Do you find the Concept of Quadras Limiting?

[jason_m]

I am an extremely open-minded person. (That could actually be the flaw in my self-typing or with the theory.) I am therefore open to talking to people from all quadras - if they have something intelligent or interesting to say. That (I think) is my problem with Se: they are inherently stubborn, and it is impossible to change their mind or open them up to new ideas - but I am still able to get through to many of them. That I also feel is the flaw with the theory: the idea is almost to stick with your own quadra all (or most) of the time. As someone very open-minded, it bothers me that I can't converse with people from (e.g.) the Gamma quadra. For instance, ILIs are very intelligent and I often like what they have to say. ILEs as well. Should I just close down communication with all ILIs because we aren't from the same quadra? I think that idea stinks. It is not very open-minded to me.

Anyway, does anyone else find this whole notion behind socionics limiting in some way?

[myresearch]

I am also open to talk with members of every quadra. I am open to talk with all types including Se egos, however, I am not open to all people, individualistic characteristics are important. I think every type adds a different kind of understanding and perspective. If any Ne ego wants to understand the perspective of Se egos, it would be easier to grasp if you spent time with your kindred (if you are rational) or look-a-like (if you are irrational).

[Tallmo]

Seriously? Your interpretation of Socionics is very strange. I don't know where you're getting these ideas from.

[jason_m]

Seriously? Your interpretation of Socionics is very strange. I don't know where you're getting these ideas from.

Isn't that what's implied by the theory? i.e., if you're Alpha, Alpha relations are good and Gamma relations are bad, so move toward Alphas and stay away from the Gammas... Isn't that the basic idea of the theory?

[FreelancePoliceman]

Isn't that what's implied by the theory? i.e., if you're Alpha, Alpha relations are good and Gamma relations are bad, so move toward Alphas and stay away from the Gammas... Isn't that the basic idea of the theory?

Some people seem to take it that way. I read it more as communication being more difficult in some ways across quadra lines. Since you mentioned Alphas and Gammas - I don’t really have anyone I’d consider a “friend” these days, but I’ve gotten closer with some Gammas than with other people. These quasi-friendships with Gammas however usually come from shared experiences and interests, less than a sense that they’re particularly fun to talk with. Not that I’m saying they’re objectively boring. They just have different values and this causes a difference in expression and cognition. With most other Alphas on the other hand, we don’t really have to have many interests in common to get along decently.

But inter-quadra communication isn’t an insurmountable difficulty at all, and I don’t see how it benefits anyone to “stay away” from their opposite quadra. Possibly for a romantic relationship it’s best to find someone you have very few hitches in getting along with, but in all other cases, I’d say the principle that it’s good to be able to understand and get along with people who have differing views and values generally holds fast.

[CR400AF]

Isn't that what's implied by the theory? i.e., if you're Alpha, Alpha relations are good and Gamma relations are bad, so move toward Alphas and stay away from the Gammas... Isn't that the basic idea of the theory?

No. The idea is that there are 35 different small groups and each small group has its own merits. Quadra is the most important one, but it doesn't tell you to stay away from gammas. Although it implies that it's better for you, an alpha, not to marry a gamma person. It also implies that alphas and gammas have different historical missions. But there are other types of relationships.

[Tallmo]

Isn't that what's implied by the theory? i.e., if you're Alpha, Alpha relations are good and Gamma relations are bad, so move toward Alphas and stay away from the Gammas... Isn't that the basic idea of the theory?

And that's what people are doing all the time without any knowledge of Socionics, because same quadra just feels more comfortable especially in intimate relationships. But that doesn't mean that you can't enjoy the (occasional) company of an individual of opposite quadra. The person could be interesting, you could be compatible in other ways, or you might share some personal history together etc. There are tons of individual factors that could pull you together.

Quadras is just a fact. It doesn't limit anything.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Are you ILE? My ILE buddy is a lot like this- he likes to get everybody involved and has these naive ideals that we can all just get along (cuz ESE is his activity after all).

Probably cuz he's a thinking type with Fi polr and doesn't fully understand or comprehend (or want to) the little emotional things that happen between people that make others not want to be around each other. In his naive ILE head he's like 'just get over it so we can go back to talking about all this cool Ne stuff!' but it doesn't work that way- he needs to pay attention to the Fi grudge holding side of things more. And yeah Fi can be very dark and sadistic- like horribly so- and ILEs especially run away from it cuz they are deathly afraid of sadistic Fi just like IEIs are afraid of sadistic Te.

