Deltas and the concept of "best friends"

[Lobo]

Do you believe in the concept of having a best friend, or to treat all your friends the same way? I just found out today that the person I've considered my best friend for a long time doesn't feel the same way, and would rather treat all his friends the same, keep everyone at the same level. It's something I can understand to an extent, but I wanted to see if other deltas believe in having a sort of hierarchy when it comes to friends like I seem to naturally develop. I'm always aware that there is a friend who is my "best friend" during a certain period of time. It's a position that is "up for grabs" from me at all times, and I don't have reservations in assigning someone as my best friend if they did things to deserve the special treatment.

[The Greeter]

Yes, there is a sort of hierarchy in my relationship to people depending on the individual. Is this not what Fi is all about?

Though personally, I am uncomfortable assigning one particular friend the 'best friend'. I tend to value all my close circle of friends in different ways; the circle which I speak of is a rather small one.

Also, I don't think this is limited to just Delta or Gamma, but these two quadras are the most comfortable discussing this kind of thing and want it to be explicit. Where as Alpha and Beta rather have it expressed implicitly (via Fe, perhaps?).

Is your friend a Ti type?

[Lobo]

Yes, there is a sort of hierarchy in my relationship to people depending on the individual. Is this not what Fi is all about?

Though personally, I am uncomfortable assigning one particular friend the 'best friend'. I tend to value all my close circle of friends in different ways; the circle which I speak of is a rather small one.

Also, I don't think this is limited to just Delta or Gamma, but these two quadras are the most comfortable discussing this kind of thing and want it to be explicit. Where as Alpha and Beta rather have it expressed implicitly (via Fe, perhaps?).

Is your friend a Ti type?

No, he's SiTe, but I don't want this to be an "SLI sucks" thread, because that's not the issue. I respect that way of thinking, even though it's not in my nature.

[UDP]

I have to have some sort of differentiation. I know so many people that if everyone was on the same level,it would just be one big blur. And there are impacting factors of time known, history, and other things.

That said, I'm really discovering (this summer, actually) that there are some very, very significant factors that relate to how close I am to people, and it has to do with their "ethics". I'm not sure what word to use, but, it has to do with my judgment of how much someone has things I want to be around. It has a prerequisite of being friends and knowing the person somewhat.

But my really good friends have certain qualities, it seems. I might be getting more aristocratic and more mercenary now, but, it is something that I'm noticing in myself. It has to do with what I want influencing me. Ideally, it's a certain preference in terms of productivity and values, and in order for you to understand them you'd have to know me, so I won't try to explain them here. But when I sense them in others, I very actively want to pursue them and be with them. I notice how people impact others and impact the world around me, and as such, I notice how they impact me. Are they giving me things I can relate to and support? Are they annoying me? Are they wearing me down and not bringing any benefit to me? Am I contributing to them? Etc

I do not suppose, honestly, that all people of my type or delta STs or even deltas feel that way. But it is where I am now. The big factors for me are compatibility of productivity and ethics, ease of communication (such as, are they easy to talk to in general; shared interests/views; do I see them every day/physically close by/we're involved in a lot of the same things), and also, simple history and experience. I have the most say in terms of my perceived compatibility and who I pursue and spend my time with. I have less say/choice in terms of who is actually around me physically (although I can 'move location', etc, yes). And I don't have much say about who I have a lot of history with as it has already happened.

Still, in general (since always), I don't open up to people very much unless I feel relationally and ethically comfortable around them. The more questionable and variable the ethics the harder it is. Even if I don't totally agree with them, having consistent ethics makes it more likely that I'll open up.

But what really affects me in terms of people I want to be around are how much our ethics align, and how much I think we're going in a similar direction in life. So in that sense, my best friends are somewhat rare but also very valuable. The selection process is a mixture of how much I 'want', which is generally entirely Te based in terms of how much I see that relationship bringing benefit, and how much I 'have/get', ... not everybody reciprocates my interests or desire to be closer.

[Minde]

I have a sort of not-well-defined hierarchy, I guess you could say. There are certainly levels of closeness, but they are often somewhat fluid and, eh... varying in color or quality. For example, the person I would consider my closest friend right now is an ESFj. But I'm also very close, if not closer, to my sister (ENFp). But the relationship I have with each of them is different, has different qualities, different dynamics, different focusses.

The way I see it, every individual has their own connection with me (as well as all sorts of connections that in turn connect and intertwine), and each connection is unique even if there are many similarities between many of them.

