Who do you tend to find more vulnerable to stress?

[Robouto]

In Gulenko's book there's the following excerpt:

"1. Left irrationals (Marshall, Craftsman, Lyrist, Advisor) are the moststress-resistant types. Their advantage is that they are good at solvingproblems under extreme conditions. A sudden change in the situationmobilizes them, giving them new strength. The ability to act effectively instress imposes on their temperamental characteristics an additionalcharacteristic: elasticity.
2. Right irrationals (Politician, Mediator, Searcher, Critic) form a groupof stress-training sociotypes. It is characterized by a gradual adaptation toextreme conditions. Each of the four goes through their “school ofsurvival,” increasing each time the
degree of resistance. An additional component to their typicaltemperaments is viscosity.
3. Left rationals (Entrepreneur, Enthusiast, Analyst, Guardian) belong tothe group of stress-braking sociotypes. They are able to withstand stressfor quite a long time, but with each new wave of stress, their forces are depleted, and they change the tactics of confrontation to self-elimination,hiding inside their inner turmoil. They seem to build a framework withinthem. An additional component of their rational temperaments iscrystallinity.
4. Right rationals (Administrator, Mentor, Inspector, Humanist) are partof a group of stress-nonresistant sociotypes. They suffer the worst of allstress, especially of a sudden nature. Despite external stoicism, theyalways have a poorly protected, vulnerable point and at the same time —the need to have strong support under their feet, a sudden blow to whichdeprives them of resistance. Drawing into a stressful strip threatens themwith serious doubts, leading to an internal breakdown (“the colloxen onclay feet”). In their rational temperaments, there is invariably such acomponent as monolithic character."

This suggests that right irrationals are less vulnerable to stress than the left rationals however most articles i've read before Gulenko's book suggest the opposite:

https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...Victor-Gulenko

Who is right? And which types appear more vulnerable to stress in your day to day life, I myself strongly suspect that irrationality has more to do with managing stress than being process or result.

[Disturbed]

On average, yes, rationals and process types seem more stressed out. If someone's both then they're probably more prone to stress. So I kind of agree with Gulenko there, but I certainly wouldn't apply it to all representatives of the types he was talking about... he's not very precise, and without much precision, a lot of his things don't apply so I tend to need a lot of thinking G's work over before I accept it. If it weren't for subtypes, I would've much more easily accepted Vera Stratiyevskaya's work to be the best. But no matter how hard I've looked for good socionics researchers, I go mainly by my own observations. FWIW, I think the Gamma NT creative function subtypes (especially the LIE-Ni) would be good socionics researchers; in fact, I've always found the LIE-Ni to be more observant, more accurate, knowledgeable, less serious and even more insightful as psychologists, anything really than their EIE-Ni business relations... there was an EIE-Ni poster here a long time ago, I forgot his name (edit: his name was Gilly), but one of my more recent threads was a reply to something he said; his observations or at least memory and presentation of them were not very good IMO. Juju was an EIE-Fe and more closely matched my own, although not perfectly we both had fluctuations... he was one of the best and knew about so many obscure people like my EIE-Fe oldest brother does (Fe sub seems much more socially aware, seems to have clearer memory, and seems to be better with details and quantifying and communicating with precision than Ni sub, Fe sub has internal fluctuations like I do, can be slow to learn, but doesn't make as many big errors, if they do jump into something, they will make sure that if they do make an error it will be small enough to be corrected whereas EIE-Ni more likely to make more frequent and huge errors, often based on assumptions, that are difficult to recover from... Ni subtype, is well, often more intuitive at the expense of good reasoning and what's actually observable, Fe subtype has better causal, visual awareness, quantitative, and deductive reasoning abilities, makes fewer errors of fact). I sometimes independently come to the same conclusions as EIE-Fe, my conclusions and opinions are usually very different from the EIE-Ni's conclusions... the latter often think I'm really dumb or think that I'm retarded as soon as they meet me (their duals are not anywhere near as quick to conclude I'm dumb), but they even think their exact duals (LSI-Se), or at least think some of them are kind of ditzy... EIE-Ni Leon Trotsky really thought he could outsmart LSI-Se Joseph Stalin, and the former wound up having a rude awakening.

FWIW, I'm either an ESI or LSI and I'm definitely not stress resistant. I'm often stressed, I always have been easily stressed out. I'm pretty strongly rational, although in MBTI I don't test strongly as judging or perceiving, but in socionics I'm strongly rational.

[Hope]

1D and 2D Si probably.

[nifl]

1D and 2D Si probably.

Stress should be most noticeable with regards to weak unvalued functions - for Ni types, Si areas stress the most, on average. There's no reason to think that any type is more prone to stress on the general level.

[Hope]

Stress should be most noticeable with regards to weak unvalued functions - for Ni types, Si areas stress the most, on average. There's no reason to think that any type is more prone to stress on the general level.

Newbie

[nifl]

Newbie

Ethical

[Hope]

Ethical

The opinion of a newbie doesnt really matter.

[nifl]

The opinion of a newbie doesnt really matter.

opinions aren't more correct because the users who post them have been on the forum longer
sounds more like Fe/Ti relation to social status, consider SEI if you're sure in Si introvert, you don't seem like a logical type

[Hope]

opinions aren't more correct because the users who post them have been on the forum longer
sounds more like Fe/Ti relation to social status, consider SEI if you're sure in Si introvert, you don't seem like a logical type

Your opinions are brutally superficial and ilogical.