It's a nice thought- but people will always like being in groups that are us vs them and we aren't just going to sit around the table logically debating things in this pleasant way without feelings and values getting involved. ((I still like his idealism in ways because, I do think 'people should be nicer' and all that....))

ILIs when they are healthy are very knowledgeable, useful and practical- however when Unhealthy they are just these sadistic bullies that can't get along with anybody for the life of them cuz their Fe is so bad.

The kinda funny and ironic thing is that if you are Alpha, you probably naively think you can be a Gamma's friend but it's not going to work the other way around because Gammas suck. =D Gammas really like their little in-group thing they have going on so it will be one-sided. And c'mon- all the quadra war stuff was started by a Gamma here so you can't tell me I'm wrong. Then you yourself are probably going to get annoyed at them and find them too snobby- and want to be around other Alphas again mostly. So you will end up proving yourself wrong intellectually - but you also won't care because it will be more emotionally satisfying for you.

Fe is like 'AoE healing' but Fi is single target healing - and so if ur more focused on Fi you will want to heal your own kind more than heal others.

You shouldn't really close down communication with anybody- but I mean, be careful of the feeling/heart side of stuff too cuz that's where a lot of the revenge schemes can start from lol. Some people are only going to ever be at a 'business distance' and that's perfectly fine.

Then again I''ve been told by others I view people too darkly but I just feel it's more realistic. Even when it seems like I'm cutely idealinzg ppl and giving them rpg classes I'm also like looking at their shadow side at all times for my own protection and cuz it's interesting to me and it's part of my refusal to be manipulated by anything cuz I'm the one that manipulates.

[Baqer]

Alright, where do I start.

Are you ILE? My ILE buddy is a lot like this- he likes to get everybody involved and has these naive ideals that we can all just get along (cuz ESE is his activity after all).

Probably cuz he's a thinking type with Fi polr and doesn't fully understand or comprehend (or want to) the little emotional things that happen between people that make others not want to be around each other. In his naive ILE head he's like 'just get over it so we can go back to talking about all this cool Ne stuff!' but it doesn't work that way- he needs to pay attention to the Fi grudge holding side of things more. And yeah Fi can be very dark and sadistic- like horribly so- and ILEs especially run away from it cuz they are deathly afraid of sadistic Fi just like IEIs are afraid of sadistic Te.

Then again I''ve been told by others I view people too darkly but I just feel it's more realistic. Even when it seems like I'm cutely idealinzg ppl and giving them rpg classes I'm also like looking at their shadow side at all times for my own protection and cuz it's interesting to me and it's part of my refusal to be manipulated by anything cuz I'm the one that manipulates.

I will admit, I've myself definitely ignored Fi stuff alot, the whole little emotional things, though I will say, those things seem extremely irrelevant and pedantic to focus on. Typically with my experience with anything nearing "sadistic Fi", I'll typically just ignore it and continue acting as I normally do. Though what I'm talking about when I think "sadistic Fi" is being needlessly criticized for the sarcastic, carefree attitude I typically hold up, and having any attempt at lightening up the situation by joking being met with a "wow look how much I'm laughing rn". The whole "shadow side" thing shows the edgy emo-ness of IEI's that I've heard about, and seems a bit black and white to divide people into their "good" and "bad" parts using idealized images.

Switching to the whole thing people have against deltas in this thread which I've found fascinating, I've personally been much surrounded much more deltas, especially EII's, around the same as I've been exposed to other NT alphas(with the occasional gamma and no one I can confidently call a beta thrown in). Typically I've found deltas to be very different depending on the type, since I haven't really met them interacting together. An SLI I know is someone who I talk to from time to time, and conversations are usually fine and interesting, though the thing I've noticed the most when talking to them is what Talanov calls Qe. Defined as "a propensity for critical disagreement and denial, impatient opposition to someone else's opinion, irritability, explosiveness, rancor." While it's not super obvious and out there, conversations with them typically devolve into me angering some Fi topic(typically joking about a mutual friend and messing with them), at which point I continue to joke around and push the topic while they get enraged at me. It's not a super permeant, grudgeful thing, but it definitely fits the definition. Another thing I've noticed between Alphas and Delta(and possibly Gamma), is the general sensitivity to joking about things/people using serious topics(the kinda violent alpha humor that freelance mentioned earlier in this thread).