If there were a visual representation of one way of looking at it, it might be something like this (probably entirely unnecessary and useless, but I felt like making it so here you go, lol):




Me being the purplish dot in the center and other people being the other dots. Each person has their own connection, but different people are different distances from me and come from different directions and interact with me in different ways. There are no real boxes or set-in-stone hierarchies. But some people are definitely closer to me than others, and that's most often based on how well I like them and how well we interact on closer levels and even how well I think they deserve it, and other variables. Nothing is ever the same for different people.

Now, despite what I say about non-well-definedness and lack of structure, I don't like lots of changes in the distances and qualities of relationships, and I don't like unexpected changes, either. Once I find a balance, I tend to like to keep it.

My natural inclination is to assume that most people are like that, having naturally and expected varying distances in their relationships, as well as showing those closeness-es in particular ways, but according to some of my experiences and conversations, apparently not?

Anyway, I have no idea if or how much this is of any use to you, Sereno.

[Park]

If only I had that many friends as to be able to separate them into groups.

[Park]

On a serous note, yes - there is a hierarchy. Once the beginning stages of friendship pass, you start seeing the potential, which differs from person to person. You work on that potential and in time you develop a sense of distance and closeness to a person. Oftentimes you have a shady perception or make a misjudgment about someone, and their place in your life can suddenly jump from bottom to top or vice versa, but in no way do you treat everyone the same; That would mean hypocrisy.

[duality is cringe]

I very much believe in the concept of a best friend(s). Don't exactly have one at the moment though.

I have to have some sort of differentiation. I know so many people that if everyone was on the same level,it would just be one big blur.

Yeah.

[Lobo]

I relate with you Minde and the Greeter, in how everyone has a particular distance with me. I understand the feeling of not wanting to assign favorites to friends, especially if you have good ones. However, if I see someone who has deserved to be in a "pedestal" because of what they've done for me or enjoy my accompany a lot, I wouldn't hesitate to assign said person as a best friend.

[duality is cringe]

Still caring deeply for Sereno.

[Lobo]

Still caring deeply for Sereno.

I don't know how that could happen, but ok, thanks.

[The Greeter]

No, he's SiTe, but I don't want this to be an "SLI sucks" thread, because that's not the issue. I respect that way of thinking, even though it's not in my nature.

Sorry, I never intended it to be, especially since they don't suck.

[...] However, if I see someone who has deserved to be in a "pedestal" because of what they've done for me or enjoy my accompany a lot, I wouldn't hesitate to assign said person as a best friend.

I am the same. Am I allowed to have more than one best friend? If so, then I don't hesitate to do that either.

[xyz]

I don't really have the time or patience to deal with many layers of human interactions.

I've basically got 1) I trust you 2) I don't trust you.

[Creepy-male]

Also, I don't think this is limited to just Delta or Gamma, but these two quadras are the most comfortable discussing this kind of thing and want it to be explicit. Where as Alpha and Beta rather have it expressed implicitly (via Fe, perhaps?).

Well, it is a socionics forum. That said, IRL, it would be strange to discuss how you order your friends.

As I said in another thread, I have a fluid way of dealing with just about anyone + the special people who get to deal with me being a neurotic nutjob (lol) + anyone I feel I'm looking after + whoever I'm interested in (romantically). (Each + goes up a level. Summary version.)

I'm going to revise the name for that to the "energy turnip".

[jewels]

Minde's blue/purple dots are a great example. And I second what she wrote.

I guess I do assign a "closeness level" in my mind to everyone. But this unfortunately changes a lot. I think the last few years especially my "best" friends and I have grown apart a lot and I've moved, switched things around, etc. Depending on when you'd asked me, I would have been closer or farther from various people.

I would prefer the closeness level to stay the same, but pretty often people who start out seeming genuine, caring, good, end up having a very shady cheating sorta side to them that really turns me off. And that's where I feel I kinda have to step back and change that Fi distance.

