User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 50

  1. #31
    this is my winter song EJCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    173 so/sx
    Posts
    18,431

    Default

    I change my vote to so/sx, after reading your answers and thoughts from fidelia and PB and others.

    You seem too so to be sx-dom, but not too sx to be so-dom... if that makes sense. I don't think your sx seems nearly as intense/laser-focused as it would be if it were your dominant.
    ~ g e t f e s t i v e ! ~


    EJCC: "The Big Questions in my life right now: 1) What am I willing to live with? 2) What do I have to live with? 3) What can I change for the better?"
    Coriolis: "Is that the ESTJ Serenity Prayer?"



    ESTJ - LSE - ESTj (mbti/socionics)
    1w2/7w6/3w4 so/sx (enneagram)
    want to ask me something? go for it!

  2. #32
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    @Inari Love - thanks for the aggregate of info!

    Often align with a group or a cause and will follow the rules loyally, trying to please the boss. "Company men." Focus on a social or work context and try to be ideal within it. Could persecute others in the name of their group's ideals. May imagine they can't live without the group's support: "If I don't play by the rules I'll be out on the street selling pencils."
    This is the one thing I've never associated with or understood. I am really not a "company" type... maybe because I generally dislike capitalism. I don't trust any kind of organization that people are primarily in for money's sake. I'm also not sure I understand persecuting others in the name of a group. I have too much personal empathy to be so black-and-white. Same with group support - groups are just collections of people, not the be-all-end-all. I have an so/sp super-phobic coworker who's the company type and she drives me nuts.

    "soc/sx
    Motivation: to create lasting connections with those they are interested in - the "best friend."
    This type has very strong one to one social skills, but is usually uncomfortable in group settings. They enjoy cultivating multiple relationships, and can be intensely involved when in the presence of someone they are interested in, but have difficulty sustaining these bonds when apart. This may give the impression of being flighty and rootless, willing to adapt and mirror others in order to connect, but lacking a defined approach that would give their relationships a more solid standing. They may have political interests, but are generally more pragmatic and less partisan than the other social variant. They are often attuned to pop culture and the latest trends.
    • Expression: bright smiley, intense expression
    • Energy: outward energy expressed intensely, broadly
    • Behavior: bright, smiley, erratic and scattered
    • Mindset: "If I can get close to people with merging/intensity, I can make sure of and keep improving my position and inclusion in the group/world."
    • Blind spot: Likely to neglect their desire to seek intense connections and experiences for the sake of their primary concern of building their sense of personal value, accomplishment, and security of place with others, in average-healthy levels. May not have an awareness of the body's need for food or sleep, or of the need to accumulate wealth for reasons of security, or of the need to manage time or resources to establish an orderly lifestyle.
    "
    This sounds pretty accurate, minus what I struck out. I've always been good about maintaining relationships and have a history of getting really pissed off at friends who apparently can't even manage responding to two Facebook wall posts a year to keep in touch. It's always me trying to hunt down others. I've given up recently, just letting them go. If they don't value me enough to keep in touch, it's not a friendship I really want anyway.

    I'm also hopeless with pop culture, trends, and current events.

    I think you give off warm, non-confrontational.

    In comparison just in looks.. @Amargith has picture of fire lol "intense" You have aquamarine going on in your pic....much more sublte lol
    Lol, true. My avatars tend to be a little softer and floatier.

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    I change my vote to so/sx, after reading your answers and thoughts from fidelia and PB and others.

    You seem too so to be sx-dom, but not too sx to be so-dom... if that makes sense. I don't think your sx seems nearly as intense/laser-focused as it would be if it were your dominant.
    Yeah, that makes sense. I see what you mean and agree.

