wow are you me, especially agree on SEI. I sometimes dislike them so much I wonder if I'm IEE. this is exactly how I perceive the scenario right down to the dig on ILE. its super annoying because they're so locked in on their dual subconsciously you can't even explain to them why they're way off base in how they go about doing things. they will literally never understand, and yet they're like an immovable derpy mass that for whatever reason people tend to almost always side with. since people always side with them (and that's their criterion for judgement and they never make any moves except when surrounded by buddies) there's no way to ever make a point, so I've just taken to avoiding them. weirdly aggressive when in groups. maybe the most anti individualistic type in the socion. they are exactly what you'd expect for the type responsible for the turnover from delta-> alpha. they are death to me. i think its possible the turnover from delta to alpha is somewhat special and the ITRs across that specific boundary are subtly different for that reason. I like most alphas but whereas gamma seems to segue smoothly into delta, alpha feels like falling off a cliff, and its no surprise to me that SEI is what does it. social interactions between SEI/IEE is like people from two different universes. whereas I see ESI and LSE get along fine, or so it seems. tallmo says hes SEI and talking to him is always pleasant, but in real life people I type as SEI is like talking to a brick wall. they tend to have really ridiculous simplistic social rules they impose on everyone and they just run away with the normative ethics crowd because it sounds simple enough, but its got so many problems right under the surface and no one seems to notice, so SEI just takes them off the cliff together. I guess its how alpha has to be if its going to actually shift from delta. if it weren't so things would just stay delta. it amazes me though that nature made such a thing possible. amazed in a good way, its like a real time miracle that life found a way, whenever I'm frustrated with this I realize I'm witnessing a phenomenon of nature with the strength of a natural disaster and that's exactly what it feels like
I feel like it maybe it has to do with IEEs that shift more toward gamma (mirage ILIs--if involved in research installation) such that SEI is on the far side of the direction I'm motivated to go the opposite in. perhaps more social IEEs would shift toward SEI not away and get along better. in other words, if I'm inclined to push things toward centrality SEI is set naturally at odds with that, since they want to finish delta off and open alpha, whereas if anything I want things to go to gamma
Last edited by Bertrand; 03-11-2018 at 08:19 PM.
A brief summary:
Of the asymmetrical ITRs, Supervision is much less favourable for the disadvantaged party than Benefit. That is because in Benefit relations, your dual-seeking function is the Benefactor's creative function. In other words, Benefit bears some superficial similarities to an Activity relation (and may appear to be so at first). I have noticed many Benefit couples, and have myself indulged in Benefit relations both as the Beneficiary and Benefactor.
Supervision is a much, much less desirable ITR - it is no better than Conflict, to which it resembles. In Supervision relations, the Supervisor's lead function is the Supervisee's PoLR. In fact, it is worse than Conflict from the Supervisee's perspective, because the Supervisor's creative is the Supervisee's lead, which means the latter is less well equipped psychologically to fight back against their Supervisor's criticisms than they would be in a true Conflict relation (hence the asymmetry). I have found it impossible to communicate my point of view to my Supervisor type. They don't understand it and dismiss it.
As a rule: relationships of all types from the opposite Quadra will not endure (with the exception of Quasi-Identical, which can at least yield fruitful friendships). Supervision/Supervisee relations are also highly dissatisfactory and should also be avoided.
http://www.socionics.com/rel/relcht.htm
My closest colleague (and only one in my field there) is my conflictor and I am struggling with that right now. She is such a downer. My husband's brother, son, and ex-wife are all my conflictor also, but I get along great with them - we see each other for relaxing social situations and do not problem-solve together....
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
it bears reiterating comfort is a function of distance x ITR. coworkers with whom you need only maintain a cordial distance can be extremely fruitful and pleasant relations but if the same person were your Dad it could drive you into a hole. I admire many unfavorable ITRs from a distance. A good example would be someone like Nietzsche who I love to read, but probably would have not liked in person. its really more about needs. distant types can help very much in difficult situations, provided there is no attempt to close the gap on a personal level, because they focus on precisely the information you lack
Duals/Activators can be hard to find because they are from the opposite Club to you (e.g. NF vs SP). That means you have quite different interests. Benefit and Semi-Dual pairs often form instead for this reason (e.g. EIE-LII). So the girl gets knocked up, they get married and are unhappily divorced a few years later. Rinse and repeat. Sad story.
