Is Gamma the most romantic quadra or not?
Honest question since I have read two novels that coincidentally portrayed about dual relation in Gamma:
1. Rich, charismatic, and popular male (LIE) fell in love with an innocent, quiet but stubborn religious Christian female (ESI).
2. A bitchy gal who lives in Thailand with her unhealthy habit of getting drunk (SEE) met a cold-headed poker face intelligent male (ILI).
Last edited by Metaphor; 12-28-2022 at 01:41 AM.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
possibly to your quadra
you're probably finding those novels b/c they appeal to your senses lol
it's the victim-caregiver-infantile-aggressor thing
i don't see the point in 2. and 1. is kind of tired and true for me at this point.
someone who is weak to Se and not valuing it (me) just loses personal investment when someone uses it
That's how confusing ILI-SEE is.Originally Posted by pasleine
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
Eh, a lot of gammas get into relationships of convenience with people that they barely tolerate. Sugar babies and “power couples” that sleep in separate beds seem Gamma
LIE ESI look more romantic
ILI SEE look more weird.
Honestly ESIxILI and SEExLIE seem like better couples than duals.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that question. I think what gets interpreted as romantic varies quite a bit between people. Neither of those storylines sound that appealing to me personally so I'd probably find them less romantic (though I hesitate to say that with confidence without having read the books you're referencing). If you instead mean what quadras are the most romantic in the traditional sense of candles, rose petals, and proposing in front of a grand vista then that may be a more answerable question. I think NFs can be very creatively romantic so while there's a lot of expressed feelings and meaningful gestures they may actually be less "traditionally" romantic in some regards than an LIE or LSE who have Fe as a Role function and Fi Suggestive. I think also ExI tend to be the most receptive to those kinds of gestures and find them cute coming from LxE
“Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
— James Russell Lowell猫が生き甲斐
all quadras have an ethical function in their values and all types have behaviour which attracts them more, including romantic
in short, it's subjective
I want to see a remake of 50 shades of grey except the cast and characters are all Gamma. And instead of Christian being an abusive dom, he is secretly a submissive guy who gets his ass handed to him by his ESI gf.
Ya kinda get the appeal but as I've said elsewhere socionics ain't the "holy grail" people think shit like Jungian psychology and all that sprang from it hoped it would be.
As an ILI myself I'll spin a yarn. The SEE suffers from dismissive attachment. So does the ILI but he (unlike her in the worst case and actually tries to reach out to her despite how hard it is for him to do so) knows that and tries to compensate as best they can.
Unlike her her "dual" is far more equipped in both body and mind to endure the suffering involved. The ILI is of a "Melancholic" nature more often than not and his dual is of a "Sanguine" nature that is ironically unequipped to deal with profound spiritual suffering on their own.
I mean hell, the absolute worst-case scenario I can imagine in regards to attachment is an anxious-avoidant glomping on to an example of a "healthy" autistic.
Not because it's bad, but because of the hell the autist has condemned themselves to. It's a rather personal hell out endured out of charity and likely actual love (which makes the likely fleeing of his/her object of affection all the more painful from most any angle you'd care to imagine).
Chaos calls forth order. None are more slavishly devoted to that side of things like autists. Of all the attachment styles I've mentioned only 5% are anxious-avoidant and that's usually the result of outright childhood sexual/physical abuse. Funny how more often than not anyone who knows of attachment theory keeps seeing Autists paired up with Anxious-avoidant types...
Not really, no.
All classic romantic stories are based on Beta characters falling in love and fighting for their love and eventually dying. Now that is romance.