  3. #33
    this is my winter song EJCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    173 so/sx
    Posts
    18,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    This is the one thing I've never associated with or understood. I am really not a "company" type... maybe because I generally dislike capitalism. I don't trust any kind of organization that people are primarily in for money's sake. I'm also not sure I understand persecuting others in the name of a group. I have too much personal empathy to be so black-and-white. Same with group support - groups are just collections of people, not the be-all-end-all. I have an sp/so super-phobic coworker who's the company type and she drives me nuts.
    Descriptions of the social instinct that focus on that sort of thing -- companies, institutions, "social status" -- strike me as being incredibly biased towards so/sp (and possibly SJ). I completely agree with you about money; I use money as a means to an end. Seems like it's the people who are sp-first or second who see those sorts of things as more than just a necessity*.

    *Excluding people who were raised in an environment that (over)valued money as an end in and of itself.
    ~ g e t f e s t i v e ! ~


    EJCC: "The Big Questions in my life right now: 1) What am I willing to live with? 2) What do I have to live with? 3) What can I change for the better?"
    Coriolis: "Is that the ESTJ Serenity Prayer?"



    ESTJ - LSE - ESTj (mbti/socionics)
    1w2/7w6/3w4 so/sx (enneagram)
    want to ask me something? go for it!

  4. #34
    The High Priestess Amargith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Enfp
    Enneagram
    497 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Fi
    Posts
    14,656

    Default

    You will be missed in the sx-so club.
    ★ڿڰۣ✿ℒoѵℯ✿ڿڰۣ★





    "Harm none, do as ye will”

  5. #35
    Paranoid Android Video's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,174

    Default

    Good stuff in this thread. I've been watching, as another sp-last who is looking between these two stackings, and understand so a lot better now.
    4w3 6w5 1w2 sx/sp ISFP

    RLOAX (don't do it)
    Melancholic Hufflepuff
    A lonely island where only what is permitted to move moves, becomes an ideal. Jung

    Kiss Kiss [johari] Bang Bang [nohari]

  6. #36
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC
    Descriptions of the social instinct that focus on that sort of thing -- companies, institutions, "social status" -- strike me as being incredibly biased towards so/sp (and possibly SJ). I completely agree with you about money; I use money as a means to an end. Seems like it's the people who are sp-first or second who see those sorts of things as more than just a necessity*.

    *Excluding people who were raised in an environment that (over)valued money as an end in and of itself.
    Yes, sorry, so/sp, I typo'd on my company coworker. She's so/sp. I think you're right about this. I can even relate better with money - I like money well enough - I just don't trust people who are only after money. I have met some lovely so/sps, but I also get a "coldness" from some I know IRL. I suppose that's me feeling the unity-awareness on top but it not being supported below by tight bonding, so it feels like things are "reversed" from the way they "should be" in my mind. Have you ever read the typewatch literature online where it talks about how you can either have a hyper-strong dominant and a pussy-whipped second, a second instinct with a "corner office", or a second instinct that's sleeping with the first? That last one would be my sx, in typical sx style. And she's on top. I guess that's why it's harder for me to relate to so/sp than sx/so, because sx is perched atop so and she disapproves.

    I found this and thought it was neat:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Aldrich
    I've said this before in other topics, but the way I see it, the variants represent your needs and priorities. The types are more like your internal issues. Your own problems. The internal problems you focus on (the conflict between ego, superego and id). The variants, by contrast, focus on the outside world. The outside problems you focus on.

    Therefore, the social type focuses on society as a whole, and… well… social problems. That is – your job, your school, whether you have homework to do, whether you don’t have homework to do, how well are you doing in life, how well are other people doing in life, how well are you doing in life compared to how other people are doing in life, your role, etc.

    It compells you to desire to interact with others, and focus on the interactions between you and others, as well as the interaction between you and… things even. It’s a thought that’s very… gear-like. Very… mechanic.

    There’s always movement. They are aware of also the interactions between others and others, and others and the environment as well as themselves and others and themselves and the environment. It’s being aware of interactions in general. How everything interacts with each other. That’s what makes it very gear-like. One gear affects another, and their aware of how they can harm and help this whole entire process (of interacting with others and stuff).

    When they lose someone, they feel that a gear was just lost. They can’t interact with it anymore, and it’s gone. That something’s missing (and they know what it is).

