Socionics negativism vs. negativism as a result of unhealthy psyche

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

How can one tell a difference between a true socionics negativist and someone who's negative because of being unhealthy? Say people who are depressed or have depressive structure of their psyche, wouldn't they appear to be nagativists in the socionics sense as well, even when it would be inaccurate for the theory? Or people who are constantly bragging about things because of their own inner insecurities or lack of self awareness and other unhealthy and socionics unrelated motives for their behavior?

[Rebelondeck]

Negativism is baggage that someone acquires due to bad experiences and or bad upbringings and or medical conditions. To imply that it's inherent within some aspect of information processing would be incorrect. Type's data processing algorithms influence the perception of negative events and how they would be rationalized but doesn't themselves create the insecurities, negativity, etc......

a.k.a. I/O

[golden]

If you remove the value judgments from negativism / positivism, and set aside whether it actually even has anything to do with Socionics, I'd call myself a negativist. I say this because I tend to see where something is broken and needs to be improved. I tend to assess the distance from where something is (a project, a concept, a product) to where it can go in order to make it complete, realized, functional, whatever.

Sometimes this can rub people the wrong way. Even if I give affectively neutral or positive feedback, someone may want to shield another person, or themselves, from this kind of information regarding lack or indicating the potential for further work and refinement, even if the information was directly requested.

[Aeris]

I have been thinking of socionics negativism as just being orriented on fixing problems more than pushing advantages, not pessimism or seenig the world all dark and grim, that can happen to anyone.
I'm thinking about ILE-SEI, ILE tend to make others feel uncomfortable, it's the SEI who smoothes things over, the negativist fixing the atmosphere problem. ILI will warn the SEE of the possible problems to come from their endeavor and work at fixing it. Some need to be more vocal about the problems they see, others simply fix quietly.
Seeing too many problems, or too little advantages can make anyone depressed I think.

*Advantages is probably not the best word, but I couldn't think of anything else.

[anndelise]

If you remove the value judgments from negativism / positivism, and set aside whether it actually even has anything to do with Socionics, I'd call myself a negativist. I say this because I tend to see where something is broken and needs to be improved. I tend to assess the distance from where something is (a project, a concept, a product) to where it can go in order to make it complete, realized, functional, whatever.

Sometimes this can rub people the wrong way. Even if I give affectively neutral or positive feedback, someone may want to shield another person, or themselves, from this kind of information regarding lack or indicating the potential for further work and refinement, even if the information was directly requested.

I'm similar, but more towards something (a conceptual something) is missing rather than broken. But still the something needs to be improved thing. How can I/you/we get a better picture of what we're talking about? When we look at it from this way, what are we missing? or how does it differ from when we look at it this other way? What could be chipped away yet leave us with a clearer picture of the underlying concepts involved? What doesn't fit right? etc.

In conversations where there's misunderstandings happening, I can get obsessive over trying to figure out what's missing, what am I forgetting? what am I getting wrong? What can I change/improve that would make mutual understanding easier? Sometimes I'll even show a written conversation to one or more uninvolved people in as neutral a manner as possible, so I can see what they catch from it that I might have missed.

Decision making is quite difficult for me, as I'm typically hesitant to make a decision as I feel like I'm risking forgetting or excluding something useful/important. Most of my opinions tend to be "on the one hand, but on the other hand" type of things, or "in one context, but in another context". An idea/opinion/pov might be useful here, but not necessarily useful there. I'll get accused of being too relativist, but then I think...is it relativism or is just that we've not dug deep enough to find the underlying value that both (or more) sides could spring from?

I totally agree with you that this can rub people the wrong way. People want to feel supported, empathized with, and validated. And mentioning, even in passing, the parts of a situation that they missed...or even the mere idea that there may be parts they've missed... can easily feel like invalidation, criticism, and judgment.

Note: I don't think all of the above applies to all negativists, as it would more likely be negativist combined with some other personality related aspects (such as combined with Ne, holographic-panoramic thinking, e6, etc)

[golden]

I totally agree with you that this can rub people the wrong way. People want to feel supported, empathized with, and validated. And mentioning, even in passing, the parts of a situation that they missed...or even the mere idea that there may be parts they've missed... can easily feel like invalidation, criticism, and judgment.

Yeah, afaik people are more likely to pay attention to negative things than positive things, so even if you're overall validating, the bits that are "negative," no matter how delivered, will stick harder. Also, some people don't have the ego strength to withstand much nuanced feedback, especially if they confuse themselves and their value with their progress at something.

