[MBTI General] Heirarchies anyone?

[ladypinkington]

I am curious. Indulge me if you will,lol.

I have a very elaborate and well defined heirarchy system for any relationship situation- even emotional attatchments to things. I know who or what I would save in any hanging off a cliff and you can only save one scenario,lol.

I have a heirarchy for top closest people or a ranking of personal relationships- things I would grab if the house were to catch on fire-favorite and most prized possessions, even the rooms in the house are ranked, I have an emotional heirarchy system for everything,lol. There can be ties too in my system and somethings are just put in a tier,lol. Other things are very very defned one by one though,lol.

Based on the tier a person is at in my rankings of relationship also determines the budget for gifts for them. If you are an aquantance it is between nothing and 5 dollars,lol. To me, the price and thought of a gift is very deliberate and is very dependent and reflective on how close I feel to the person,lol. This also includes the time I put into and share in the relationship and how involved and interested I am in the person's lives- it is based on where they are in the closeness and ranking factor,lol.

My husband is an ENTP and is the complete opposite. A stranger that he clicks with - he'll be able to be as close to as someone he's known since high school and he'll spend the same amount of money and time on people be it aquaintance or good friend, my ESTP best friend is like that as well,lol. They have a heirarchy but it is a lot looser and not as defined and is a lot more basic.

Is this an NF thing or maybe an NFJ thing since it deals a lot with relationships? Or maybe just a basic crazy person thing?
Can anyone else relate?

 

[Totenkindly]

I do not pre-plan any hierarchies.

I like to get what is appropriate for the person or would connect. If it is someone I really like and/or value, then I will splurge if necessary if I see something that they would either love or that I think really really reflects who they are.

If it is just an acquaintance, they are stuck with (1) whatever I happen to see and (2) what my mood happens to be at the time. I feel less need to spend on people who are not as close to me, but I also sometimes enjoy just giving to someone 'just because.' so someone might luck out.

I don't know what I would save if there was a fire or an incident. It would depend on the moment itself -- how much time I had, how I could maximize what I saved, etc.

 

[ladypinkington]

I must add that the confusing part of this is that I do not believe in heirarchies for respect and everyone is on the same level in my opinion.
I don't think I'm better or worse then anyone and I don't believe anyone is better or worse then me. Example, I talk to and treat children the same way that I do with adults-I talk to them like they are people too.

The handicapped- children- the elderly- the rich- the poor- none of these things should matter- to me everyone should be treated with the same respect. This also means that I get just as offended by anyone doesn't matter their sitaution or age- if I am disrepected by them.

I don't believe in rankings or heirarchies for respect or worth but I do rank personal relationships and attatchments to people. I just thought that there should be that distinction made.

 

[Natrushka]

In the case of a fire: Cats and photo album. This is of course, assuming the people in the house are out and safe. Everything else is replaceable.

In terms of gifts, more thought goes into the ones going to the people I care the most about - no matter how long I've known them. I bought gifts two weeks ago on MY birthday for other people, because they were The Perfect Gifts. I squirrel presents away that I find when not really looking because finding something special for some people is next to impossible.

I have favourite things (mug for my coffee, comfy t-shirt for sleeping in, cat, etc), but not everything is ranked; a lot of things I don't really think about, or rather, these things don't matter to me. I could take them or leave them. I've had to make an effort not to use the word 'whatever' when asked a choice between two things I don't much have an opinion on. I must now say, "I am easy either way, you decide which you'd prefer" - it preempts many arguements.

I do have a hierarchy in terms of who I make allowances for; it gets a workout every day when the phone rings, or a request is made of my time.

I suppose the answer is yes, I do use a similar system - for things that matter to me.

 

[ptgatsby]

I have a heirarchy for top closest people or a ranking of personal relationships- things I would grab if the house were to catch on fire-favorite and most prized possessions, even the rooms in the house are ranked, I have an emotional heirarchy system for everything,lol. There can be ties too in my system and somethings are just put in a tier,lol. Other things are very very defned one by one though,lol.