Honestly, it was a thought-provoking question because I didn't get the appeal of Beta quadra romance - too unrealistic and somewhat was nonsense or just illogical, especially when I read Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet as I retorted to sarcasm as I thought that they should have killed each other instead of attempting a lover suicide. But yeah, I couldn't agree more that Socionics ain't the "holy grail" but eh, as I said before, it was just meant to defy this already hardened stereotype from what I have seen. In other words, the preference is vary depending on your attachment towards romance. For instance, someone could make a claim that Alpha is the most romantic quadra, or Beta, Gamma, even Delta but eventually, these all were coming from a subjective perception and therefore it couldn't be fixated as the objective point of view.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
Any advice on how to heal anxious-avoidant attachment that’s from abuse? I’ve been in therapy for almost 8 years now and still haven’t seen much success with the attachment issues themselves although I’ve healed a lot of trauma?
Holy hell I wasn't expecting this one. I'd first recommend doing what I did and learning all you can about attachment theory and all things related to it. Furthermore, no surprise to anyone who has followed me for any significant length of time I am the example of a big IQ who went for "people" over the Hard Sciences and by the grace of God am I glad I did. (i.e. There's a reason there's more Newtons, Einsteins, and Teslas over Aquinas's, Sheen's, and Ratzinger's)
This is a common refrain from anyone who is familiar with attachment, but it must be said with the full faith and conviction of a martyr about to die for the faith. As they had the virtue of "faith" they believed in God and both his infinite justice and mercy. So must the broken believe in the fact that they can be loved and/or that someone can actually love them truly and deeply flaws and all (within reason of course as accepting love, like having true faith, necessitates certain actions and by their presence or lack you can determine if someone actually cares about/loves you for real).
Like I've said, to break your bad attachment you have to overcome your hardwired inclinations. Easy on paper, Herculean Feat hard in practice. "Just be yourself" eh? Yeah, if your literal brain chemistry is screaming at you "Being yourself will earn you only hatred and abandonment" (i.e. Anxious), "Being yourself will only allow others to play you like a fool" (i.e. Avoidant), "What the hell am I supposed to do if I don't know if the other person hates me or not!?" (Anxious-Avoidant).
This is sadly the hardest thing to heal as it involves one taking a major risk that has likely at some point not worked out well. Like, ya tried to turn to your mother as you told her in all honesty about how daddy was sodomizing you and she in turn didn't believe you as he did exactly that the next room over as you screamed for help. Sorry, ILI's are pretty darn great at making intuitive leaps in regards to the maximization of suffering (hence why for this and many another reason we're often the villains in any given story).
To heal Anxious-Avoidant attachment then. Like I said, ya gotta actually believe you're worthy of unconditional love. This is how you heal any attachment issue but like I said above it is both easy as hell and also hard as a "no-hit" run in a FromSoft game.
I'm going to be honest about this one, you're gonna have to get comfortable with an autistic if ya wanna brute force this. They are gonna boil your trauma down to facts and mathematical variables and you're gonna have to just be cool with that. Equations that refuse to be solved logically are their heroin and thus that's probably gonna be the only "high-value" mates you stand a chance at attracting as you are right now.
To put it in more plain terms. If you're a girl and if you're like iama you're gonna have to give a lower entity a chance despite the fact that hypergamy is a factual thing...
this is definitely true. my mom (ESI) has a friend who is quite wealthy from his scientific patents and he’s been having a bunch of noncomittal relationships (including a marriage proposal) and she was like, “they’re only after your wallet. you marry this person while cheating on them with someone else, they’re going to run off with your assets. how about you just marry me instead so your money will be secure while you go around and screw whoever you want”
it’s the same i sometimes wonder if something or other’s in my headbone
———————————————
-Ne
5w4 so/sp
Also, 8 years with a given therapist? I mentioned attachment theory and I'd mention it with them as well. If they get hostile they glow radiantly in the dark and I'd thus recommend you drop them like a rock. If not (i.e. they get earnestly curious about a thing they heard about for all of 1 hour in their entire curriculum) than recommend them to read a copy "Attachment in Psychotherapy" by David J. Wallin. This is basically a textbook for a 10x class if psychology professors actually bothered to give this subject the attention it deserves (and yeah I bought and read the thing cover to cover and found it to be alright).