And let me clarify that -- I'm not saying I'm some sort of perfect beam of white light or anything, but when girls are getting someone to pay their rent and living w/ him when they're constantly saying he's a loser, and can't make his own decisions (behind his back to all his friends), and don't even LIKE him, ICK. Or, guys who will pretend to be your friend to try to get some, even if they have a gf, etc. ICK. I actually knew a girl who proudly said she didn't listen to what anyone said if it didn't directly benefit her. She interrupted me once to say that someone across the room had a bracelet similar to hers. Or a "good" guy friend you go shopping w/ who, it turns out, has had his whole office cheering him on to try to sleep w/ you for several months, including his bosses and the client side (some of whom you've met), meanwhile you've never even held hands w/ the guy...until they get him so drunk and send him off to meet you one night that he spills the whole story in his drunkenness. And then he demands you sleep w/ him or it's "over" so you show him the door and sadly, have to de-friend your "best" shoe shopping buddy. And then you see his boss out cheating on his wife w/ some 20 year old chick, and tell him this, and he finds it "funny." etc., etc...

where is the love people? where is the love.

So because of that I'm really hestitant to announce a "best friend." I also don't want to make anyone feel bad and the non "best" friends are still really really important close friends.

Sidenote...the two ESTjs I've known well did assign a "best friend" that they kept for a really long time. One of them was best friends w/ an ISTp. The other was likely cheating on his gf.

[Mattie]

I was just talking about this with my best friend! Strange! I guess I would generally agree with Minde's "model" there. I definitely have a loose hierarchy, but it's extremely flexible and in flux. My current best friend and I have been close for about 11 years, though with varying degrees. There were many times where her importance in my life diminished and other people had more influence and precedence to my attention, but she kept her "value" so-to-speak. While I can easily assess where a person is in this hierarchy, I'm not constantly thinking of it or letting people know of it's existence. Observance of these zones of friendship are only useful to explain my behavior concerning comfort levels relating to information and spending time with, as well as doing certain activities.

[iAnnAu]

I definitely have best friends, acquaintances, and several gradations in between - although they're not so much defined specifically as they are built up or degraded through each interaction.

It's kinda weird, because I don't disagree with anything on this thread so far, and some of it really sounds contradictory. People have varying distances to me, a la Minde's drawing ... but the distances can change pretty easily from interaction to interaction. However, I just can't do "on-again-off-again" in the sense of fighting, breaking apart, coming back together, getting into another fight. So there are aspects of the friendship that must be fairly smooth.

I can go for a long time not seeing someone and still feel very close emotionally. And if I hang out with someone and there's no "click" that makes things exciting or brings us noticeably closer and more trusting, that's OK as long as there are no strong negative developments. I am still learning the balance of how to treat people I have to deal with regularly that wouldn't otherwise be my friends, such as coworkers, but I haven't had a serious personality clash at work in a long time, so even though I know some people think I'm aloof, I feel like I still project enough trustworthiness to be easy to work alongside.

When a person gains "best friend" status, I'm more likely to go through the awkward process of revealing the depth of my emotions for him/her, and I stand ready 24/7 to help. There are few things in my life that have been as rewarding as helping one of my BFs in need, and a few people who have abused my protectorship have gotten themselves booted out of that status.

However, it's still unlikely that I'll initiate much socially even with my BFs. I am more likely to be found hanging out with people who initiate social interaction than with the people to whom I feel the closest connection, and it sounds strange to even admit that, but it's been that way for a long time now, and I just kinda go with it. Those people in the inner circle know they're there, and they understand this about me, too.

[UDP]

It's kinda weird, because I don't disagree with anything on this thread so far, and some of it really sounds contradictory. People have varying distances to me, a la Minde's drawing ... but the distances can change pretty easily from interaction to interaction. However, I just can't do "on-again-off-again" in the sense of fighting, breaking apart, coming back together, getting into another fight. So there are aspects of the friendship that must be fairly smooth.

For some reason, I think my picture would be more like a bar graph.

I can go for a long time not seeing someone and still feel very close emotionally.

I cannot do that. Unless I have a very deep seated feeling (of hate, lust, love, etc), it difficult for me to maintain things with someone if there is no contact. The exception to this would be if I made a bond or commitment, and then I would honor that commitment until something changed it. Otherwise, I prefer frequent contact with people close to me... I have numerous relationships and I only like cultivating ones that produce much good fruit.

When a person gains "best friend" status, I'm more likely to go through the awkward process of revealing the depth of my emotions for him/her, and I stand ready 24/7 to help. There are few things in my life that have been as rewarding as helping one of my BFs in need, and a few people who have abused my protectorship have gotten themselves booted out of that status.

I relate to that.