J, please let me introduce you to P;

I do not pre-plan any hierarchies.

P, please let me introduce you to J;

I do have a hierarchy in terms of who I make allowances for; it gets a workout every day when the phone rings, or a request is made of my time.

---------------------

I suppose the answer is yes, I do use a similar system - for things that matter to me.

T, please let me inroduce you to F;

I have a heirarchy for top closest people or a ranking of personal relationships- things I would grab if the house were to catch on fire-favorite and most prized possessions, even the rooms in the house are ranked, I have an emotional heirarchy system for everything,lol.

F, please let me introduce you to T;

It would depend on the moment itself -- how much time I had, how I could maximize what I saved, etc.

All jokes aside, that is pretty much the two dimensions. Js favor structure and order, so they create structure and order. The first operand of any J is to create structure around their closest items, to order them. The order appears as contingencies all the way to filing systems.

What we all care about differs based on individual whims, but there will be a bias towards cost-benefit in the T approach, while the F will have a more subjective personal value approach.

Ps will rarely structure the items that are around them until it becomes a hinderance. For example, my desk is a mess. My files are a mess. My computer has become a rats nest despite my best efforts. However, my courses, my current fixation of discipline, are actually "perfect". I have revision numbers, draft forms, instructions, files. As such, we won't tier out multiple items... well, very rarely, until the situation requires it.

 

[ladypinkington]

J, please let me introduce you to P;



P, please let me introduce you to J;



---------------------



T, please let me inroduce you to F;



F, please let me introduce you to T;




All jokes aside, that is pretty much the two dimensions. Js favor structure and order, so they create structure and order. The first operand of any J is to create structure around their closest items, to order them. The order appears as contingencies all the way to filing systems.

What we all care about differs based on individual whims, but there will be a bias towards cost-benefit in the T approach, while the F will have a more subjective personal value approach.

Ps will rarely structure the items that are around them until it becomes a hinderance. For example, my desk is a mess. My files are a mess. My computer has become a rats nest despite my best efforts. However, my courses, my current fixation of discipline, are actually "perfect". I have revision numbers, draft forms, instructions, files. As such, we won't tier out multiple items... well, very rarely, until the situation requires it.

Well done!

 

[nottaprettygal]

I have an emotional heirarchy system for everything,lol.

I think it's odd that you consider this hierachy to be emotional at all. To me, it sounds like a rigid system based on points that you assign a person based on their relationship to you. It's the opposite of emotional. It's systematic and kind of dispassionate, actually.

 

[ladypinkington]

I think it's odd that you consider this hierachy to be emotional at all. To me, it sounds like a rigid system based on points that you assign a person based on their relationship to you. It's the opposite of emotional. It's systematic and kind of dispassionate, actually.

Listen, if I didn't do that- then how would I know what choice to make on who or what to save in the hanging off a cliff scenario,lol.

It's actually not as systematic and dispassionate as it may sound to you.
I don't necessarily give out points- but I do have favortisms if that makes sense that just build over time. I am closer to some people then others and I am aware of how much or how close I feel to everything or everyone and that is why I can rank or organize them. It is more of an awareness factor.

I don't actually run around with a tangible list. It's all in file in my head and my heart. I am also always wanting to grow all of the relationships I have with people- so if anything people are constantly moving up until maybe one day they'll all be on a tie,lol. That would actually be ideal to me. I would love to be as close to as many people as I am to my closest people but that often seems impossible and unrealistic.

It's really really hard for a person to move down in the list- they have to actively try to become distant from me and hurt me constantly.
I have a loyalty and a sacred bond with everything I am attatched to- so being further down on the list doesn't mean it doesn't have significant meaning to me. Example- I love my house and I love all the rooms in my house- but I just like to be in some rooms more then others or like the ways that some rooms look more then others but am glad to have and like all the rooms. I am very aware of the strengths of bonds I feel with things and people and am aware of the difference in measure of bond.

