversion which would be more like technology. this would be the development of the "perfect" set of values. the strategy to win not just this game but all games, this is essentially what morality amounts to: the development of a scheme whereby we perfect our subjective stance towards things such that "we win", which is defined as being in an equilibrated state in time, not one that ends in doom but "eternal life"

    as to your second point I think half the types, the extroverts, define success in terms of their achievements in the world, hence a lasting contribution in any number of fields would be enough to satisfy their criterion for "self actualization" or, better yet, they find self actualization in pursuing such goals... and even then if theyre seemingly wildly unbalanced they may nevertheless provide a service that justifies their existence in the grand scheme of things in light of the organism as a whole and in time "the herd"-- perhaps it is only an EIIism to define "unification" in an ethical and individualistic sense, thus any sense of superiority may be misplaced, which is actually a comfort to hear because EII master race feels wrong

    it also explains why so often EII is not particularly cared for, but at the same time feels very strongly in their own personal motives... people's indifference seems shocking but only if you assume everyone is on the same path

    in some sense I feel like we're in a dream that we will wake from and then this will all make sense in some future state, but for now we are just working out our current level of consciousness... by this I mean the creation myth is in some sense the story of how we "fell" from a prior collective form of being that was completely undifferentiated and that the sense of individuality and personal meaning is a product of our own journey back to a unified state and what that will look like or how it all fits together is unclear by definition and faith in God is faith in the idea that it nevertheless matters, that existence is good not evil, that love is the willingness to try, in the belief that its not hopeless or for naught, and that in the end it will all make sense, and that God is the culmination of all of that (heaven with him) and driving force behind everything (the beginning and the end)
    Last edited by Bertrand; 10-12-2017 at 04:30 AM.

  18. #18
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    yes I personally think that there's a progression of self actualization, and it arises from centroversion [1], which is a product of Ne [2] and the end state is integration which is the opposite of differentiation and inasmuch as a person becomes more integrated the less sharply they feel ITR

    [1] see eric neumann, origin and history of consciousness is actually a relatively easy read

    [2] nardi has a lecture on this where he talks about a "transcendent function" (which I believe he was talking about centroversion) and it registering most closely as Ne (but they are distinct notions) on his brain scans. I do believe Ne in the creative position may be distinct from Ne in the dominant and amount for the difference. In other words, for the reasons you've stated Ne in the dominant position may actually be moving away from integration and not towards it and thus not properly centroversion, but its the "whole brain activity" directed towards integration, which would be towards a rational whole i.e. subordinate to introverted judgement which structures the "whole person." Ne balanced by Fe (the demonstrative) may be heavily reliant on the environment to provide the "structure", in other words, adoption of a bankrupt idealogy is a pitfall Fe tends to run into which hyperactive Ne might speed the brain into reorganizing itself in accordance with, but it runs the pitfalls of organizing itself unto something just as flawed as the environment that produced it (just in the other direction--you see this often in paradoxically "aggressive" SJW types)... perhaps Fi runs the same risk in some ways because it nonetheless is influenced by the environment but more in terms of what it rejects... in the final anaylsis there are probably at least 16 different ways to transcend and these are the most obvious ones to us and each has its own pitfalls which is probably why healthy and complete human beings are so incredibly rare, if they exist at all