    Sx-firsts, on the other hand, aren’t as aware of the interactions between them and others and the environment, rather… their more aware of the chemistry. So while the so-firsts are more “mechanical”, the sx-firsts are more “chemical”.

    Focusing on sx-first issues involve: Am I close to my gf/bf? Am I close to my family? How much in common do we all have? Do I really like this thing? Am I attracted to it? Is that person attracted to that other person? etc.

    They’re more aware of the bonds and the chemistry between them and people, as well as environment, and other people and other people, as well as other people and the environment. They really like being close to their intimates, and are generally passionate about things.

    Likewise, they fear that those chemical bonds could be broken, and when they are, they are emotionally hurt. They feel literally separated, and ripped away from the other person or object.

    Finally, sp-first issues revolve around: Am I healthy? Do I look good? How are my financial issues? How is that person’s financial issues? Am I hungry? etc.

    In other words, sp-firsts worry more about fitness. Fitness in general, of course, not necessarily just body fitness. Therefore, they worry more about how fit they are in their environment, as well as how fit other people are in their environment. They want to be fit. I guess this represents more of… potential energy, rather than mechanical and chemical energy.

    When someone leaves them… I guess perhaps they feel more unfit, since I’m sure they may rely on others to keep them fit. Though, its still more important for they themselves to be fit on their own.

    Therefore… now… stackings:

    So/Sx- Mechanical energy -> Chemical energy (-> = then)
    Focus on the interaction of things, and how their “chemical energy” influences these interactions. They use their “chemical energy” to help them interact better. They seek a bond with everything they interact with.

    Sx/So- Chemical energy -> Mechanical energy
    Focus on the chemistry of things, and how their “mechanical energy” influences the chemistry between them and others. They may rely on interactions to help their “chemical bonds” remain stable (such as asking a friend for advice on the relationship, as well as interacting with the right objects to help the relationship remain stable).

    So/Sp- Mechanical energy -> Potential energy
    Focus on the interaction of things again, but then they also focus on their fitness, and how fit those interactions are. Use their fitness as a away of reinforcing the strength of the interactions as well (“I will do better at work if I am well-suited”).

    Sp/So- Potential energy -> Mechanical energy
    Focus on their fitness, while also focusing on the interaction of things. How those interactions affect their fitness. They may, for this reason, seem more business oriented. (“If I take that offer, it might help me more”).

    Sp/Sx- Potential energy -> Chemical energy
    Focus on their fitness, as well as the chemical bonds they’ve developed with people. They also focus on how those chemical bonds affect their fitness.

    Sx/Sp- Chemical energy -> Potential energy
    Focus on their chemical bonds, as well as fitness. Basically, the fitness of those chemical bonds, and what they can do to make them “fitter”.
    Obviously I personally fall somewhere between mechanical and chemical interactions... @decrescendo may be right in that to some degree my instincts may simply be on par with one another. I feel like I employ both methods - though it occurs to me that I use "chemical" relating more consciously and intentionally, whereas I "track" relations all the time, which is probably a good indicator of so/sx over sx/so.

    Quote Originally Posted by Webslinger
    Good stuff in this thread. I've been watching, as another sp-last who is looking between these two stackings, and understand so a lot better now.
    I'm glad you've found it useful... I feel like I've learned a lot too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    You will be missed in the sx-so club.
    Aw thank you! And trust me, I'm still sx-y enough that I still relate! I will still nom on sx/so issues all the time I'm sure...

  7. #37
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    Descriptions of the social instinct that focus on that sort of thing -- companies, institutions, "social status" -- strike me as being incredibly biased towards so/sp (and possibly SJ). I completely agree with you about money; I use money as a means to an end. Seems like it's the people who are sp-first or second who see those sorts of things as more than just a necessity*.

    *Excluding people who were raised in an environment that (over)valued money as an end in and of itself.
    Not really. The same way SO-last types may see SO as some cartoonish social status seeking tendency, SP-last seem to see SP as some cartoonish security & materially focused tendency.