There is a simple solution to this problem: get out of your comfort zone and test your limits. If you're an LSI looking for an EIE, attend a classical music concert, fringe theatre production or stand up comedy. Talk to the stage assistants like me. Or if you are EIE join your local NRA branch or offroad 4WD group. You will suddenly meet a lot of people who have a favourable ITR.
Let’s see how that works out with a person who never gives you a straight answer about their plans or their finances and whose response to questioning is to run away. And you can call them but they won’t pick up and they won’t set up an answering machine and won’t take messages on their phone and might get back to you in their own good time when they feel like it. Or they might not.
Good luck with that.
I’m really not a nine, Olimpia.
Healthy eights are supposed to integrate to twos. I’ve been more stressed than normal recently, and it’s harder to keep the filters up.
But like Rocky Raccoon, I’ll be better, as soon as I am able.
@Adam Strange you need to write a long and angry article about SLIs, cool down for one or two days, then rewrite it and title the post "Shit SLIs do and say". Some nasty truths and your own experiences will be more beneficial than any positive insight.
well the bottom line is what is irritating for one person is a fun game for another, and its in viewing it that way that keeps the players together. even though that is irrational. that is the point.. but anyway, I'd read tales of Adam getting fucked over by SLI, and I do think there is some good, because once you realize they're irrational and then how it looks from a rational's point of view, you start to really learn about people and I think a lot of people could benefit from that. bitterness about the whole thing is kind of pointless because its only our misplaced expectations that created the disappointment. SLIs can't help but be SLIs and there's a lid for every pot. there is a lesson here about not taking what isnt yours to have, etc. if irrationals didn't exist humanity would have enslaved itself a long time ago because they would have devised a way to control everything and possess everything
It's not for SLIs - for the forum - but mostly for yourself. You write positive things about SLIs followed by really negative experiences with your ex. It is as if you're holding back most of your negative thoughts about the issue and then write very bitter posts and opinions. There is no consistency or harmony. Only extremes. When you're feeling sick the best thing is to let it out.
But what do I know...
*edit* damn, I'm on the unsolicited advice train again
there's a super thicc LSE in my class im in love with, but I can tell she would destroy me
@Cosmic Teapot, I think LIE’s have the ability to creat a reality distortion field around ourselves. It helps us accomplish things in the face of great adversity. This is both a strength and a fault. Seeing my father and my ex and my son in a favorable light is of some practical use to me, for many reasons.
But I agree that it is also good to see the world as it is.
I need to give this some more thought.
*EDIT*
I was married for a long time, and one of the best ways to ensure a long, happy marriage is to view your partner in a favorable light. I’m in the process of switching my loyalties from my past family to my future family, and so some of the filters are coming off.
I think a decent consideration of others demands that I not go overboard with this particular process.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 03-12-2018 at 12:53 AM.
true, realistically I would probably do the most damage, but I'd ultimately feel really bad for my own misdeeds... and she'd be easy to blame. when I say "she...destroy me" I really mean "I would destroy us both" and I've learned its not good to go into things already knowing you want out
well anything is possible so I'm not saying its doomed to failure, but what I mean is if you bring irrational antics to an LSE theres bound to be trouble, and it would be easy to turn around and put that on them in the moment, and on some level you start to know it wouldn't work but won't blame oneself either so what you get is this mix of desire and apprehension but you have to ask if you're going to put that first at the expense of a person. if so you go ahead and dive in and seduce them or whatever, and then when you're not feeling it you can make excuses as to why its fine and then you hurt them and then they react and then its over and its easy to never take any responsibility. so yes IEE is there to help them flourish but sometimes you do that by not getting into stuff you already know you're not really serious about, especially with the kind of people who are serious and vulnerable. in the end you cant just waste everyone's time and assume its on them if it doesn't turn out right, so its not as simple as merely showing up. so you're right its our job to prevent damage from occurring, and i've definitely been too reckless in the past with people who deserved better. so the above was a statement acknowledging it was a bit silly to say she'd destroy me, since that attitude actually sets the stage for me not taking responsibility later
i've never known an IEE to have a sufficient understanding of damage control, instead what usually happens is that they find themselves in the midst of chaos, which is sometimes of their own creation, other times they're just drawn toward chaos because they over-estimate their own organizational abilities, but it's like redirecting a gust of wind toward a baby flame which ends up creating an inferno, while they stand back idly with a dumbfounded expression wondering what wrong. i've even caught them lighting the baby fire (inadvertently, believe it or not) after they thought they smelled smoke because two negative must make a positive, but it's funny since if you ask them for their rationale, sometimes it's even confusing enough to make sense.