However, it's still unlikely that I'll initiate much socially even with my BFs. I am more likely to be found hanging out with people who initiate social interaction than with the people to whom I feel the closest connection, and it sounds strange to even admit that, but it's been that way for a long time now, and I just kinda go with it. Those people in the inner circle know they're there, and they understand this about me, too.

I know a few SLIs who are also this way.

[Danielle]

First of all, I have always had very few friends. It's a stretch if I have three at a time. And I certainly do not see them all the same way. I do believe in the concept of best friends, but I don't always have one.

I may have several close friends and no best friends, but I am always on the lookout for a best friend. Even when I had only one close friend, I didn't necessarily see that person as a best friend, because best friend has special meaning for me.

[tereg]

I have a sort of not-well-defined hierarchy, I guess you could say. There are certainly levels of closeness, but they are often somewhat fluid and, eh... varying in color or quality. For example, the person I would consider my closest friend right now is an ESFj. But I'm also very close, if not closer, to my sister (ENFp). But the relationship I have with each of them is different, has different qualities, different dynamics, different focusses.

The way I see it, every individual has their own connection with me (as well as all sorts of connections that in turn connect and intertwine), and each connection is unique even if there are many similarities between many of them.

If there were a visual representation of one way of looking at it, it might be something like this (probably entirely unnecessary and useless, but I felt like making it so here you go, lol):




Me being the purplish dot in the center and other people being the other dots. Each person has their own connection, but different people are different distances from me and come from different directions and interact with me in different ways. There are no real boxes or set-in-stone hierarchies. But some people are definitely closer to me than others, and that's most often based on how well I like them and how well we interact on closer levels and even how well I think they deserve it, and other variables. Nothing is ever the same for different people.

Now, despite what I say about non-well-definedness and lack of structure, I don't like lots of changes in the distances and qualities of relationships, and I don't like unexpected changes, either. Once I find a balance, I tend to like to keep it.

My natural inclination is to assume that most people are like that, having naturally and expected varying distances in their relationships, as well as showing those closeness-es in particular ways, but according to some of my experiences and conversations, apparently not?

Anyway, I have no idea if or how much this is of any use to you, Sereno.

This reminds me of a post I made about the "feeling" of

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post448096

[iAnnAu]

Unless I have a very deep seated feeling (of hate, lust, love, etc), it difficult for me to maintain things with someone if there is no contact. The exception to this would be if I made a bond or commitment, and then I would honor that commitment until something changed it. Otherwise, I prefer frequent contact with people close to me... I have numerous relationships and I only like cultivating ones that produce much good fruit.

This sounds quite a bit like my LSE SO, and in fact most of the people I've been hanging out with for the past several months have been closer to his best buds and more like just plain ol' pals to me (except for my brother - both of us are quite close with the Z!). He's even helped me a couple of times in getting my own friends to get together, and I've been sure to express my gratitude!

He can spend quite a bit of time by himself pursuing his own interests, but he does put effort forth on a frequent basis to go out and socialize. He has been going to a particular bar downtown at least once a week for over 3 years now, and all the waitrons greet him enthusiastically, and the manager will sit down to converse with us ... he really seems to value having that recognition/established environment in a place to meet with his closer connections. While I like cute waitresses hugging on me too, I guess I don't really seek that specifically - I'd be happier at someone's house with a max of 4 or 5 people and preferably only 2 or 3 of us.

Hm, that makes me curious ... One thing I've noticed about my SO is that he's a little too polite in some circumstances. We've had those gimmicky magazine sellers come to our door, and he'll buy a subscription rather than turn them away (if they're nice). And on more than one occasion, we've had an obnoxious drunk insinuate him/herself at our table, and I am much more quick to snub than he is. I have no problem shutting the door on salesmen or walking away from a person too drunk to register not-so-subtle cues. This surprised me at first; I thought he'd have no trouble taking them to task, but instead he takes quite a bit of time before insisting on cutting off the interaction. Maybe something about his upbringing rather than type-related?

[Lobo]

So because of that I'm really hestitant to announce a "best friend." I also don't want to make anyone feel bad and the non "best" friends are still really really important close friends.