Said David is likely an LII and he even mentions, funny enough, how the likes of usvaluing folk picked up this particular football and ran with it all the way to the endzone before the likes of himself even noticed in the opening chapters. His book is, among other things, an attempt to get the likes of his colleagues to accept the practiced wisdom of us "apes" here in applied engineering land (i.e. the
valuing folk) as something actually worthwhile to consider.
This is actually an application for that phrase that I wasn't familiar with (provided I'm interpreting it right).
I think that Gamma relationships would probably theoretically involve soft emotions (Fi) and some kind of intensity (Se). The soft emotions might make their stories more "emotionally deep" while the intensity might make their stories more "passionate". To some types, that would look more romantic.
I think that what people consider "romantic" probably depends on their type (or their Quadra). I think that a Beta NF for example (maybe like an IEI) would think that stories that involved strong, extroverted emotions (declarations of love or changing emotional states) are more "romantic" than stories that involved personal, quiet declarations of love (maybe gift giving or small personal sentiments). I think I'm basing this mostly on theory.
Oddly enough, the first novel you mentioned sounds more interesting to me than the second novel. I don't know how much of this is related to type.
I don't think I'd be able to use the novels you listed and my reasoning to fit myself into a Quadra. Neither of the novels sound that interesting to me by themselves, and the other Quadra versions (maybe logical but insecure male provides cookies to quiet, bookish female or social butterfly shows stay-at-home scientist that the outside world can also be fun) don't seem that interesting to me either. However, I'm pretty sure that I like stories that involve "soft emotions".
Edit (1/26/23, 12:21 am GMT): I didn't read the entire thread before I made this post. It looks like others in the thread already basically stated what I wrote above.
To give some more information about my interests, I think I personally don't like Romeo and Juliet either. I think I used to like it, but at some point I realized that the situation that they went through wasn't necessary. I think my thought at that time was that if they would've just followed the rules a little, or just waited before they killed themselves, they probably could've had a life together. I guess I'm not really a fan of "tragic circumstance" type stories.
Last edited by Clarke; 01-25-2023 at 11:22 PM.
Also, 8 years with a given therapist? I mentioned attachment theory and I'd mention it with them as well. If they get hostile they glow radiantly in the dark and I'd thus recommend you drop them like a rock. If not (i.e. they get earnestly curious about a thing they heard about for all of 1 hour in their entire curriculum) than recommend them to read a copy "Attachment in Psychotherapy" by David J. Wallin. This is basically a textbook for a 10x class if psychology professors actually bothered to give this subject the attention it deserves (and yeah I bought and read the thing cover to cover and found it to be alright).
Said David is likely an LII and he even mentions, funny enough, how the likes of us
They’re actually the ones who told me about have disorganized (anxious-avoidant) attachment in the first place. I’ve been with them for almost 4 years, and before them I was in group therapy for 4 years with 2 other therapists leading it. But yeah, idk if I’ll have to find someone autistic, especially since that as a LSI I feel like it’ll be hard to find a dual EIE Enfj with Autism, although logical types having higher rates of autism is a stereotype I know. Where would someone like me i their late 20s (29) even find groups of people to make friends with anyway, meetup? Also, I’m actually a guy. My username is misleading, I know.
Gamma is one of the most pragmatic Quadras imo. I believe they have a strong sense of realism and aren’t the kind to make sacrifices for ideals. Beta is the crazy cult Quadra since it’s all idealism based and fighting for ideals.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
IEI-C 952 VELF
I am being cancelled. For being so sexy and fun and intelligent and hot.
Rather than dislike, I just found the story of Romeo and Juliet to be ironic and somewhat as illogical as Diogenes Lapersky's vegetable statement.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
What you have to do is actually fully accept that things can be better for you regardless of everything else. This actually makes total sense to a Catholic like myself and the guy who got me on this path is a convert to the faith.
They don't have to be autistic, but if you're trying to not be anxious-avoidant the person who seems most "cool" with dealing with your shit will likely be an autistic. The "red flags" are just "variables" to be solved for as it were and holy hell if you're not a total bitch-ass simp like most men are when confronted with an average 7 you're already leagues above your competition wheareas for most everyone else they're signals to just cut sling load if ya catch my drift.