O, and to the whole fantasizing thing, typically I've found that since I've had a very neutral and pleasant upbringing, I don't really find myself recoiling into any fantasy realm, with basically 90% of my head being full of surface level intuition or some mix of Ti/Te. Very boring compared to the extreme detail of the other people in this thread.

And finally, to the original question of this thread, I've personally found Quadras to be relatively loose groups of people which seem not to really matter when groups of people form. While I will say that I have noticed people of the same quadra seemingly interacting better than of those in different ones, including my own experience, it seems that groups form randomly or from a common interest, both of which are usually very independent from socionics. The idea isn't limiting, in fact actively hanging out with your own quadra more often in close relations is probably one of the best choices one can make, it's just that you can still get along and talk with other people(though friendships will take more work to uphold, especially the closer they get).

[ashlesha]

Itr doesn't prescribe behaviors or tell you who you should talk to. That's something people do afterwards. I prefer to avoid that kind of approach and conceptualization of the theory because it leaves an extremely bad taste in my mouth and no mathematical framework is gonna be the boss of me. People could be more consoled by the idea that being yourself will be good with the right people? But I guess that would remove the sense of agency they get from having typology in their pocket.

[Stray Cat]

I am an extremely open-minded person. (That could actually be the flaw in my self-typing or with the theory.) I am therefore open to talking to people from all quadras - if they have something intelligent or interesting to say. That (I think) is my problem with Se: they are inherently stubborn, and it is impossible to change their mind or open them up to new ideas - but I am still able to get through to many of them. That I also feel is the flaw with the theory: the idea is almost to stick with your own quadra all (or most) of the time. As someone very open-minded, it bothers me that I can't converse with people from (e.g.) the Gamma quadra. For instance, ILIs are very intelligent and I often like what they have to say. ILEs as well. Should I just close down communication with all ILIs because we aren't from the same quadra? I think that idea stinks. It is not very open-minded to me.

Anyway, does anyone else find this whole notion behind socionics limiting in some way?

Nah. I'd say you're extrapolating & creating boundaries on your own. Like, my conflict relations are hella fucking awesome people but I'd factually be a dumb motherfucker to put a ring on it.

Socionics just studies the spectrum of comfort that reality has created between the types. Keep your mind completely open & have a completely open bottle booze with you also

[Sol]

Quadras are only types grouped by their valued and supplemental functions.
So you should ask about supplemental functions instead. You doubt in IR theory by this.

Limiting are Jung types. It's psyche distortion which also creates IR effects.
It needs to change Jung type or its expression to change IR effects for you.

Among hypothetic ways which can do this are:
1) meditations - super concentration on something what suppresses all other mind conscious processes. Some of meditations establish "void" state, some may relate to religious symbols and ideas as God in monotheism. This consciousness suppression reduces suppression of weaker functions and they become more equal in such trance states. Mb by a training it's possibly to reduce Jung type for when you return to common mind state.
2) To join minds with a human of duality type in love/friendship state. This shifts your mind to the side of weak functions (as those are valued you have lesser inner opposing to accept this influence) and so reduces Jung type.
1 and 2 mb matched to some degree.

Possible side effect of the said change can be:
1) reduced abbilities related to strong functions. Jung type helps to use strong functions as has permanent readiness to use them - so you need lesser efforts to concentrate the mind on them. In more equal state this will be alike to start with lesser initial speed.
2) reduced abbility to differentiate information of weakened functions - nuances will be harder to be processed. for example, you are hurted by a dog and then feel irrational fear from all of them. and lesser differentiation between different functions alike in synesthesia, as for the mind they become more similar. for example will appear higher tendency to trust logically (T) to what you like higher by emotions (F)
3) activation of archaic unconscious mind processes which are not good conscious in common, which were suppresed by developing modern mind. some of them can be useful, but other not. so may appear a problem to integrate and to control something what may come

It's good if it will be same with Jung functions as with left and right hands development. If you'll develop left hand to be used with similar skills - you'll not reduce your skills with right hand. It needs a research and practice to find how to solve one problem and do not make other ones. For example, not anyone will agree to become dumber and to live by simpler occupations as way to feel better himself and with some people. And mb not anyone will like to deal with unconsciousnes contents alike telepathic compassion (with lesser possibility to ignore what other people feel to you) when you need higher concentration and not be distracted by opposing people near, when need be strict or even violent with people (as in army). It may need to study additional methods how to control new traits and do not loose the good what mind allowed before.