In my way of thinking, even if other friends are important close friends, I would still have the best friend position available. The problem with not doing things to make people feel bad when it comes to this is that if someone comes along who definitely deserves to be "up there" as in always being there for you, and definitely showing interested in being more involved in your life, makes time for you, takes you seriously, and then you become hesitant when it comes to deciding if you should or shouldn't assign said person as your best friend (or just don't) then it's true that everyone is "happy," except you'll be hurting and possibly pushing away the one that is more concerned about you. There are people who will care for you and be your close friends, but unintentionally will not be there for you at times, or won't actively make themselves a part of your life. Of course, everyone has their own life and concentrate on their priorities. However, if someone makes me a priority as I described before, I don't care if I'll end up hurting my other friends' feelings by assigning said person as one of my best friends (or best friend period), not because I don't care about their feelings in general, but I expect them to understand this. I do have friends who I consider close who don't consider me as their best friend, and I'm definitely ok with that because I'm not as involved in their life. This can be a sensitive subject that can make you affect the friendship in some cases, but when someone puts in the work and I let them, then I don't see it as fair to be wishy washy.

I think that all of this is something that I've only just recently come to understand by being the person I'm mentioning who wants to actively be involved. From this standpoint a lot of things seem clearer to me... It's just not fair to treat all your friends the same way, even if they are close, especially the ones who put in the work. My friend is so concerned about keeping everyone at the same level, that he doesn't know the impact or consequence of this decision. It might be one of those things that will take a long time to realize when you look back, or maybe that won't be the case. Regardless, it's very unfortunate, but now I'm going to concentrate on other things.

[Tom]

I don't assign roles to friends, nor do I have some verticle hierarchy. I personally don't even think of people as friends or enemies, but rather that I have a specific relationship with each individual, and while I know that some may be more profitable (or the person more trustworthy, likely to do whatever, etc.), I still don't think of some people as better or worse friends.

The point of Fi isn't to set up internal hierarchies among people and things. The point of Fi is to assume the good in each thing before it's even seen. "Bright lights band the hopeful" is how I like to put it, and I tend to think of Fi as a warm glow which emminates from all/between and including all objects, almost like the sun.

People misrepresentin' mah Fi.

[Lobo]

I don't assign roles to friends, nor do I have some verticle hierarchy. I personally don't even think of people as friends or enemies, but rather that I have a specific relationship with each individual, and while I know that some may be more profitable (or the person more trustworthy, likely to do whatever, etc.), I still don't think of some people as better or worse friends.

I don't have the mindset of determining how profitable people are to me, and having that be the basis for friendship. I don't like it when I know someone is being buddy-buddy with me because I have profitable things to offer. It's more of an infatuation/selfishness than actual friendship.

The point of Fi isn't to set up internal hierarchies among people and things. The point of Fi is to assume the good in each thing before it's even seen. "Bright lights band the hopeful" is how I like to put it, and I tend to think of Fi as a warm glow which emminates from all/between and including all objects, almost like the sun.

People misrepresentin' mah Fi.

The cheesy meter is getting high up in hea . On a serious note, I don't understand the point of Fi as you're saying here. This seems more of an optimistic/negative thing.

[tiny_dancer]

Hm. I have a best friend, but I don't think I assign a hierarchy to it. I've known her longer than any of my other friends, and I'm completely comfortable around her, which is why she's my best friend. And she knows more about me than any person on this planet.

Um... yeah. I just have people that I'm comfortable around, and people that I'm less comfortable around. I've run into some people that totally repulse me, and obviously those I don't hang out with at all. haha My closer friends are ones I've known longer. Although if I really click with someone, I guess I'd start trying to hang out with them more..

Anyway, I don't really have a list going on in my head or anything.

[Tom]

I don't have the mindset of determining how profitable people are to me, and having that be the basis for friendship. I don't like it when I know someone is being buddy-buddy with me because I have profitable things to offer. It's more of an infatuation/selfishness than actual friendship.

lol I just said "more profitable" because it describes more clearly what's meant by "being a better friend to me" or whatever. Profit doesn't just mean money and/or sex. It means gain.

The cheesy meter is getting high up in hea . On a serious note, I don't understand the point of Fi as you're saying here. This seems more of an optimistic/negative thing.

Well that's really what I'm getting at. Fi is generally described as some need for a pessimistic declension, where this isn't the case at all in healthy individuals. Fi is about optimism and tact. People like to think of Fe as the real "emotional" element because Fe is more overtly unstable and almost rollercoaster-like in manifestation. Fi, however, is more about the positive intrinsic value of things and the internal bonds that people share. Of course there are negative examples of Fi and these include things like uber-religiousness and hating anyone who comes from a certain background, etc. But people see this and end up thinking that this is what Fi really is, when this isn't the case at all. Fi is about real, internal bonds, which, in this world where nothing matters and all is pointless, is the only thing that appears somewhat important (to me anyway).