    All of the instincts are about necessities, but your stronger ones are the ones prioritized.

    SP ---> keeping control via your own physical state, whether by being able to meet your needs, by reducing your needs, or by indulging to self-soothe
    SX ---> pursuing intensity, attraction & connection reminiscent of mating, making a mark or leaving a legacy analogous to producing offspring
    SO ---> forming niches & bonds with other people, whether more broadly social or intimate, feeling a sense of belonging somewhere & connected to other people
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  8. #38
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Just because I was reading TGO's posts and this thread at the same time, I wanted to echo part of my response to him here, since it's really more of a dual response inspired by the last few posts in both threads, which is that something I think might be very important that was misleading to me personally in my understanding was that I thought instinct variant was a method of prioritization, and would determine what you want, but I think there's more of an element of perspective to it than I realized - that it doesn't so much determine what you want so much as it determines the "why" of you wanting it, and how you tend to see it, whether it's something you need to chase or whether it will just fall into place for you, if that makes sense.

    So for example given money, I think basically everyone uses that as a means to an end, but a sp-first might have more of a feeling of actively needing to manage their money, while an sp-last like myself might tend to ignore it more and just assume money will work itself out - it's not that I don't think money is important, or I don't like it or want it, but I've just never felt a burning need to keep up closely with it... whereas my sp-first boyfriend tends to stress a lot about money. And we're the reverse with close relationships. He seems to be much more relaxed about interpersonal maintenance where it's my stress point and something I really pour a lot of energy into.

    My point being, I didn't realize how much of a "lens" aspect there was to instinct, but it seems like there is. Almost more of a prioritization of what you feel compelled to keep track of than what you necessarily seek.

  9. #39
    this is my winter song EJCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    173 so/sx
    Posts
    18,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    Not really. The same way SO-last types may see SO as some cartoonish social status seeking tendency, SP-last seem to see SP as some cartoonish security & materially focused tendency.

    All of the instincts are about necessities, but your stronger ones are the ones prioritized.

    SP ---> keeping control via your own physical state, whether by being able to meet your needs, by reducing your needs, or by indulging to self-soothe
    SX ---> pursuing intensity, attraction & connection reminiscent of mating, making a mark or leaving a legacy analogous to producing offspring
    SO ---> forming niches & bonds with other people, whether more broadly social or intimate, feeling a sense of belonging somewhere & connected to other people
    I was using the phrase "more than just a necessity" in the sense of physical necessity. Maslow's hierarchy of needs, i.e. that you have to meet your physical needs before you can even begin to tackle the rest. So, what you just saw -- and what appears to have struck a nerve? -- was my simultaneous recognition of sp needs as being most important, objectively, and devaluation of it from it being my last instinct.
    ~ g e t f e s t i v e ! ~


    EJCC: "The Big Questions in my life right now: 1) What am I willing to live with? 2) What do I have to live with? 3) What can I change for the better?"
    Coriolis: "Is that the ESTJ Serenity Prayer?"



    ESTJ - LSE - ESTj (mbti/socionics)
    1w2/7w6/3w4 so/sx (enneagram)
    want to ask me something? go for it!

  10. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    5 sx
    Posts
    506

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    My point being, I didn't realize how much of a "lens" aspect there was to instinct, but it seems like there is. Almost more of a prioritization of what you feel compelled to keep track of than what you necessarily seek.
    really interesting thought, something I've been trying to articulate for a while. someone (you?) should start a thread on this!

Similar Threads

  1. [Inst] Am I Sx/So or So/Sx? [2w1]
    By Nørrsken in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-16-2017, 04:32 PM
  2. So am i an INFJ or just a HSP INTJ girl ?
    By Astra princess in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-25-2015, 08:06 PM
  3. So am I an INFJ or what?
    By Forever in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 01-28-2014, 01:00 PM
  4. Am I sx/so or sx/sp?
    By Abbey in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-07-2013, 12:34 AM
  5. So am I an E or an I?
    By BerberElla in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 04-02-2009, 02:09 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO