Who the fuck deleted my post?
Who the fuck deleted my post?
Model X Will Save Us!
*randomwarelinkremoved
I'll add my thoughts on why a lot seem to be reporting supervision to be better then expected.
The supervisee's most subdued functions, the ignoring and Polr, are supervisor's areas of greatest understanding, the Base and Demonstrative. This allows the supervisor to skillfully handle the areas in which the handle the areas where the supervisee shows the most inadequacy and inertness, perhaps more so then in dual relations in some cases. Being on the same side of process/result also allows a more direct flow of information and understanding of each other, unlike Mirage relations. The quality of supervision relations, perhaps more so then any other relation, probably depends a lot on the level of health of the people involved and if they can accept each others flaws and differences.
For me it goes:
Dual
Mirror
Identical
Kindred
Semi Dual
Super Ego
Activator
Benefactor
Quasi Identical
Supervisor
Conflictor
Beneficiary
Extinguishment
Last edited by LuckyOne; 12-01-2016 at 09:42 PM.
Today I came across this article, and I pretty much agree with its descriptions and general conclusion that for most (or many) people, the best relations are typically Duality, Activity, Semi-Duality (and Mirage, as far as I know):
As you could see, Duality is the best and the most satisfying relationship possible. Activation is pretty good, too, and Semi-Duality can be fine for some couples. Other relationships – you’ll have to try hard to make them work.
Of course, personal issues, such as background, lifestyle and goals matter. When talking about marriage, they matter a lot, indeed. Besides, you do not just live with a personality type – you live with a person. One person is good, the other isn’t.
However, given the same circumstances, a relationship with your Dual will benefit you most. Your Dual has the biggest chance of being your soulmate. Getting closer with him, you discover the best and often under-valued sides of yourself. These are the most loving and lasting relationships.
I'm on the side that thinks introverts prefer interacting with other introverts and vice versa for extroverts, and therefore I would rank activity as higher then duality.
While a dual might offer the most potential in helping you achieve your goals and aspirations, I think activity is better in terms of pleasantness and sincerity between partners. The extrovert in a dual pair may often too much for the introvert to digest, and each partner may prefer their activity or benefactor over their dual due to matching energy levels. The fact that are each partner are trying to extract more from their activators creative could lead to tighter and stronger bonds then with duals in some cases.
I think a similar kind of logic applies to conflict and super-ego. I would rank super-ego as worse then conflict since the different energy levels can help conflictors stay separated. Super-ego is harder to ignore and it is more likely that they will connect and exchange blows.
I'll also add that I think Identity and Activity is preferred more amongst Si (and possibly Fi) valuing types, introverts especially, then it is amongst Se valuing types. Se valuing types might see it as more important that they accomplish their goals and thus seek their duals more often, while Si valuing types place more emphasis on the comfort of the relationship itself then what it has to offer.
I also have the impression that Si valuing Extroverts tend to go for their benefit types more often then other types for some reason.
Last edited by Muddy; 12-14-2016 at 05:15 AM.
This reminds me of an interesting excerpt I read from this book:
In summary (satisfaction rating):
1. Introvert & Introvert
2. Introvert female & Extrovert male
3. Extrovert & Extrovert
4. Introvert male & Extrovert female
Now, let's translate this into Socionics.
The supposedly best ITRs for...
Introverts & Extroverted women: Identity, Activity, Look-A-Like, Kindred, (Benefit), ((Super-Ego)), ((Quasi-Identity))
Extroverted men: Duality, Mirror, Semi-Duality, Mirage, (Supervision), ((Extinguishment)), ((Conflict))
The supposedly worst ITRs:
Introverted men & Extroverted women: ((Duality)), (Mirror), (Semi-Duality), (Mirage), Supervision, Extinguishment, Conflict
I think those findings could spark an interesting discussion.
Is Duality actually only the best for extroverted males (in our culture)? Or is Duality actually worse for introverted men/extroverted women?
How much does culture influence the success of ITRs?
It is possible what I said earlier could just apply to the levels of classical extroversion/introversion between partners instead of socionics extroversion/introversion and that I mistook that as activity. Energy level can vary within the same type, and my hypothesis is that we prefer to be around other people that exhibit levels of restlessness and chattiness closest to our own, independent of socionics related factors.
As @Cassandra posted, gender roles could also influence this. Males tend to not like being controlled/overshadowed as much as females and thus prefer their partners to be more agreeable and submissive on average. I am a male so maybe this might factor in my experiences.
Last edited by Muddy; 12-22-2016 at 09:52 AM.
Maybe but I don't really see why this is relevant towards the point I was trying to make.
This works very similar to the way men and women match up by height. A taller man an average will pair up with taller women then a short guy. However, no matter the height range you almost always see the guy being taller then the woman. Statistics have proven this, even when factoring in that men tend to be taller then women on average. As guy who as stronger/tougher then the average man, you would probably like your woman to also be tougher then average women. However, chances are you would still only pair with a woman who is at least a few notches below your own levels of strength/toughness. When I go to the gym for example I see this one super ultra-masculine dude who just so happens to have a wife that is also super-masculine, more masculine then the majority of guys in there even, but she is still less the masculine the him, hence maintaining the "close but less than" rule.