essentially this image right here:
yeah in retrospect I can see that has been me all too often
Like the song says, I think people are attracted to things that would give them trauma. Often they have this romantic fantasy that the opposite of how somebody usually behaves will magically happen, because they are simply carnally attracted to the person no matter what their super ego says- or because it's more interesting than simply taking people for face value - or who they are. So a sadistic psychopath's 'nice' moments become something that's overly idealized. And a person that's actually good for you doesn't feel exciting or sexy and makes you cringe etc. This is kind of an exaggerated example, but with people it tends to happen in smaller scale but similiar ways.
I also compare it to like eating something fatty and unhealthy that tastes good in the moment but causes obesity and pain and health issues vs. something healthy you probably aren't going to crave but is good for you long term. Kind of a cheesy example I guess, but it works in my head. Most people (including me) are common , pathetic and weak - and just predictably always go for the easy sugar fix. That's why the negativity seems to outweigh the good, I think. Part of the reason anyway- I also think objectively the world just kinda sucks right now and everything (including relationships) will reflect that?
I have seen a few relationships where there's hardly any drama - and the people simply get along with each other and laugh and have a good time but these do sadly seem quite rare nowadays. My mom and dad had that but my daddy had to die. =(
Also a hot dangerous Chad is just innately more interesting than a boring nice guy that holds your hand through the park. Like you already played world 1 of mario bros, you are ready for world 9.
But the problem is danger is danger. Shiny silverware is shiny. A spade is a spade. Pain hurts... and fire burns. A-holes are hot but A-holes also hurt your arse. And there's nothing really romantic about that. Being hurt by something hurtful is the price we pay for it being 'more interesting.' So you end up in child custody cases with a ###### up Chad rather than riding off in the sunset like you originally had planned. So I guess... there's kind of a balance between feeling like your life is an interesting explosion, and just being wise enough to stay safe with the beta males. =D
It might not have made her happy, but she seemed pretty focused on getting it.
She called me a while ago and told me it wasn’t enough. Which makes me wonder what WOULD be enough? Lol.
I sometimes think that SLI’s are determinantly ignorant of their own motivations.
Fortunately, that’s no longer my problem.
The reasons for this can be complex. I don't think i'm qualified to comment
But it's something women can do. If a woman's willing to get a divorce, she can be willing to do anything just for the sake of hurting, but hopefully that's not the case.
Another scenario is possible resentment. If someone places a high value on money, working 7 days a week, then another may try to extract that money from them as a way of 'attacking' what they see as too much a value placed on material earning.
But, some people just like working.
Or maybe she just wants stuff.
Errr, not really my place to know, like you say, it's no longer your problem
I don’t think she was trying to hurt me. I think she just places a very high value on her own security, and is selfish. For example, whenever she dished out food, she would 100% of the time give herself the largest portion. I don’t think she allowed herself to realize that fact.
In her mind, she wanted to believe that she was completely fair.
this is funny cause I always get annoyed when people push large portions on me, especially if they just make a shitload, then calculate they need to give me x+1 so they can justify taking x, which is the amount they actually want (they built in their "sacrifice" at zero cost, just to head off empty complaints they aren't sacrificing enough). its all empty posturing, when people should take as much as they want and not punish me by making a big deal over how much I do or do not eat so they can feel better about their own choices, and if you think you're being short shifted just freakin say something. own your choices people. the whole thing is entirely superfluous no one is going hungry, and yet here we are, playing mind games over nothing
Yes, thats right. But I've seen a lot of Ni's and especially LIEs (no personal anything towards LIEs). I mean, looking for hidden meanings and putting secret blames in others and accusing them of nonexistent moral meanings behind their actions as if they are able to see right through ppl minds. Maybe it has something to do with Fi seeking and Ni. What freaks me out is not the fact of they inferring x or y, but the fact that they actually convince themselves to the point of believing that their suspicions and conclusions about the motivations and unsaid thoughts of others are completely true. Like if they were able to read minds.
They make assumptions and then they believe them as truth. I've seen others Gamma doing similar stuff, so I think its Fi Ni together, and the victim-aggressor style. Victims seem to always being looking for guilty, an aggressor, someone to blame, "who did what against me and for what reason and hidden meaning". Too much suspicion and paranoia with little evidence.