That's the other thing I've noticed about autists. They're quite stubborn. Can be a virtue. After all, St. Augustine only became both a saint as well as a Doctor of the Church because of his mother Monica. 12 straight years she endured in her prayers to God as she watched him partake of many a whore day after day. Yet she persevered in her prayers and never lost hope that if she kept praying she would save her son as God would certainly grant him the grace of conversion. She is the patron saint of "perseverance" for a damn good reason after all.
He did. A terrible sinner was transformed into a saint. Many such cases. The problem the autist trying to healthily attach to an anxious-avoidant type is that their partner is so terrified of opening up to them that they'd rather flee into the wilderness than actually risk, say, telling them the story about how they got abused by a gang of most vile perverts and the like. Thing is that won't exactly disgust most people who know how this kind of shit works.
Ya don't exactly like/choose to become a whore at age 9 or something else on that tier of FUBAR. What matters is that you actually manage to defy the hardware of your own mind and actually reach out to someone who earnestly wants to help you see that most humans aren't anything like that. It is they who are the minority and more wonderful and caring individuals who are the majority. Mothers who would rather bake you cakes, cookies, and ethnic dishes while fathers would rather teach you how to do X, build things, and defend yourself if violence became unavoidable...
I agree with this.
OP, I guess it depends on what you mean by romantic, but by most definitions gamma is not the "most romantic". Anyone can fall in love, as in the first example you give, but I don't think gammas would make sacrifices for ideals such as love. Love has a much more pragmatic bent in gamma, imo.
They would but perhaps, not in such an idealistic way that Beta tends to be. Hm also, what's wrong with pragmatism in love again? I wonder.
Last edited by Metaphor; 01-27-2023 at 09:59 PM.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
You mean than beta tends to be?
I didn't say there was anything wrong with it. Relationships require some degree of pragmatism or they won't work on a material level, for example building a home with somone, etc.Hm also, what's wrong with pragmatism in love again? I wonder.
I do think (and this is my personal opinion) that love in our society has become overly pragmatic, to the many point people just recycle and throw away their relationships like household objects. I think this is Te-Fi values taken to an extreme, where it's all about individual benefit and the emphasis is on the person doing the loving, and not the object of love as something transcendant and not just 'useful' to the individual. But this is a kind of individualism that, ironically, ends up hurting the individual, because it turns something that is meant to go beyond the individual (romantic love) and makes it into another consumer product for the individual. This hurts our individual need to go beyond ourselves and fullfill the needs of others (and not just our own), in other words, the human need to love and be loved.
I was shocked by how Youtuber Sorelle Amore (SEE in my opinion) once said in one of her videos (where she was talking about romantic love) that being in a relationship is something that she sees as something should that make her grow, and benefits her. It's a shocking pov to me, because a relationship is by definition not something that is just about self-growth, but growing together. The way she said just sounded like being in a relationship was a self-help strategy: take what you need, reject what you don't, and move on etc. Don't get me wrong. I am not saying being in a relationship should be detrimental to the individual, but the way she talked about it didn't even sound like she was considering the other person as a part of the equation.
I can be romantic
But I’m also pragmatic just like my dual sooo
Maybe INFJ and ENFP are romantic in other ways like likening new foods and experience new things
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Yes, my bad. My brain confused itself. Speaking of which, there is nothing wrong about growing/benefitting yourself in a relationship as an individual. For a tangible example, a couple of husband and wife will eventually leave, be divorced by fate or legal laws and that they will be alone. So, how to cherish everything that you have as a possession if not by using them properly? Benefit on itself isn't necessarily a negative word either.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."
No, I totally agree with this. I'm talking about a trend I see in today's society though. Which turns people into commodities, though this isn't even exclusive to relationships. I don't if it's Te, gamma, or just late-stage capitalism gone wrong.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