Note: I don't think all of the above applies to all negativists, as it would more likely be negativist combined with some other personality related aspects (such as combined with Ne, holographic-panoramic thinking, e6, etc)

A lot of it does sound more 360 degree-ish than I can conceptualize. I see things as unfolding in a linear way.

[anndelise]

A lot of it does sound more 360 degree-ish than I can conceptualize. I see things as unfolding in a linear way.

yeah, to me yours sounded more like there's a path/target that's been/being strayed from. In socionics terms, more algorithmic than holographic.

[DELL]

"Positivists initially pay attention to what is present in a situation (what exists, what is there) what can realistically occur"


"Negativists pay attention to aspects of the situation that are insufficient or lacking" So also what realistically can't occur then...



Positive and negative examples of each....



Positivist (positive) Little Timmy has a nice voice, he could be a singer one day....


Positivist (negative) Where did you get that toy Timmy? Did you steal it from one of the other boys?


Negativist (positive) Timmy doesn't have many books; I'll buy him some more


Negativist (negative) Timmy will never be a scientist, he doesn't have the brains...

[ooo]

if you talk with my dad he'll say I'm a negativist, if you talk to people I work with they'll say I'm a ball-breaker, and my friends use to think of me as pollyanna... sooo

[gone]

Well I guess negativist and positivist simply refers to (+) and (-) statements. 'Everything is bad' is a positivist statement, whereas 'Everything is not bad' is a negativist statement. Maybe be careful to bind it to optimism and pessimism.

[ooo]

so if u use negative interlocutions you're a negativist... hmmm

[gone]

so if u use negative interlocutions you're a negativist... hmmm

Yeah, positivists focus on what's present and negativists focus on what's missing. If they choose to focus on the positive or negative is another thing. I don't believe in Reinin dichotomies overall, but positivist/negativist has got to be the most absurd of those.

[Sol]

Reinin's traits may to be the result of unhealthy psyche

[Beautiful sky]

I'm similar, but more towards something (a conceptual something) is missing rather than broken. But still the something needs to be improved thing. How can I/you/we get a better picture of what we're talking about? When we look at it from this way, what are we missing? or how does it differ from when we look at it this other way? What could be chipped away yet leave us with a clearer picture of the underlying concepts involved? What doesn't fit right? etc.

In conversations where there's misunderstandings happening, I can get obsessive over trying to figure out what's missing, what am I forgetting? what am I getting wrong? What can I change/improve that would make mutual understanding easier? Sometimes I'll even show a written conversation to one or more uninvolved people in as neutral a manner as possible, so I can see what they catch from it that I might have missed.

Decision making is quite difficult for me, as I'm typically hesitant to make a decision as I feel like I'm risking forgetting or excluding something useful/important. Most of my opinions tend to be "on the one hand, but on the other hand" type of things, or "in one context, but in another context". An idea/opinion/pov might be useful here, but not necessarily useful there. I'll get accused of being too relativist, but then I think...is it relativism or is just that we've not dug deep enough to find the underlying value that both (or more) sides could spring from?

I totally agree with you that this can rub people the wrong way. People want to feel supported, empathized with, and validated. And mentioning, even in passing, the parts of a situation that they missed...or even the mere idea that there may be parts they've missed... can easily feel like invalidation, criticism, and judgment.

Note: I don't think all of the above applies to all negativists, as it would more likely be negativist combined with some other personality related aspects (such as combined with Ne, holographic-panoramic thinking, e6, etc)

I'm definitely positivist.

[Number 9 large]

How can one tell a difference between a true socionics negativist and someone who's negative because of being unhealthy? Say people who are depressed or have depressive structure of their psyche, wouldn't they appear to be nagativists in the socionics sense as well, even when it would be inaccurate for the theory? Or people who are constantly bragging about things because of their own inner insecurities or lack of self awareness and other unhealthy and socionics unrelated motives for their behavior?

socionics negativism just means you talk in negations.
e.g. you say i am not sick today, instead of saying i feel fine today.

it has nothing to do with negativity as in feeling down, bad or depressed.

[WVBRY]

I find it easiest to tell by how you anticipate situations. If your first thought is to minimize the negative before getting into something, that's a negativist attitude. If it's how to maximize the positive, that's a positivist attitude.

It is not defined as being in a negative or positive place psychologically.

[The Reality Denialist]

Expectations seem more modifiable for negativists and are probably more direct in aggression. Positivists usually raises their hands and swallow the pride and change the point of view.