    as far as ESI v EII, I do think quadral complexes are a thing and that quadral progression is a thing and that types represent fixations on issues that broadly give rise to quadral "missions" and that certain responses or modes of dealing with problems are more appropriate for the environment as it exists at that time, hence it may be said that ESI favors action in space whereas EII favors action in time wrt to introverted ethical development and that each is needed based on the vicissitudes of history etc... life cycles exist for a reason, the reason we don't live forever, and even get cancer is arguably because its more beneficial to make a new copy of us than to keep the old one past a certain point, which is why we don't just get to delta and stop forever... alphas reshuffle their psychological priorities because it maintains the species' agility in response to a shifting environment. delta would be peaceful right up until it got totally wiped out because something came along it had failed to prepare for via challenging and developing itself from every angle. in that sense even "less developed" types serve the heard because in developing the problems peculiar to their type, even at their own expense in terms of ever becoming a "whole person" create solutions that only such a high degree of differentiation could produce, thus they are in some sense the true christ like figures in regards to the species. so disintegration for the benefit of the collective entails its own christ like sacrifice, but one of a different kind than the traditional individualistic notion we tend to think of. in that sense they find their integration in time via the herd and the propogation of the species. as if everything is one organism and they are an organ vital to its survival. thus you can start to see how various religious modes of understanding that view the universe in different lights may all have a basis and that most people I think are inherently striving for some kind of good, its just how they conceive of it and at varrying levels of consciousness. introversion tries to awaken the self but extroversion has its own sort of journey to enlightenment... like Jung says you can find God at the end of either extreme intro or extreme extroversion
    Last edited by Bertrand; 10-12-2017 at 04:03 AM.

  19. #19
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,581
    Mentioned
    132 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    yes I personally think that there's a progression of self actualization, and it arises from centroversion [1], which is a product of Ne [2] and the end state is integration which is the opposite of differentiation and inasmuch as a person becomes more integrated the less sharply they feel ITR

    [1] see eric neumann, origin and history of consciousness is actually a relatively easy read

    [2] nardi has a lecture on this where he talks about a "transcendent function" (which I believe he was talking about centroversion) and it registering most closely as Ne (but they are distinct notions) on his brain scans. I do believe Ne in the creative position may be distinct from Ne in the dominant and amount for the difference. In other words, for the reasons you've stated Ne in the dominant position may actually be moving away from integration and not towards it and thus not properly centroversion, but its the "whole brain activity" directed towards integration, which would be towards a rational whole i.e. subordinate to introverted judgement which structures the "whole person." Ne balanced by Fe (the demonstrative) may be heavily reliant on the environment to provide the "structure", in other words, adoption of a bankrupt idealogy is a pitfall Fe tends to run into which hyperactive Ne might speed the brain into reorganizing itself in accordance with, but it runs the pitfalls of organizing itself unto something just as flawed as the environment... perhaps Fi runs the same risk in some ways because it nonetheless is influenced by the environment but more in terms of what it rejects... in the final anaylsis there are probably at least 16 different ways to transcend and these are the most obvious ones to us and each has its own pitfalls which is probably why healthy and complete human beings are so incredibly rare, if they exist at all
    okay I'll check it out

    which would mean that Ne-creatives are the closest to reaching self-actualization, yeah? Where Ne-leads are flying off the handle with Ne and nothing to reign it in so that they can put it to good use since it's merely a vehicle in which they use to attain their creative function's needs, Ne-creatives use Ne (and they use it more "creatively" than Ne-leads) to implement their Ji-related initiatives to uphold their Ne-creative values. Since they're Se PoLR, they do so in such a way where it quietly "makes the world a better place" and since they're Si HA as well as Se PoLR then it's almost like an act of selflessness since their Si HA makes them hyper-focused on fulfilling their own needs and their Se PoLR expects nothing in return for their acts of benevolence. They're living by their values while implementing their values and since they do so by setting a good example by upholding their own values.. .OH and the nature of Ne in creative position - I think that makes them more likely to find fault within themselves rather than other people and if you go through living that way and you make conscious efforts to correct those flaws in yourself (as opposed to Ne-leads, who are usually more self-compensatory rather than self-actualizing in their approach to Ne-ing themselves) then they've attained self-actualization by virtue of slowly and eventually covering that Mazlow man's hierarchy of needs and it's only when you change yourself that you may then change the world and those within it. Everything comes back to platitudes

    I'm mostly making sure that I understood what you wrote correctly, but the second part about Fe and Ne and that bit about Fi confuse me. THE BOLD THO. That means each individual sociotype has a distinct path of self-actualization that they may follow in order to read Ne-creative status (for lack of a better phrase) but what I'm wondering here is which types would find it easiest and which types would find it most difficult to finally attain self-actualization? I'd assume the Ne-creatives respective conflictors but I'm not sure. However I did read somewhere that eventually SLEs reach a point in life where they start to regret for they have sinned in a million different ways and I'm wondering if that's how it might be for other types except to a less extreme degree. Where they eventually become depressed or downtrodden and their previous self is completely terminated and so they start anew