 

[Natrushka]

All jokes aside, that is pretty much the two dimensions. Js favor structure and order, so they create structure and order. The first operand of any J is to create structure around their closest items, to order them. The order appears as contingencies all the way to filing systems.

A most entertaining and informative post, PT.

 

[runvardh]

I tend to go more for semi-centralized strenths application, but that's just me...

 

[Meursault]

Well, I never really thought of it as a hierarchy but I do losely think of people in the following terms:

Friends with a big F
Friends with a little F
Acquaintances whom I like
Acquaintances of whom I have no opinion
Strongly disfavored people
People I don't know but would like to know
People I don't know and don't want to know
People I don't know and am completely indifferent of

People just sort of slot in where they belong, but this is the only heirarchy that I do--and I think I do it to protect myself...I've been hurt a lot in the past by people I thought were friends...

It came about in law school, before that I never really thought about it--maybe the hellish social nightmare that is law school requires this? I haven't really thought about it much since then, to be honest.

 

[niffer]

people to save in life/death situations where I must choose: whoever seems to be enjoying their lives the most, or will have a better future or whatever

Otherwise...people...are equal in the sense that they are just more living things to me (I was going to say people are dispensible, but that's not vanilla enough to stop me from getting carried away).

I have stuff with sentimental value, but...it's not something I think about. The whole hierarchal list thing.

 

[Sahara]

I don't have any heirachy, execpt for friend, aquaintance, foe, or unknown when it comes to people. And if the house was on fire I would simply grab my handbag, and the black box near the door that has all important documents, and I'm gone, the things I want to save from the fire are my kids, and myself, the house and all that's in it could burn, I have no prized possessions, I might mourn for my book collection, but I have mourned more than one book collection in my life already, i learnt long ago that it doesn't pay to become attached to any material object.

I have seen people become majorly depressed over losing material things, and to be honest I find it quite shocking lol.

I think like gatsby said, it's a P vs J thing.

EDIT: I would hate to have to choose which one of my friends would be saved, I am not sure how that would go at all.

 

[celesul]

I try to get people what they would like. If it's over $20 they are not an acquaintance, but it mostly depends on their favorite junk. For some, I can make their gift myself. Mind, gift giving depends on my mood, as I can't remember when special occasions are.

 

[prplchknz]

1.Friends
2.Family
3.Aquaintaces
4. Everyone of never met or use to know but now have no opinion on them either way
5. People I wish would jump in front of a bus or fall out of a window in a tall building.

 

[dissolved girl]

No hierachies that are obvious to me. Impulse, consideration of fairness and equality tend to rule how I would decide. As far as presents would go. It's mostly a case of you'll get a nice present from me if I find something that I know you'd like. If I can't think of anything personal or that you'd enjoy then I'm not going to put much cost in...even if I care about you. It usually means a person gets a crap present for a few years and then suddenly I think of something great and more than I should really spend and just have to get it for them.

I rarely have a favourite of anything, just preferences. I kind of hope that cliff scenario doesn't happen. I'd end up not being sure and then both would die. Ah, but I guess neither would feel left out right?

 

[Athenian200]

I do have a bit of a hierarchy, but not terribly strict. Mostly there are just acquaintances, friends, and good friends. There are three levels, and most people are near the bottom. I tend to allow people to reach the top faster if they seem very interesting, caring, trustworthy, I have a good feeling about them, etc. I'm good at organizing my relationships, my arguments, and my ideas, but not so much my external physical world. If I'm not inviting people over or going anywhere, I might fail to keep things clean, because it ceases to affect my Fe reality, and Ni couldn't care less about external reality. Does that make sense?

 

[Varelse]

Acquaintances (People with whom the conversation goes "Hi." "Hi." "How are you?" "Ok-I have to go." "Bye.") Friends are people that I have actual conversations with when I see them, and good friends are people with whom I make an especial effort to stay in contact with. And then there's family.

Anytime I'm not having real conversations with someone, that moves them into the acquaintance category.