Hm. I have a best friend, but I don't think I assign a hierarchy to it. I've known her longer than any of my other friends, and I'm completely comfortable around her, which is why she's my best friend. And she knows more about me than any person on this planet.

Um... yeah. I just have people that I'm comfortable around, and people that I'm less comfortable around. I've run into some people that totally repulse me, and obviously those I don't hang out with at all. haha My closer friends are ones I've known longer. Although if I really click with someone, I guess I'd start trying to hang out with them more..

Anyway, I don't really have a list going on in my head or anything.

This is pretty much spot-on.

[Simon Ssmall]

I certainly have hierarchy with people in my life, which can spread in different directions, like:

Girlfriend
Family
Best friends
Friends/ Ex-girlfriends
Colleagues
Acquaintance


I used to have a best friend, but I broke all bonds with him a few years ago, basically he just became a total alien to me person and did things I cannot approve on any level. So I sort of don't have that kind of special bond with any of my friends, but it also meant that a small group of my friends became more important and I improved the bond and time spent with them.

Some colleagues are as important as friends, some colleagues are less important than acquaintances, that all depends on how much time I spent with the said person in difficult situations or abroad (where you basically have to rely on each other anyway).

Usually my girlfriend takes most important role in my life, close second comes my brother. Then my parents, and best friends.

Bah, its all connected and listed in a certain way in my mind and I maintain the level of closeness of a relationship, Im not as responsive when someone else is doing that though (I still am to a degree depending on the person). To give an example:

If one of my ex would show me what I consider too much attention I would probably would be reluctant to respond or go out with her. If one of my friends who I do not consider one of the best friends (which are 3) would show me more attention than normal I might be intrigued as to why, could be he/she is having a hard time etc. so this I would not consider abnormal and if I would have the time for a person would depends whether I spent enough time with people who I consider more important and also if I would know if something is wrong or its just that he/she wants to chill with someone. If one of my best friends would show more attention than normal I would welcome it and it then would depend whether I have time in general, I would still think of something, like meeting together with my girlfriend and friends at my brothers place, so I would have time for all people I consider most important in my life.

[UDP]

This sounds quite a bit like my LSE SO, and in fact most of the people I've been hanging out with for the past several months have been closer to his best buds and more like just plain ol' pals to me (except for my brother - both of us are quite close with the Z!). He's even helped me a couple of times in getting my own friends to get together, and I've been sure to express my gratitude!

He can spend quite a bit of time by himself pursuing his own interests, but he does put effort forth on a frequent basis to go out and socialize.

Yes

He has been going to a particular bar downtown at least once a week for over 3 years now, and all the waitrons greet him enthusiastically, and the manager will sit down to converse with us ... he really seems to value having that recognition/established environment in a place to meet with his closer connections. While I like cute waitresses hugging on me too, I guess I don't really seek that specifically - I'd be happier at someone's house with a max of 4 or 5 people and preferably only 2 or 3 of us.

I think a sense of community and constancy are appealing. I often like staying at home, too, and meeting with friends... but not all the time. Having some sort of a gathering place that is fun and out and gives off a sense of familiarity, it helps me feel involved. And as I said before in the Delta ST attraction thread, a sense of involvement is appealing. I actually start getting kind of depressed if I'm not "doing things", and that includes social events.

At uni that's what I spend a lot of time doing, because there are many groups I like to support, and it's also related to what I do - management, administration, planning, coordination, etc. I like seeing communities I support do well. And I also like a sense of familiarity and involvement in them.

In general, consistency is relaxing, especially if I'm tired after a long week. I like having a healthy balance of adventure and doing things and action to go with my consistency, and the ratio varies depending on my mood, other people's wants that I care about, and various other factors. But I definitely like having both elements.

Hm, that makes me curious ... One thing I've noticed about my SO is that he's a little too polite in some circumstances. We've had those gimmicky magazine sellers come to our door, and he'll buy a subscription rather than turn them away (if they're nice). And on more than one occasion, we've had an obnoxious drunk insinuate him/herself at our table, and I am much more quick to snub than he is. I have no problem shutting the door on salesmen or walking away from a person too drunk to register not-so-subtle cues. This surprised me at first; I thought he'd have no trouble taking them to task, but instead he takes quite a bit of time before insisting on cutting off the interaction. Maybe something about his upbringing rather than type-related?