[YXPR]

But doesn't the theory state that each intertype can bring you something? I've never read that you shoud stick to your quadra and never talk to someone outside of it.
To me it's all about balance. If all of your friends are from the opposite quadra then there is something wrong 100% (that's my opinion). But having a mix of all the quadraqs in your life can be a great thing. For example, you can learn a lot from your benefactor, supervisee of even your super-ego.

And personally, if most of the people that I hate are deltas; I also know some deltas that I really like.

[persimmonism]

No not at all, along with duality this was the concept that finally pushed me to learn about Socionics after seeing the word floating around online for a couple years.

[rivka]

nah i see quadra dynamics play out all the time so i dont really have any skepticism towards it. dimensionality on the other hand...

[CR400AF]

There is other small groups such as clubs in which you are in the same group with ILIs.

Quadra is only one of the 35 small groups. Although it is considered one of the most important group, there are other groups and socionics is not saying that you can't communicate with other quadras.

[Alomoes]

Just start thinking in terms of probability of meeting someone in your quadra multiplied by the chance making friends with them.


You can find this by friends/number of people ypu know times the chance they're in your quadra, or number of people you know are in your quadra.

Now, I doubt you know for sure of people in your quadra. If all your friends are in your quadra, and everyone you dislike are not, then you are probably aristocratic. That's a tangent for another day though.

[AWellArmedCat]

I wasn't aware that we were supposed to stay in our quadras, so I wouldn't have said I found it limiting. As you describe it though, yeah, that's definitely very restrictive. I think it's important to be exposed to all sorts of views whether they're from your quadra or not. I do find there are definite trends though along quadra lines. Other than my own (beta) quadra, I generally find alphas to be the easiest to get along with. Gammas tend to be interesting, but I feel very blind to their Te-Fi cognition. Like I just don't feel like I "get" them really though my interactions with them I would call positive. They're just a bit confusing to me at times. Interactions with deltas though very often just feel completely awkward to me. Not always, but just much of the time. ISTps and ENFps are less of a problem for me, but ESTjs and INFjs very often make me feel weird. I'm sorry, it's nothing personal and I love y'all rational deltas, but I just don't get you at all lol

[FreelancePoliceman]

I wasn't aware that we were supposed to stay in our quadras, so I wouldn't have said I found it limiting. As you describe it though, yeah, that's definitely very restrictive. I think it's important to be exposed to all sorts of views whether they're from your quadra or not. I do find there are definite trends though along quadra lines. Other than my own (beta) quadra, I generally find alphas to be the easiest to get along with. Gammas tend to be interesting, but I feel very blind to their Te-Fi cognition. Like I just don't feel like I "get" them really though my interactions with them I would call positive. They're just a bit confusing to me at times. Interactions with deltas though very often just feel completely awkward to me. Not always, but just much of the time. ISTps and ENFps are less of a problem for me, but ESTjs and INFjs very often make me feel weird. I'm sorry, it's nothing personal and I love y'all rational deltas, but I just don't get you at all lol

That's interesting to me. For me, Betas are also the easiest to get along with outside Alpha, possibly excepting SLEs. But the energy of the quadra can be a little too "hard" in a way, like there's a tendency to revel in the unpleasant and disparage the pleasant; that tendency I don't like very much.

Gammas just tend to seem distant; usually they don't seem interested in me, and I tend not to find them too interesting in turn. Occasionally I've sparked good conversations with ILIs, but eventually they fizzle out. ESIs are nice and I tend to get along pretty well with them; they just tend to feel...somewhat boring, in a way; I tend to feel a little restless after spending too much time with them. SEEs it can be difficult to communicate with or find much in common with.

Deltas give me a strange feeling of self-limitation, like they try to construct bubbles around themselves and their conceptions and won't ever voluntarily step past them. SLIs are the worst in this regard. They give me almost a feeling of being machines: they find a routine, consider it good, and will continue it indefinitely, never thinking, let alone desiring, to do anything else. EIIs tend to have a really awfully prosaic worldview that's depressing to hear -- you don't expect a random person off the street to be very insightful, so it would be forgivable for them to have incoherent or misguided opinions, but hearing a stream of banalities pour from the lips of quite introspective and often quite insightful people is somehow much worse. Alain de Boton is someone I consider EII, for instance. It's a little similar with IEEs; despite the flood of Ne, it just doesn't seem to...go anywhere; they have a strange way of returning their thoughts back to where they began, which is difficult for me to describe, and seems to me quite different than the way ILEs or even LIIs use their Ne. I've also noticed they like to very confidently give advice, and this advice is almost without exception terrible. I tend to like them at first but tend to feel agitated after spending too much time with them.