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    as far as ESI v EII, I do think quadral complexes are a thing and that quadral progression is a thing and that types represent fixations on issues that broadly give rise to quadral "missions" and that certain responses or modes of dealing with problems are more appropriate for the environment as it exists at that time, hence it may be said that ESI favors action in space whereas EII favors action in time wrt to introverted ethical development and that each is needed based on the vicissitudes of history etc... life cycles exist for a reason, the reason we don't live forever, and even get cancer is arguably because its more beneficial to make a new copy of us than to keep the old one past a certain point, which is why we don't just get to delta and stop forever... alphas reshuffle their psychological priorities because it maintains the species' agility in response to a shifting environment. delta would be peaceful right up until it got totally wiped out because something came along it had failed to prepare for via challenging and developing itself from every angle. in that sense even "less developed" types serve the heard because in developing the problems peculiar to their type, even at their own expense in terms of ever becoming a "whole person" create solutions that only such a high degree of differentiation could produce, thus they are in some sense the true christ like figures in regards to the species. so disintegration for the benefit of the collective entails its own christ like sacrifice, but one of a different kind than the traditional individualistic notion we tend to think of. in that sense they find their integration in time via the herd and the propogation of the species. as if everything is one organism and they are an organ vital to its survival. thus you can start to see how various religious modes of understanding that view the universe in different lights may all have a basis and that most people I think are inherently striving for some kind of good, its just how they conceive of it and at varrying levels of consciousness. introversion tries to awaken the self but extroversion has its own sort of journey to enlightenment... like Jung says you can find God at the end of either extreme intro or extreme extroversion
    This is precisely why I love Gilly and dolphin's quadra progression articles because it puts everything into perspective and rather than treating the types as separate from each other it shows that everything is connected and that life is innately cycle. Time is a flat circle and all that jibber-jabber. I have observed the quadral complexes play out in actuality and this is mostly because I've been a part of an on-going online community where I observed how we moved from Alpha (where ILE came up with an idea > ESE ran it up the flagpole, and Alpha territory was born) to Beta (we literally had "scapegoat sacrifices, two EIEs grew "sick" [one developed schizophrenia] and dropped out of the community) and then we moved to Gamma which was very clique-ish and we're still in that stage right now and it's god-awful but... while everyone is still Gamma stage, they started yet another Alpha community, with a separate group of individuals. But the closest we've ever gotten to a Delta community are book clubs, or little communities which branched off from the main communities, and then even more branching off until most of the Delta "communities" devolved into 1-on-1 interactions between Delta types.

    I do have a question I've been meaning to ask someone for a while now tho. Do you think that people are at the peak of their life when they're in the life stage that most closely corresponds with their own quadra? As well as their neighboring quadras. As in are Alpha types happiest in childhood, followed by teen-hood, and eventually old age, while detesting middle-age life, and so on and so forth for the other quadras?
    Last edited by wasp; 10-12-2017 at 04:23 AM.

  20. #20
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wasp View Post

    I do have a question I've been meaning to ask someone for a while now tho. Do you think that people are at the peak of their life when they're in the life stage that most closely corresponds with their own quadra? As well as their neighboring quadras. As in are Alpha types happiest in childhood, followed by teen-hood, and eventually old age, while detesting middle-age life, and so on and so forth for the other quadras?
    this thought had never occurred to me but it checks out, I was absolutely miserable until about 22 (when I converted to Christianity) and even then its been a slog, but its been on a slow upward trajectory ever since then, I expect I will be happiest in old age. like as a kid I was tortured by nightmares and had all sorts of bad times, and high school was hell because I was literally outcast, and college was slightly better but still full of traumatic experiences, and then I joined the army... it has always blown my mind that people enjoyed their childhood or grade school. on the other hand, I know a SLI and she says her happiest moments were in high school and she went to UCLA which is a great school but said she hated it, so I don't think it necessarily holds for everyone but it holds true for me so far

    its also possible local environments have their own status such that it may offset general life stages, in other words a very delta ish high school environment might make a delta feel great even in a "beta" stage of life, so I think in general the concepts are valid rational categories but they're subject to a confluence of factors


    as an aside I also want to add: this is how you can detect intuitives, they pack larger and larger amounts of meaning into smaller linguistic constructions and then chain them together to deal with ever increasing complexity of ideas... you can tell me and wasp are doing that the way we progressively build on concepts but at the same time compact foregone concepts into small compartments that we remember what they mean without getting stuck on the particulars or getting too pedantic. thinking intuitive types do this with long chains of abstract symbols such as pure mathematics, that they can track for extended periods where ethical types lose concentration. people need to do this so they can "reach bottom" of an issue instead of just retreading the same territory over and over, which is more a characteristic of sensory dominance... this is the capacity to move the discussion forward which is the purpose in specializing in such modes of cognition... otherwise people wouldn't be able to push discourse past a certain point... you see that with people like donald trump or ben shapiro, they never actually advance the discourse via the discourse, rather they're playing a different game when they discourse
    Last edited by Bertrand; 10-12-2017 at 04:54 AM.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This thread is just full of lunacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    you can tell me and wasp are doing that the way we progressively build on concepts but at the same time compact foregone concepts into small compartments that we remember what they mean without getting stuck on the particulars or getting too pedantic. thinking intuitive types do this with long chains of abstract symbols such as pure mathematics, that they can track for extended periods where ethical types lose concentration. people need to do this so they can "reach bottom" of an issue instead of just retreading the same territory over and over, which is more a characteristic of sensory dominance... this is the capacity to move the discussion forward which is the purpose in specializing in such modes of cognition... otherwise people wouldn't be able to push discourse past a certain point... you see that with people like donald trump or ben shapiro, they never actually advance the discourse via the discourse, rather they're playing a different game when they discourse
    It's called intellectual masturbation. You do realize that you are literally making up the majority of stuff that you are saying out of thin air?

    I'm like holy crap... just back it up, back the fuck out of whatever that you're saying in your constant vomiting of stream-of-consciousness over and over again, pretending that you've just said the most astute and wisest thing since Socrates, with at least SOME kind of hard evidence and data, instead of just making things up in your imagination and saying that your source is "an EII that I know" "I think this is what Fi is" "This is Alpha, this is Beta".

    Oh well, this is basically Socionics and this forum in a nutshell. Thinking that they're suddenly the expert psychologists who have the right to say whatever crap about people that they've thought up in their basements, just because they have read Jung.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    13,331
    Mentioned
    1265 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    with at least SOME kind of hard evidence and data, instead of just making things up in your imagination and saying that your source is "an EII that I know" "I think this is what Fi is" "This is Alpha, this is Beta".
    I suppose your scepsis is due to thinking is not your strong side and hence leaded you too often to mistakes. Te seems as not valued too to adequately take into account own exprience.

    > Thinking that they're suddenly the expert psychologists who have the right to say whatever crap about people

    So you dislike someone's opinion and try to protect own one by reducing of personal meaning of your opponent, like Ti valued would do. Also again - you dislike thinking, based on own bad experience with it.
    I suspect your type as EIE. They often reject the reason to keep dreams and delusions.