It's related to Fe role somewhat, as opposed to your Fe polr, but also values. Possibly also enneagram type, too. Lots of things.

For me it has to do with how I feel about somebody. Unruly people interrupting me, my table, my home, or my family, they have very little going for them. It's the perfect excuse, really, for me to be overbearingly protective (which can be fun in a slightly evil way). However, if I genuinely feel some sort of sympathy for someone (which is rare), then I might be more lenient. And even socially, there is Fe role stuff where I have to show a sort of politeness for a few moments. But those moments can dry up pretty fast depending on how much bullshit I think is apparent.

Wheeler-dealer type people haven no sway over me, especially if they are pushy. The more pushy they are the more swiftly they are rejected. I hate when people try to steal my time, or interrupt things that are important, or bother people I care about. But if I see a kid who is trying to sell me something and its obvious they don't want to be there but are trying hard anyways, I'll be more receptive, etc. Still, my initial nature is much more 'conservative' with myself and my resources. I had an episode of that last night with tipping the pizza guy, mhm.

"and he'll buy a subscription rather than turn them away (if they're nice)" I would absolutely not give somebody money (or time) as some sort of appeasement. That sort of thing bothers me a great deal. Unless I wanted to support that person in some way. Or if I was loaded maybe and I really didn't care -- but that would have to be tons of cash. I dislike spending money frivolously. Or getting junk mail and crap magazines that I won't read.

[leckysupport]

Hm, that makes me curious ... One thing I've noticed about my SO is that he's a little too polite in some circumstances. We've had those gimmicky magazine sellers come to our door, and he'll buy a subscription rather than turn them away (if they're nice). And on more than one occasion, we've had an obnoxious drunk insinuate him/herself at our table, and I am much more quick to snub than he is. I have no problem shutting the door on salesmen or walking away from a person too drunk to register not-so-subtle cues. This surprised me at first; I thought he'd have no trouble taking them to task, but instead he takes quite a bit of time before insisting on cutting off the interaction. Maybe something about his upbringing rather than type-related?

I'm guessing it is type related, I've seen ESEs do this as well.

[Tom]

So many alphas pollute this subforum and everyone's view of deltas. For shame.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

However, if I genuinely feel some sort of sympathy for someone (which is rare), then I might be more lenient.

I always feel sorry for people. Seriously. Feeling sorry for people is frequently the only thing that stops me from murdering them outright.

I actually start getting kind of depressed if I'm not "doing things", and that includes social events.

I think everybody needs to do SOMEthings in order to feel loved and useful but for me I just need the bare minimum. I'm sooo not a go-getter and what-have-you.

I like having a healthy balance of adventure and doing things and action to go with my consistency, and the ratio varies depending on my mood, other people's wants that I care about, and various other factors. But I definitely like having both elements.

lol sorry bud but I just don't think that life has enough hours in the day for things to be this interesting and stuff 'depending on your mood.' You just sound like a typical privileged white person from the safe and sheltered suburbs, no offense. And I'm not trying to make you feel guilty or play a minority card by that I'm just saying. (I'm spoiled, privileged and white myself) You remind me of one of those funny republican white guys.

I hate when people try to steal my time, or interrupt things that are important, or bother people I care about.

Yes, because some people actually enjoy being annoyed and inconvenienced! Us Betas cheer if our mothers are raped!!! I don't mean to be making fun of you but really....

But if I see a kid who is trying to sell me something and its obvious they don't want to be there but are trying hard anyways, I'll be more receptive, etc.

Blah. I'm the complete opposite.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

CONFLICTOR FIGHT CONFLICTOR FIGHT CONFLICTOR FIGHT!

[Mattie]

So many alphas pollute this subforum and everyone's view of deltas. For shame.

Why not do something constructive about it?

[iAnnAu]

Having some sort of a gathering place that is fun and out and gives off a sense of familiarity, it helps me feel involved. And as I said before in the Delta ST attraction thread, a sense of involvement is appealing. I actually start getting kind of depressed if I'm not "doing things", and that includes social events. I like seeing communities I support do well.

It's the perfect excuse, really, for me to be overbearingly protective (which can be fun in a slightly evil way). And even socially, there is Fe role stuff where I have to show a sort of politeness for a few moments. But those moments can dry up pretty fast depending on how much bullshit I think is apparent.

if I see a kid who is trying to sell me something and its obvious they don't want to be there but are trying hard anyways, I'll be more receptive, etc. Still, my initial nature is much more 'conservative' with myself and my resources. I had an episode of that last night with tipping the pizza guy, mhm.