[AWellArmedCat]

@FreelancePoliceman
I find what you say about betas reveling in the unpleasant kind of interesting. This wasn't something I ever thought about before coming to Socionics, but now I hear the idea that betas are somehow harsher quite often, and I guess it's true if I compare myself to my very alpha parents (SEI dad and ESE mom). I thought it was just me doing the edgy teenager thing, but when I was around 12 or so I got really into pop-punk/metalcore/emo-scene music and culture. Even before that I always liked music that was somehow aggressive, and rather than growing out of that as I've gotten older I just go for heavier and heavier hitting stuff. Totally different from my dad who likes melancholy country music or my mom who's into classical, jazz, and a lot of pop music. With movies as well there's a similar split. My mom in particular really seems to NEED the movie to have a "happy ending" whereas I often find too happy of an ending to be kind of unsatisfying. Even if the movie isn't specifically a "sad movie" I want it to make at least a little effort to hurt me. I think it's cause I go through every day acting happy and really beaming a lot of positive energy outwards regardless of how I actually feel, so for me happiness doesn't feel so much "positive" but rather feels "neutral". Happy is the default so it's not very interesting. When I talk in depth with people "pleasant" is a great place to start, but I'm going to feel like we're not really connecting if we don't at some point start sharing the tragedies of our lives lol

P.S. I just realized I also tend to find romantic relationships more satisfying when they're quite dramatic. I know it's not a good thing, but I'm really attracted to troubled people and tragic backstories. I feel I've been doing a good job at not getting into these sorts of relationships since I graduated college, but the temptation is real

[rose]

@FreelancePoliceman
I find what you say about betas reveling in the unpleasant kind of interesting. This wasn't something I ever thought about before coming to Socionics, but now I hear the idea that betas are somehow harsher quite often, and I guess it's true if I compare myself to my very alpha parents (SEI dad and ESE mom). I thought it was just me doing the edgy teenager thing, but when I was around 12 or so I got really into pop-punk/metalcore/emo-scene music and culture. Even before that I always liked music that was somehow aggressive, and rather than growing out of that as I've gotten older I just go for heavier and heavier hitting stuff. Totally different from my dad who likes melancholy country music or my mom who's into classical, jazz, and a lot of pop music. With movies as well there's a similar split. My mom in particular really seems to NEED the movie to have a "happy ending" whereas I often find too happy of an ending to be kind of unsatisfying. Even if the movie isn't specifically a "sad movie" I want it to make at least a little effort to hurt me. I think it's cause I go through every day acting happy and really beaming a lot of positive energy outwards regardless of how I actually feel, so for me happiness doesn't feel so much "positive" but rather feels "neutral". Happy is the default so it's not very interesting. When I talk in depth with people "pleasant" is a great place to start, but I'm going to feel like we're not really connecting if we don't at some point start sharing the tragedies of our lives lol

P.S. I just realized I also tend to find romantic relationships more satisfying when they're quite dramatic. I know it's not a good thing, but I'm really attracted to troubled people and tragic backstories. I feel I've been doing a good job at not getting into these sorts of relationships since I graduated college, but the temptation is real

wow.
I guess that's where quadra values truly appear.
I tend to act nice and all but it's fake, I'm buying peace because I find it valuable. If I feel I must be fake to buy peace, I cannot have respect for the person.
And well, I can be genuinely nice, I'm just a human after all, but it has to come from the heart.
Tbh, I think the fakest people are those faking Fe, not Fe egos. They mean the Fe. Even if I can't understand how.
Sorry, this may be uncalled for, I just can't understand why anyone has typed me IEI after reading most IEI stuff. It's so strange to me.

And more on the actual topic: no one is restricted to a quadra or good IR, it would be hell if we were. We need to learn from each other to grow and become both more open and able to set up boundaries.