    Remind youself what is this forum for if you does not hold that people here "have the right to say whatever crap about people". And also read the rules (Ti valued again) to understand better their rights here. And then the sun will shine in your world again as the reality come to you, the dude with depressive avatar.
    Last edited by Sol; 10-15-2017 at 01:55 PM.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  23. #23
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,581
    Mentioned
    132 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    As you can see, my main hang-up with socionics, even though I'm on board with the idea that these underlying patterns in people and relationships do exist, is that for some people it turns into this self-fulfilling prophecy because they don't recognize that it isn't a foundation on which to rely on for identity or presumed compatibility with other people. This is like... This is like a life-hack and if you look closely you'll notice a-many connections between this theory and many other psychology theories and even connections between this specific personality theory and other personality theories. They're always measuring the same or very similar cognitive behavioral patterns. The only real difference between socionics and, let's say, the big five, is that the latter doesn't make the assumption that you'll score exactly the same every time. It doesn't give you a specific description because it recognizes that people are relatively fluid and I'd even argue that they propose the theory that nurture > nature. And now we could get into a long-winded discussion about free will and determinism because that is by far my favorite topic but my brain really hurts and IJust showered and when I showered I fell on the ground from excitement but also because the floor was very wet and now I'm very hungry but I'm too lazy to mkae food My enthusiasm is feeding into itself right now

    SOCIONICS, MUCH LIKE COMMUNISM, OBSTRUCTS PROGRESS (SELF-IMPROVEMENT) IF NOT USED CORRECTLY WHICH IS THE MAIN POINT

    this is my brain right now


  24. #24
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    LIE-Ni
    Posts
    1,068
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Look at them roll.

  25. #25
    C-ESI-Se 6w7 sx/sp ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    the center of the universe
    Posts
    15,798
    Mentioned
    909 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    I like it.

  26. #26
    I sacrificed a goat to Zeus and I liked it
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Durmstrang School
    Posts
    2,845
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Without socionics, there is no duality, and you are wild and free. Go out to the perimeter, where there is no socionics, and from there, follow your heeeeeeeeeeeeart

  27. #27
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,678
    Mentioned
    276 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jung View Post
    Hi!

    There is this problem I'm having with dual seeking in theory: What I understood, was that the best way to find a dual was through not knowing about existence of whole socionics theory. Then whatever you try to do based on socionics is not natural, because you would not have done it 'naturally'.

    In this way the socionics tends create problems, cause 'knowing' how something is supposed to work makes it highly likely to start working that way just because you was predicting it to work that way. Say you know your own type and how your supposed to act (according socionics theory) then you can type the other person, find out what relation comes out and start working with the person as if you did know that the prediction was correct. Now from what I have seen it is correct, but knowing about those predictions tend to create more problems instead of solving them.

    Do you find socionics helping you in some manner instead of it creating new problems? Can you 'seek' your dual, or is the best way just go to somewhere where they can erase all my knowledge about socionics and MBTI?

    -Carl G old
    You're overthinking things. God knows I did before I learned to quit worrying and embrace my to use a personal example. For instance, you'll know your romantic style by knowing about this stuff. I'm a "Victim" but I also know not to push that on anyone. My ideal "aggressors" will pick up on that part of me so all I gotta do is act natural and take pride in being "chased" by these women (I'll give em' a bit of sport too, because no true hunter is satisfied by easy prey). It's kinda the whole point of "dual" seeking. Ya just stop trying to do what other people say you should do and instead just let them come to you.

    This is, ironically enough, what any high-level PUA will tell you to do IF you happen to be male. Make the girl chase you. They usually neglect to define "how" they may chase you (if they're actually any good at the "game" they exalt) because, subconsciously, I bet they get what we talk about here. Each romantic style has a way it likes to be approached/make an approach. The aggressor goes all in, and the victim is refreshed by their direct honesty. The infant likes how slow the caretaker takes things, wanting to be eased into things. Likewise, the caretaker would be repulsed if their infant was over eager to just hand them all the power as they'd rather it be a trust relationship rather than a power based one. Quadra differences are real, deal with it.

    I'm oversimplifying all of this but I hope you get my point. Just go with what you feel is right and don't let the hormones/base desires override your logical centers. You "dual seek" by just letting it happen. I know, it's cliche and canned as far as answers go but that's how it basically works. Learn how to hit the modern nirvana state of "fuck it" like I have. Once ya do life gets way more easy and ironically fulfilling. Though I supplement it with faith in Jesus and his holy church so results may vary .