What I quoted from your post resonates with what I observe of my SO. ESPECIALLY the "fun in a slightly evil way" part. Ironically Jon is the youngest of the group (by less than two years, but still ...) but he often is the driving force behind both organizing getogethers and even the topic at hand: he can really get into telling people what he thinks they should do. And sometimes when he goes to the bathroom, we all admit how even though he's right about what he's saying, he's also just enjoying hearing himself talk!

One night recently we had driven to the bar separately, and I left around 11:30. He was finishing his cigar and said he'd be a few minutes behind me. But he didn't get home until 1AM, and he told me it was because he'd been telling his best friend - who recently earned manager at a cigar store - how he should proceed in his business. And they'd already been talking about that for half an hour or so before I left!

He has a detached matter-of-fact delivery that somehow manages to not step on the audience's ego, as can also be seen by how he's pushed me into going back to college - normally, I would find such suggestions manipulative, but somehow he convinced me of the benefits to be gained by enduring the bullshit of the system one more time.

I can definitely see how LSEs get negative impressions - that kind of "I know what you should do better than you yourself do" pushiness borders on arrogance even in my healthy SO. But he manages it well, and almost everyone - from his boss to my brother to the manager of the bar, etc. - respects his opinion highly.

[Tom]

I try

[Mattie]

I try

Step it up!

[Tom]

lol If only everyone just believed truth; this wouldn't be a problem either way...

Anyway, I'm not upset that there are deltas who aren't deltas, just like I'm sure some (if not many lol) aren't upset that I don't think I'm beta. And because I doubt I'm going to convince everyone of my type, I just have to hope that the casual observer can differentiate, and try to give them what I think is correct as information. So I'm trying lol

[Mattie]

lol If only everyone just believed truth; this wouldn't be a problem either way...

Anyway, I'm not upset that there are deltas who aren't deltas, just like I'm sure some (if not many lol) aren't upset that I don't think I'm beta. And because I doubt I'm going to convince everyone of my type, I just have to hope that the casual observer can differentiate, and try to give them what I think is correct as information. So I'm trying lol

I think the general problem comes from assuming you have "truth" obtained. Even when I'm rather sure of something, I typically keep open-minded enough to the possibility of being mistaken. I don't really have an opinion on your type because we don't really talk, but if you are incorrect of your type, there could be lots of misconceptions you have of everything else. I might be pointing this out because this is first in a bit where people are bringing up people being typed incorrectly, and I (yeah, this isn't my forum, but maybe others will agree) would prefer if we could do something constructive, like explaining what you see incorrect with these examples and post how you think the actual hypothesis contrast. It could be just me, but when you just make a comment about how people are mistaken about things and don't really back it up well, I think it's just unproductive.

[Tom]

We've tried and tried and tried again. And I just tried to word that post specifically so people reading it would understand that I wasn't claiming "truth" there, a point to which I obviously failed. That was the whole point of that post... x_x

Basically my point is that there really isn't anything more constructive to do about it than to try to just tell it like you think it is and hope the casual observer will eventually come to understand that you're correct.

As for me, I do always keep an open mind, but it often takes a good deal of convincing to get me to believe you. I believe what I believe (and this applies to everything, not just socionics) because I've worked it out logically and/or empirically. So if someone can point out a logic flaw (an actual flaw, not "you don't know what you're saying blahblahblah HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAAA), I will generally change my mind. And because that has happened several times and in several ways, I now believe I'm Si ESTj and use Model X. Even using Model X however, doesn't change a person's type, with the exception of moving you to the mirror's position, sometimes. Do you want to know what types I think people are? look at my userlist. Or ask me; I'm happy to explain it if you won't be a twat about it.

[Mattie]

According to your userlist, Ryu and Ssmall, are the only people posting here you think are in alpha. What about their statements in this thread show they have a misconception of at least Ti/Fe vs Fi/Te valuing? And from what I understand about Model X (or, every model suffers from this problem) is that there's a different outlook that does make peoples' types different, which is why looking at userlists, those who I know of who are using Model X agree with each other's typings much significantly enough to contrast everyone else. Knowing this, would bringing up that people have misconceptions when you're on one page and the rest are in a different book be useful at all?