[AWellArmedCat]

@flowers and sugar You're probably not IEI. I have little reason for saying this beyond a vibe, so don't take this as meaning much, but you remind me more of my EII sister. Also thank you for recognizing Fe as not fake. It's not fake in the slightest and I get really irritated by people constantly implying that it's somehow less real. The way I feel about my Fe is that I go through life soaking up emotions like a sponge. They don't have to be my emotions, though some might be. Because I soak all these emotions up I NEED to emote them somehow eventually, but I do so carefully because I am keenly aware of how my emotional output impacts the environment around me. I regulate my emotions with precision as though I were managing a bunch of high pressure valves. Whatever I'm emoting is definitely real, but it's also measured to the situation as I see fit and since it's stored in liquid form old sadness has been mixed with new sadness so it may not all come from the same place in time. If I'm in a situation where I feel the energy needs to be maintained at a positive level then I'll keep sadness and anger and whatever else locked down pretty hard until I'm in a place which requires those emotions, and at that point I can let them out with a fair bit of force. This is why I believe I like tragic stories and rage-filled music, and probably why I was a theatre kid in school. I love excuses to open those valves without worrying. I can totally forget about locked down emotions though. It's not like they eat away at me if I leave them alone to build for a long time. Sometimes if I've gone too long without opening one up I underestimate the amount of pressure it's under and can respond to a situation with WAY more emotion than I meant to. This has surprised people a number of times, particularly when I responded suddenly with anger, because people basically never see me angry unless they go to karaoke with me lol

[FreelancePoliceman]

@FreelancePoliceman
I find what you say about betas reveling in the unpleasant kind of interesting. This wasn't something I ever thought about before coming to Socionics, but now I hear the idea that betas are somehow harsher quite often, and I guess it's true if I compare myself to my very alpha parents (SEI dad and ESE mom). I thought it was just me doing the edgy teenager thing, but when I was around 12 or so I got really into pop-punk/metalcore/emo-scene music and culture. Even before that I always liked music that was somehow aggressive, and rather than growing out of that as I've gotten older I just go for heavier and heavier hitting stuff. Totally different from my dad who likes melancholy country music or my mom who's into classical, jazz, and a lot of pop music. With movies as well there's a similar split. My mom in particular really seems to NEED the movie to have a "happy ending" whereas I often find too happy of an ending to be kind of unsatisfying. Even if the movie isn't specifically a "sad movie" I want it to make at least a little effort to hurt me. I think it's cause I go through every day acting happy and really beaming a lot of positive energy outwards regardless of how I actually feel, so for me happiness doesn't feel so much "positive" but rather feels "neutral". Happy is the default so it's not very interesting. When I talk in depth with people "pleasant" is a great place to start, but I'm going to feel like we're not really connecting if we don't at some point start sharing the tragedies of our lives lol

P.S. I just realized I also tend to find romantic relationships more satisfying when they're quite dramatic. I know it's not a good thing, but I'm really attracted to troubled people and tragic backstories. I feel I've been doing a good job at not getting into these sorts of relationships since I graduated college, but the temptation is real

I relate to what you said about your mother wanting movies to be happy. I really dislike films or literature that seem to feature needless violence or edginess. I tolerate it if the piece is very compelling/interesting, but if it isn't, I find it really disgusting, almost on a spiritual level: the world is ugly and unpleasant enough as it is without trying to make it uglier and less pleasant. I don't like people who revel in their problems; I don't like "edgy" music; the goal of existence as I see it is to work toward human flourishing, and these things seem opposed to that.

If I had a motto, it would be the famous excerpt from Pericles' funeral oration: "φιλοκαλοῦμέν τε γὰρ μετ᾽ εὐτελείας καὶ φιλοσοφοῦμεν ἄνευ μαλακίας." Roughly, "for we love beauty, but with good purpose; and we love wisdom in a way that does not make us soft." Beauty is good for its own sake -- not to cocoon yourself from nastiness by, but because humans are compelled to create it, and it's amenable to human growth.

Edit: as far as stereotypes of quadras go, I guess what I wrote seems to fit the stereotype of Alphas liking pleasant things. Since I mentioned cocooning yourself from unpleasantness, the impression I get from Deltas is that they prefer that approach, and that's one of the differences between Alphas and Deltas -- Deltas stereotypically are more jaded and take a more "us-vs-them" attitude toward the rest of the world, while Alphas are stereotypically more evangelistic in spreading Si/Ne values, and survive in a hostile world not by reclusion to a safer space, but by an inner harshness that usually only manifests when necessary -- like a compromise between Delta and Beta values: a willingness to employ Beta methods to secure Delta goals, maybe? You see hints of what I call this "harshness" in Alpha humor, which can get quite dark, often even darker than Beta humor, though usually diverted to silliness or lightheartedness at the end of the joke, whereas Betas will often make the darkness or edginess the "point" of the joke. The NTs' verbal "harshness" is probably more obvious, but even the SFs are like this too: ESEs can really use their demonstrative Se when they have to, and SEIs despite often seeming timid often have a fascination with the macabre, or mix an element of "edginess" into their aesthetic sense. @MissDucki's avatar of a cute duckling holding a knife is an example of what I mean: "I am cute and like cute things and am naive and happy, but I will do all I can to murder you with my duck knife if you try to take advantage of me." Despite the stereotype of Alpha naivety, there's always a willingness to fight and get hands dirty when necessary, I think, in order to preserve these "naive" values of peace and pleasantness.