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    13,331
    Mentioned
    1265 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    The infant likes how slow the caretaker takes things
    I'd say with lesser rude pressure. For example, LSE are honest and open - so when notice meaningful interest, quickly say what they feel and what think about the relations. If LSE will think "it's all serious" and reciprocal - things may go really fast, without all that yours "catch me" aggressor/victim play. I saw such at other LSE and I know me.

    > Just go with what you feel is right and don't let the hormones/base desires override your logical centers.

    *sigh*
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  29. #29
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,678
    Mentioned
    276 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    I'd say with lesser rude pressure. For example, LSE are honest and open - so when notice meaningful interest, quickly say what they feel and what think about the relations. If LSE will think "it's all serious" and reciprocal - things may go really fast, without all that yours "catch me" aggressor/victim play. I saw such at other LSE and I know me.

    > Just go with what you feel is right and don't let the hormones/base desires override your logical centers.

    *sigh*
    That last part is actually important given how we're living in the tail end of an r-selected era. As things are hormones and base desires basically rule the public sphere. That time is ending and yet it's not hard to see how the various romantic styles can and would serve as very valid reproduction strategies in a K-selected environment. I mean, just to use my own victim class as an example again. The kind of man who "expects" the woman to chase him is essentially an Alpha Chad of the highest order. Only on the surface though. Once the facade is breached only an aggressor female would continue to hold interest and, furthermore, be willing to swear fidelity to him once the terms of the relationship are defined in light of ALL the data.

    This is, again, what finding your dual basically boils down to. Ya both got your own idea of an "ideal" mate and, it just so joyously happens, ya both are in total agreement. You are theirs, and they are yours, and ya both couldn't be happier about that .

    Not to say you couldn't find happiness with some other type. Even your conflictor can grant you happiness in their own way. Rare as the case may be but some would rather wed that bundle of hatred, misunderstanding, and "conflict" over their dual. I wouldn't look down on them for it because, well, sometimes the Lord works in mysterious ways. If they say they love them, then they love them. I won't interfere.

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    13,331
    Mentioned
    1265 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    Even your conflictor can grant you happiness in their own way.
    If you love, you tune to their psyche and this drains you. You may get pleasure, but it's like to deal with vampires.

    > Rare as the case may be but some would rather wed that bundle of hatred, misunderstanding, and "conflict" over their dual.

    Such may happen in case of strong passion, insincerity and when there was no experience of romance in good IR. Remove any of this and people will understand "something is wrong" very quickly.
    I saw such marriages, - they had serious problems, emotional and behavioral.

    > sometimes the Lord works in mysterious ways. If they say they love them, then they love them. I won't interfere.

    In case of marriage - would not. But in other case - to say like "think twice what you are doing" is useful. You may think that God send you to help.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  31. #31
    End's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    TIM
    ILI-Ni sp/sx
    Posts
    1,678
    Mentioned
    276 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    If you love, you tune to their psyche and this drains you. You may get pleasure, but it's like to deal with vampires.

    > Rare as the case may be but some would rather wed that bundle of hatred, misunderstanding, and "conflict" over their dual.

    Such may happen in case of strong passion, insincerity and when there was no experience of romance in good IR. Remove any of this and people will understand "something is wrong" very quickly.
    I saw such marriages, - they had serious problems, emotional and behavioral.

    > sometimes the Lord works in mysterious ways. If they say they love them, then they love them. I won't interfere.

    In case of marriage - would not. But in other case - to say like "think twice what you are doing" is useful. You may think that God send you to help.
    I'm just throwing things at the wall and seeing what sticks there. However I am of the belief that God could and would throw things like that at us to further his plan. He's infinite, we're finite. If I were to indulge my darker side in trying to explain it further I'd start to mirror a certain anime antagonist who saw things like child murder as "COOOOL!" and used that as his basis for believing in God's existence. If you can get that meme without consulting 4-Chan or Google you get a cookie .