I do the thing of serving different portions all the time. It depends on the person I'm serving too and if s/he is hungry or his/her regular portions. Its completely and totally physically oriented. If I'm very hungry I'll take a large portion. Not because I'm very hungry I'm going to serve a huge portion to the other person. Thats not reasonable. I've been accused of serving large portions before so I often try to ask about the portions or just go with a standard size. If the person wants more there can be a second portion. But if its too much and they dont want the food, it will be wasted at the end. I dislike wasting.
Last edited by Faith; 03-14-2018 at 07:08 AM.
lol Adam, your stuff always cracks me up.
It could be about fairness, or maybe she was just hungry and consciously or subconsciously choosing a large portion. Thats more logical if you consider that SLIs are Si lead and Si is about taking care of themself. I think you as LIE could be subconsciously oriented towards seeking Introverted Feelings and ethical relational (Fi) meanings and probably dismissing Si usual focus due Si PoLR. I think the interpretation of others actions also depends on perspective.
Last edited by Faith; 03-12-2018 at 07:16 AM.
just the idea that there's a hidden meaning in there seems insane given all the non conspiratorial possibilities that could be producing the result. not to mention any problem could be immediately rectified by saying something. its like do people really go on like this for God knows how long without saying anything only to vent to strangers years later and somehow expecting they understand as if this is common knowledge. the whole thing is n u t s
I was gonna say what Adam said sounded very non-Ni to me: expecting someone to cater to u is Ni? I dunno i've not encountered it honestly. But anyway i reckon it was a complicated situation where even the smallest annoyances can become a big deal.
I don't know if this forum is just exclusively meeting "unhealthy" SLIs because that's what they're like in actuality and I must've mistyped every SLI in my life, or if my brother and the friends I've had are just unusual exceptions to these obscure rules, because I've never experienced a single issue of this nature with my brother and I have yet to think of a single time where we experienced anything beyond a momentary misunderstanding, which was forgotten shortly afterwards, and I think outside of matters pertaining directly to love, which comes with its own set of complications, regardless of which sociotypes are involved, I don't think I've experienced these issues with my friends or ex-boyfriends either. there are always gonna be awkward misunderstandings between people, as is the nature of human interaction, but nothing on such a large scale that I'd attribute that level of opportunism ("gold-digging") to a single sociotype, mostly because if I were to attribute "gold-digging" to any sociotype, it'd probably be LIE (thx strat) followed by IEI.
which isn't to say that SLIs are impervious to potentially uncouth behaviors because I know they've got their own set of flaws (otherwise they wouldn't be human) but for simplification's sake, Si would be "needs" and Se would be "wants" so for any Si-valuer (especially Si-leading sociotypes) to expect, let alone demand, more than they objectively need doesn't fit the theory. I think that's closer to Se territory and I'd be more inclined to argue that Se HA would be the most guilty of this, and there's probably something to the fact that LIEs are supervised by SLIs because I've always kinda been of the opinion that LIEs are the greediest sociotype because where SLIs might be greedy for self-preservation purposes - which occasionally comes at the expense of other people, but I wouldn't say it's unintentional - then LIEs are greedy simply because their subjective "wants" are the basis of their self-esteem, which extends well beyond self-preservation, it's more like self-aggrandizement, but you'd be hard-pressed to find an SLI who'd take the bait.
anyway I don't mean to be rude, but this discussion is reminiscent of that "ESIs are gold-diggers" thread, which contradicts the theory because I'm pretty ESIs are considered to be one of the most self-sufficient sociotypes in the socion, and I'd say that SLIs are somewhere on the same level, if not higher
I think everything Adam Strange is saying, in balance, is correct.
The reality of SLIs is that, they're happy doing minimum work for maximum return. It's not because they are so great at maximizing their returns because of creative , it's because, as an dominant, and IP, they are lazy. They are also selfish when it comes to their comfort over others, and, despite what they really claim to mean (so they say themselves), with their Fe PoLR at least, they can say and do some of the most heartless and hurtful things possible.
Let's not over idealize a sociotype. SLIs come with many faults, consequently, as the literature says, they need an 'understanding partner.' Good luck putting up with an SLI.
Considering the poster in question was married for many years, had a child, went through a divorce, he's talking about stuff, and you're speaking as if you know it all, it does seem a bit rude, to me, all the sameOriginally Posted by wasp
Curios: Maybe you do know it all, what age are you? (You come across as young and inexperienced, so I thought i'd clarify.)
Last edited by at sirac son of sirac; 03-12-2018 at 08:49 AM.