[AWellArmedCat]

the goal of existence as I see it is to work toward human flourishing

This is one of those things that I agree with on paper, but feel that my psychology is inexorably opposed to. Like, I don't *want* anyone to suffer. That's obviously horrible. However, the idea of a utopia of any kind no matter how good is honestly the most depressing reality I can imagine. If there's nothing to fight against then I feel life loses all meaning and I'd absolutely need to escape into a harsh and cruel VR world if I lived in such a utopia. It's not that I wish for evil or that beta types want evil to flourish in the world, but rather that I think fundamentally beta psychologies are wired to fight against doom, and in a world where there is no doom to be fought we feel useless and can become destructive if we have nowhere to direct this. This is terrible, but growing up I often felt my family was too nice and often wished I grew up in an abusive household so I had something I could legitimately direct rebellion at. I feel a weird kind of jealousy towards people with troubled pasts. I probably wouldn't feel this way if I experienced what they did and I hope this doesn't come off as me glorifying the darkness in the world, but yeah... beta psychology definitely tends towards an edginess that I feel alphas and deltas in particular don't like. The gammas I've interacted with don't seem to mind it, but I'm less sure of how they feel about us betas

[Faith]

I am an extremely open-minded person. (That could actually be the flaw in my self-typing or with the theory.)

Define extremely

I am therefore open to talking to people from all quadras - if they have something intelligent or interesting to say. That (I think) is my problem with Se: they are inherently stubborn, and it is impossible to change their mind or open them up to new ideas - but I am still able to get through to many of them. That I also feel is the flaw with the theory: the idea is almost to stick with your own quadra all (or most) of the time. As someone very open-minded, it bothers me that I can't converse with people from (e.g.) the Gamma quadra. For instance, ILIs are very intelligent and I often like what they have to say. ILEs as well. Should I just close down communication with all ILIs because we aren't from the same quadra? I think that idea stinks. It is not very open-minded to me.

Anyway, does anyone else find this whole notion behind socionics limiting in some way?

I think theory should fit reality not the opposite. Besides romance Styles, do You have some piece of theory that that supports the idea that You can't talk to, interact with or get along with other Quadras?

I find usually that this idea comes more from people's experiences shared in this forum that from mere theory.

[ouronis]

It's probably more like "interact with whoever you want, but here are some things to watch out for." So in some respects it does advise limiting your interaction, but not to the point of complete avoidance.

[The Reality Denialist]

It is your choice

[Aster]

I didn’t read the previous comments, just so everyone knows

but do I find the idea of Quadra limiting?

yes and no. I mean anything can be limiting if you think of it as limiting.
its just a category like other categories- race,
sex, job. Preppy, emo.
people are always going to be classified and try to stick with their own. It’s human nature. ———> https://news.ku.edu/2016/02/19/new-s...nd-and-partner

[Alomoes]

Who does? The amount of wordage that is just garbage makes this forum style super inefficient. I think we'd accomplish more in the shoutbox.

[Poptart]

I find the idea of type to be much more limiting than the idea of quadras.

[skosh]

Alpha here. I've grown to see the widsom of quadra values. Still, I will defer to IEIs when it comes to advise on serious life issues.

[Rebelondeck]

Classification systems by definition creates limited numbers of categories, in which to place observations, thus making real world data easier to comprehend. Quadras are broader classifications that seem to complicate matters rather than clarify anything. Socionics hasn't progressed beyond classification systems, and plausible models cannot be made from IEs because they don't help to define the fundamental information handling processes; they're too coarse. The current models talk of functions but don't really define them in scientific terms. An IE is an imprecise classification and doesn't in any way constitute an actual function; it only indicates that there must be one that has yet to be defined. Quadras aren't the only things in Socionics that are limiting.

a.k.a. I/O