Last edited by Muddy; 12-22-2016 at 08:27 PM.
Yup Identity is boring to me for that reason. As a friend, okay... that's about it.
I disagree that Conflict is all that comfortable. Not for me. Highs-lows too much, lack of consistency essentially with how rewarding vs how bad it can get, I just don't notice this pattern quickly enough initially. But definitely not leading anywhere long term. Which is again something that has taken me some time to notice before. That's me though since I don't easily notice it in time if I picked the wrong option in certain complex situations (and romantic relationships are definitely a complex type of situation - been learning though, lol).
I agree on some of this. The activity pair thingy, as described, I experience that with IEIs pretty much. And EIEs are fine with more balance yes. Actually, LIEs too (Rational Mirage for me), I must mention this dynamics too since there's definitely a neat balance but it's also with a certain distance that may not be noticed by the parties but never gets closed. Like with me and my LIE ex, I noticed and decided only after quite the delay that this distance was there and could simply not be closed. My ex on the other hand didn't ever get aware of this. Probably the 1D Fi sucks even more at noticing than my 2D Fi role lol. I don't find the LIEs different from EIEs in terms of being activated initially. But that distance thingy, I think it leads to less activation over time. In the long term especially.
With the LIEs, I also notice that this balance will be self-sustaining very neatly (with that distance that is hard to notice and can never be closed), like forever. Unless external circumstances mess with the Ethics aspect of things - because then this balance is very quickly disturbed and it looks real BAD to outside observers especially. To the LIE vs me, it's less noticeable, especially to the LIE (again the 1D Fi thingy) and we can sort out things Logically after a while. Intense arguing until then can be quite fun, hell, lol.
Actually, it's all pretty much like described here about Cold-Blooded (IxTx) vs Business (ExTx) relationship: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ication-styles ("3. "Business-like" (PL) and "Cold-blooded" (LP) types.
: Events in this pair usually follow this scenario. Both partners in this pair are quite indifferent to ethical influences. "Business-like" partner tries to use "Cold-blooded" partner for his purposes, but his efforts don't lead to anything. Over time and after a series of unsuccessful attempts, the desire of "Business-like" partner to change situation to his own tastes fades, and partners start drifting apart. Internal equilibrium, nevertheless, is attained in this way. In relation to people around them, this pair turns out to be insensitive. Each is busy with something of his own. However, if external influences are so strong that they affect the low-activity ethical functions of partners, quarrels begin between them concerning how to respond. This impaired balance with the outside world for them is very difficult to restore.")
It's otherwise alright, being one of these two relationships: "The following two kinds of relationships provide psychological homeostasis only partially. Compatibility between them is of average significance. Either internal disagreements or external destructive influence can undermine these relations".
No, this dichotomy has been defined several times by several different psychologists/researchers. Jung is just one of them. The picture is slightly more complex than what Jung painted though he definitely had some nice insight into some um, patterns that seem like a lot more sensible insights than what some other ideas by others were from his time. A very unfinished system though, so...
I think your definition of what's weak vs strong in women is a bit unrefined. LolI think this also has to do with personality (not types tho) / maturity. From my experience weak men like weak women. As you said these people (majority of people) have self-esteem and are uncomfortable with a strong women. Inversely, I am a strong man (you'll just have to take my word on that) and I require strong women. The low self-esteem of weak women mean they get easily offended by me. As for the overshadow part, weak women do not like being in the spotlight and that will frustrate me so I want a women who isn't afraid of being the center of attention.
Eew, submissiveness, not my thing. Fought a lot with my LIE ex over him feeling too controlled by me. EIEs don't mind in the same way, must be that they mind the Ti less. It's funny, my ESI-Se mom is also anything but submissive or agreeable seeming but my LIE dad was fine with her way of controlling - more Ethics based than mine I suppose.
As for the levels of activity, restlessness, chattiness, whatever... No I prefer to be around certain duals who are definitely more restless and more chatty than me. Level of general activity is similar though, in terms of amount of initiative taking. I'm more initiative taking in the sensory/physical areas essentially, compared to them, and they are more initiative taking socially. There can also be mutual initiative taking in some areas and that's cool too.
Bullshit. In my case. It needs more than just extraversion vs introversion for it to work. Plus I'm pretty much ambiverted in terms of levels of activity, etc. I most definitely don't care to have the man being in charge too much. Absolutely zero chance of me liking such a thing. I feel more natural if I'm in charge in enough things. So fuck these stereotypes lol
I took a different approach in addressing this subject when I wrote the article below. I thought that processing perspective (need?) would produce a greater holding force. However, since our primal needs have to be met first and both, in any relationship, is affected by all the baggage that the other carries, this makes cognitive style a distant tertiary consideration and perhaps somewhat irrelevant. I think that Socionics theory is best used to help one understand oneself and the partner(s) that one ends up with rather than to use it to find theoretically ideal relationships........
http://www.socionics.com/articles/thestrength.html
a.k.a. I/O
Last edited by Rebelondeck; 12-26-2016 at 03:53 PM.