[nifl]

Your opinions are brutally superficial and ilogical.

And you respond not with discussion but with labelling; this is not congruent with how SLI acts, normally - thus it makes the type less likely for you. Logical types rarely react with one-liners such as 'newbie' to discussion, because they are generally confident in the region they are expected to respond in (logic). Ethical types, especially the Fe types who aren't as afraid of conflict, are more likely to do this, in lieu of arguments. Basic stuff.

[Robouto]

Stress should be most noticeable with regards to weak unvalued functions - for Ni types, Si areas stress the most, on average. There's no reason to think that any type is more prone to stress on the general level.

There is not much evidence for either case but atleast from personal experience I have noticed that some specific types tend to respond worse to stress than others. The worst example is the LSE, it's not a rare ocassion to see an LSE absolutely lose it after handling stress for too long. In comparison there are types like the LIE who tend to brush it off far easier. Also, this isn't really about which type is more prone to stress but which are more resistant to it or handle it better lol I don't think type influences how much people get stressed more than external circumstances.

[Hope]

And you respond not with discussion but with labelling; this is not congruent with how SLI acts, normally - thus it makes the type less likely for you. Logical types rarely react with one-liners such as 'newbie' to discussion, because they are generally confident in the region they are expected to respond in (logic). Ethical types, especially the Fe types who aren't as afraid of conflict, are more likely to do this, in lieu of arguments. Basic stuff.

Says the one who puts the label of "ethical" to anyone who disagree with his nonsensical mansplaning. A logical type as me won't fall in such foolishness and evidently an SLI won't waste any time to discuss the opinion of a rando who doesn't even understand basic theory. Your low Si Te is painful to see.

[nifl]

There is not much evidence for either case but atleast from personal experience I have noticed that some specific types tend to respond worse to stress than others. The worst example is the LSE, it's not a rare ocassion to see an LSE absolutely lose it after handling stress for too long. In comparison there are types like the LIE who tend to brush it off far easier. Also, this isn't really about which type is more prone to stress but which are more resistant to it or handle it better lol I don't think type influences how much people get stressed more than external circumstances.

There's no basic theoretical reason to think so, and I haven't had any personal experiences that went against that. Ability to resist stress would, socioncally speaking, likely have to do with strength and hence mastery of the given function to which the stress is related.
@Berries
>Says the one who puts the label of "ethical" to anyone who disagree with his nonsensical mansplaning.
Read more carefully. ''Logical types rarely react with one-liners such as 'newbie' to discussion''. I responded to your comment about what you perceive me to be with a similar comment, since your comment was not a continuation of the discussion.
What do you mean by mansplaning? And what does it have to do with this thread?
>A logical type as me
Not so likely, as per the reasons above.
>an SLI won't waste any time to discuss the opinion of a rando who doesn't even understand basic theory.
A SLI might well - they have stronger logic and the strong valued functions are the ones used most, and most of the time, generally.
SLI, with strong and valued Te, isn't interested in whether or not the person is a ''rando'' - they perceive what is said more than who says them. Ti types might be more aware of the formal status of the one claiming something. Being introverts and irrationals, they are less externally stubborn and not so tenacious, that's true.
On the contrary, you should reacquaint yourself with basic theory. There's nothing about low Si having any more vulnerability to stress, as far as I know of, and my initial statement is reasonable to derive from the model and is generally what I have observed.

[Minde]

I didn't read the arguing, but I'd answer the title of the OP as: me

[Hope]

@blaecaedre

The level of your reasoning is beyond ridiculous. Sadly, it seems that you have fall so deep down into your own fallacies that you don't even en notice how patetic your logic is. And still, here you are talking about concepts that you don't even understand.

[DEAD]

evidently an SLI won't waste any time to discuss the opinion of a rando who doesn't even understand basic theory.

Ironically, you have been arguing here and are wasting time. Both of you, but it's entertaining, so keep it up.

[Hope]

Ironically, you have been arguing here and are wasting time. Both of you, but it's entertaining, so keep it up.

Well, I'm answering to his compulsive quoting trying to make him understand that his opinion is not intellecually stimulating for me since It's not even accurate according most elemental theory.

[sudo]

Well, I'm answering to his compulsive quoting trying to make him understand that his opinion is not intellecually stimulating for me since It's not even accurate according most elemental theory.

It's interesting, then, that you'd refuse to deliver the blow which would prove him wrong. According to what you've said here, it ought to be pretty easy. I find it hard to believe that you simply can't be bothered, so why else are you so hesitant to engage with any substance? If you have the "fundamental knowledge" that should prove so fatal to him, then by all means: Kill!

[Hope]

It's interesting, then, that you'd refuse to deliver the blow which would prove him wrong. According to what you've said here, it ought to be pretty easy. I find it hard to believe that you simply can't be bothered, so why else are you so hesitant to engage with any substance? If you have the "fundamental knowledge" that should prove so fatal to him, then by all means: Kill!

That wouldnt be the case, if I engage in hyperextended discussion of all of the points the troll keeps making just to "prove him wrong" that only would make him even more obssessed with discussion as he evidently craves for attention and validation. For the rest, anyone who is smart enough can read theory to get their own conclussions and see where he's wrong and why he's misusing typology. And even when they don't, thats certainly not my problem.