    (This has been an End drunk post, take from it what you will)

  32. #32
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    in that sense even "less developed" types serve the heard because in developing the problems peculiar to their type, even at their own expense in terms of ever becoming a "whole person" create solutions that only such a high degree of differentiation could produce, thus they are in some sense the true Christ like figures in regards to the species. so disintegration for the benefit of the collective entails its own Christ like sacrifice, but one of a different kind than the traditional individualistic notion we tend to think of. in that sense they find their integration in time via the herd and the propagation of the species. as if everything is one organism and they are an organ vital to its survival. thus you can start to see how various religious modes of understanding that view the universe in different lights may all have a basis and that most people I think are inherently striving for some kind of good, its just how they conceive of it and at varying levels of consciousness.
    I feel like this is essentially how we (in Christianity, the west) struggle with the problem of satan and judas figures, and how pagans deal with this with "satanism" (lucifer, paradoxically named the "bringer of light"), which is nothing more than subsuming the apparent evil into a dialectical move upward which recognizes it as yin/yang (also eastern religions got this a long time ago)

    when people reject Christ because of the apparent contradiction between "the truth" and Christian tenets its because they fundamentally view the truth in a non unified fashion which would be this vs that, with Christ on the wrong side of science, requiring someone to choose, whereas a dialectical unification between science and religion is characterized by other thinkers (namely piaget, jung, neumann, eastern philosophers), where the this v that character takes the form of the higher and lower levels of "truth as yin/yang (life as a balance between ethics and logic)" v "truth as science (and inasmuch as science cannot provide "oughts" we throw them out--post modernism)"... which is really just a prior rung on the dialectical ladder, so this whole science v religion debate is fighting an outdated 19th century battle. but inasmuch as they continue to try and relitigate an already decided issue they represent stultification, but inasmuch as they continue to grapple with it they speak to the psycic trauma the events of the 19th and 20th century created. in other words, the inability to progress up the dialectic ladder by a large portion of the population, by continuing to cling to outdated science v religion narratives, speaks to essentially a "childhood trauma" they can't get over... thus they find that battle in every current event, even though it long passed.. and inasmuch as they operate this way, they operate as a stumbling block to advancing the discourse in a healthy way. Jung said "mass hysteria calls for mass therapy" so I think society stands on the brink of something bursting forth to resolve this tension, not science v religion, but science-v-religion-opposed v science-v-religion-unified, which is the real struggle for our day and age

    when someone like peterson says post modernism is the evil to be overcome by our generation I think he's speaking to transcending the old neurotic dichotomy that is at the root of the post modern narrative (and was likewise at the root of marxist and nazi doctrines)... in other words that dichotomy gave us both marxism and nazism, and then in clinging to that dichotomy, after ww2 we came up with post modernism, but the fundamental core issue remained, and its in digging down to that and resolving it that the 21st century finds its work

    in other words these are the psychological, not necessarily material or political (power), factors at the true root of human drama, that drive history

    its funny because in that sense the "science" types are essentially the true conservatives, trying to preserve their pristine image of the past and seeing everything in terms of threats to that, whereas the radical forward thinkers are those working to progress upward "beyond science"-- however it takes on the character of being "radically moderate" because it seeks to balance these two forces (left v right, in vulgar political terms), but not to move left or right but to move up. a lot of science as "hope for humanity" I feel like is born out of insecurity rooted in the self knowledge of their own fundamentally fearful and regressive character, which is why they react so harshly against anyone who is even worse off than them (even more regressive types), because its the vision of them at their worst and they hate that in others because they hate it in themselves, but they can't get off that ride until they recognize the true picture of what's happening, otherwise they're sort of shadowboxing with demons (which is ironic because they gave us such pejoratives leveled at their "adversaries" as "the demon haunted world")
    Last edited by Bertrand; 10-15-2017 at 02:53 PM.

  33. #33
    idontgiveaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,871
    Mentioned
    166 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well the problem with you is you're boxing yourself to fit on this stupid socionic theory.

    Just be you and don't fit in there. So you would not get a problem. Just refer to socionics if there's something you cannot understand.

    Like how an intp looks uncomfortable on a big social discussion. - Se polr.

Posting Permissions

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