Agreed partially in that the correlation between type and personal strength would not be very strong, definitely not a direct line of causation there. With introverts, I think there is a clearer correlation, I would say they can sometimes like being in the spotlight but not constantly. That would just require too much extraverted information processing. So my point was that this is not necessarily due to lack of personal strength, and not due to fear etc.
Any opinions here on mirror vs extinguishment? Mirror is in same quadra but has conflicting temperament and shares the same cognition as one's conflictor, while extinguishment is in opposite quadra but has dual temperament and cognition.
Extinguishment might be the best opposite quadra match for the reasons you have mentioned. But because it is opposite quadra, it will be less compatible than Mirror at the end of the day, because the true values of the individuals are the exact opposite. So, how that translates into real life: the Extinguishment partner will be more attractive initially, and enjoyable in surface level interactions, but once the people reach a more "emotionally intimate" level and try to build a life(style) together based on shared goals and values, the Mirror partner will be a better match after all.
P.S: It is a possibility that Extinguishment is more enjoyable than Mirror when things are being "kept light" and no one tries to delve "deeper", whereas Mirror is often a bit uncomfortable or slightly awkward in the early stages, but has a much better "staying power" because of the shared quadra values.
Anyone here think that temperment (ip/ej) matters more than most relations?
Yeah the system for the stars should be described lol.
As for attraction hmm, I find Activity and Mirage for me are very attractive fast (maybe this includes the "improvement time" being fast?), Duality is a bit more subtle intially... Semi-duality is somewhere between Activity and Duality with this, I think.
I didn't what exactly? This seems like a complete non-sequitur answer.
This is what I was saying with initial attraction.It's like,
Wonder if we are in a soccer field. Every type have its "unique" ball, so there are 16 different balls in soccer field. More attractive that ball, it will made me more willing to practice soccer with that ball.
Then, I practice juggling, shooting, dribbling, etc. The ability to mastering my skill with that ball at a first time practice, is being rated by gold star.
Then, I took a rest, hold that ball with my hand, and look at the sky, wondering, how much I can mastering this ball, if I will to spend my time to practice a lot. That prediction is being rated by silver star. To reach that maximum potential, the next practice time might slower or faster than my first practice. Estimation of that time is being described as improving time.
Hope this parable about sport practice with soccer ball, can explain about the ratings and make you understand, Myst. Maybe it's a religious gamble for you. , but it's not for me. I really put much effort to measuring it.
Who said it was a religious gamble for me? Wtf you are totally out in space with your non-sequiturs.
From point of long romantic relations I'd avoid anything besides:
duality, activation, semi-duality
If you have time, will and possibility to choose - duality only.
Also don't forget about other important factors. Some duals are worse (in total) than some not-duals. You need to understand a human better to figure our it's key features. Don't become crazy just because you see pretty dual woman wich has sympathy to you - try to know her better.
LIE Profoundly great and powerful
ESI Perfect breeding stock
ILI Aggressive and very dark
EIE Dramatic flair and style
LSI A sullen badass
ILE Crazy yet somewhat intriguing
SLI no opinion
LSE no opinion
IEI Emotionally manipulative waif
SLE Obnoxious loose cannon
SEE Simple, scattered and silly
EII Intolerant, a rigid zealot
IEE Commitment phobe
ESE Micromanaging nag machine
SEI Obsessive perfectionist
LII Misses the forest for the trees
Most compatible
ESI (Dual), LSI (Mirage)
Least compatible
SEI (Conflict), ESE (Super-Ego), IEE (Benefactor)
I haven't met all types yet but in my experience the best was Duality.
I got along with a supervisee once, it was comfortable and we helped each other a lot. Great friendship.
Identity was a bit weird, we both could see each other flaws, we were not big fans of each other but the understanding was there.
The worst ones were Business (constant Polr hits) and Quasi Identical.
Would change for:
(Very positive)
1. Duality
2. Activity
3. Semi-Duality
4. Direct Benefit
(Nicely neutral)
5. Identical
6. Mirror
7. Direct supervision
(A bit draining)
8. Mirage
9. Kindred
10. Reverse Benefit
(Ok with keeping a distance, otherwise horrible)
11. Superego
12. Quasi-Identical
13. Conflict
(Ever horrible)
14. Bussines (ESI imposing Fi on my Ti, so nope)
15. Reverse Supervision
16. Extinguishment (can't possibly imagine how anyone may be attracted to them for even a minute. Maybe particularly LSE are such monsters, not sure.).
1. Dual
2. Identity
3. Supervision ( K , i'm close with Supervisor too. Not Supervisee )
4. Benefit ( Damn , i'm close with my beneficiary and benefactor too. Online and irl. )
5. Semi Dual
6. Kindred
7. Activity ( K , the theories it should good relation. But , in reality i suffered a lot ;-;. Coz , i ever close with unhealthy SLI ffs. I hope , i can find healthier SLI. )
8. Mirror
9. Mirage
10. Superego ( Yeah , i don't close with my LSI little brother )
11. Conflict
12. Extinguishment ( I ever had EIE ex boyfriend and it was suck )
That's my review , about business and quasi identical. i don't put in my ranks. coz i never meet LII and IEI before.