[ESTJ] Ask an ESTJ!

[chubber]

ENFP / ESTJ

The Inspirer and the Guardian

An Extraverted Relationship​

Extraverted relationships tend to form around the objectives, values and external structures within the relationship space. Because these are defined by collective perception and agreement upon what appears as the world’s obvious and scarcely arguable realities, the nature of any extraverted relationship will depend very much upon how each person in the relationship thinks and feels about these things. The external world can be experienced and valued in many differing ways, and this means that each personality type will bring a different set of perceptions and behaviors into a relationship. These will sometimes automatically complement the way other Extraverted types see things, bringing an unusual breadth of perception to any situation, but sometimes they will antagonize those of another type, creating argument and disruption within any ongoing relationship, whether in the workplace, the family or between the sexes. Where such strongly positive or negative effects arise, they usually occur between those whose dominant extraverted functions are heavily expressed and insufficiently balanced by any strong inner awareness. Most of the time, however, the interplay between the dominant and the secondary functions of each participant stabilizes the relationship, enabling its ongoing development and allowing the most conscious value to flow from those within it.

ENFP/ESTJ Relationship Dynamics

This is one of those match ups which can get more complicated with each new development, especially for strongly expressing types. Partners with a good balance of functional expression will have an easier time, but the differences to be overcome in finding the right path together remain significant.

Almost every day we are faced with choices which will effect our life in some way. The choices we make will be those we feel are the best for this, our situation. And if we ask each of these partners: “what is for the best?”, we get two different answers, reflecting each type’s most comfortable sense of the world and their way of deciding for themselves how best to use their time and create their own personal satisfactions.

If we look at the “classic” attitudes and behavior of these partners, we see that to create the life which best feeds their differing needs requires two sets of ideals and focuses, sometimes mutually exclusive of each other. The ESTJ sets a high priority on security, stability and the maintenance of an organized, progressive and integrated life. The ENFP sets a high priority upon personal freedom, spontaneity and the search for the realization of ideals. For the one, the need to live a secure, productive and organized life bound by the constraints of commonsense reality is merely obvious – for the other, such a life would be no more than a background or starting point, which if continued unchanged could come to feel like a prison for their soul.

Feeling toned possibilities are the daily bread of the ENFP. But, while the possibilities they see are anyone’s, the tonality which colors them arises from the music of their own feelings, not just the rote learned tunes of society’s more conventional rationale. Thus, in seeking to fulfill their dreams or the dreams of others, they recognize a strong need for personal freedom – not only to express what lives within, but to act, to search, and to move constantly forward. This drive, and the feelings which energize it, express through every level of ENFP life. Every nuance of a situation is a chance to define further meaning, to enact inner feeling, to discover the energy of its further movement forward. The freedom to do this is essential, and if limited or shut down by circumstances, it can turn upon life in a kind of ruthless parody of itself, trying by whatever means to wring the last gasp of value – any value – from a situation which such activity then only makes more self defining and wretched.

For the ESTJ, careful, logical appraisal of every situation yields the most sensible way in which to enact change or to produce value. Proper structure, both of society and its environment is essential for life to grow in prosperity and contentment. For the ESTJ, things never work properly if left to chance. Possibilities, other than those which are reflected in the immediate situation, are excluded. It is the present situation and its immediate future which must be dealt with. The ESTJ knows that, at every level, there has to be an incorporation of the immediate needs demanded at that level. Every correct step taken leads to the right outcome. To achieve such outcomes, the ESTJ needs a wide canvas, over which they can paint a logical, coherent and organized picture of a good and useful life. If this canvas is shredded by circumstances, this natural drive for order is driven to focus ever more narrowly upon their life, where it now constantly meets its own unconscious foundations and those irrational parts of the psyche which cannot be ordered and in which logic cannot be found. At this point the stressed ESTJ will usually institute an ever more intrusive regime of control, attempting to exclude all possibilities of chance, irrationality or spontaneity. The enemy is now everywhere and must be conquered at all cost. Unlike Pogo, an overly strong and excusive ESTJ attitude must fail utterly before it can say “we have met the enemy, and he is us!”

If we contrast the needs of the ENFP with those of the ESTJ we have a conundrum worthy of note, for it has a significance in our world far wider than the personal. Essentially it is the difference between those for whom the world is an expression of life, and those who see the world as an expression of universal law. It is the difference between the ideas of those who champion native forest and the ecological understandings of the logging company. It is the difference between those who believe children learn best by discovery and those who believe they learn best by careful schooling. And it is essential to realize that none of the worldly outcomes these differing attitudes engender are necessarily “right” or “wrong”; in certain situations and for different types of people, they can be either, or both.

What this comes down to in ordinary daily life, is a strong and often quite opposed difference in the way each type understands structure. For the ESTJ structure is a natural necessity. Good outcomes are the product of a logically created, organized structure, whether this be mechanical, spatial or the structure of a group charged with the process of enacting some productive value. For the ENFP, structure is something which merely conditions the possibilities of the moment. Rather than its temporal and logical value, they notice only its archetypal form, and the possibilities which can unfold from such form. For the ESTJ, a good structure ought to be permanent, for the ENFP it is no more than a worthy transient; something which can be left behind once it has fulfilled its purpose..

In daily life, even at their most petty and insignificant level, these differences can play out in the most frustrating ways. And when these differences enact within more important areas of life, such as a new direction the relationship might take or the rearing of children, then strongly expressing types can quickly learn that there is indeed a level of difference at which it is impossible to compromise.

While the differing directions thinking and intuition engender can usually be brought together through the mediating effect of a shared value system, these partners share no function which might mediate their differences. So when there is a problem, the tendency is then for each to attempt its solution in their own most natural way.

If the problem is one of design, structure or the organization of a system, the ESTJ will sort it soon enough. But when it has a human context, their attempted solutions often only increase the problems. The most typical instance is that of trying to organize everything. The ESTJ will try and create a situation in which everyone feels secure and knows the “proper procedure” for dealing with any problem. The ESTJ is usually blind to the fact that their rigid organizing is only bringing the situation into line with their own thinking. Rather than sensing an improvement, those around them can feel the original problem remains untouched, or worse, is now paved into its so called solution. Consequently, they are even more inclined to rebel, or “act up to the part” in an attempt to demonstrate the ultimate irony of a solution which actually institutionalizes the problem it was supposed to solve. As many organizations have found out, “working to rules” can be just as disruptive as workplace anarchy.

For the ENFP, problems are often dealt with by “letting things happen”. For them, things will work out for the best if you just keep moving towards the goal. Strategies only slow the game down and limit the possible outcomes. “Get up, get over it! Move down the field! Onward and upward! You can do it!” But they don’t realize that how they might play the game just won’t work for everyone. Some players need to know exactly what they should be doing. They need strategies in case things don’t go to plan. The ENFP just wants everyone to go for it, but more than half end up either frozen to the spot or running all over the field.

There is no doubt that these two could learn a lot from each other, and each could certainly use a smattering of the other’s talents, particularly when things aren’t working out too well. But how do they get this to happen?

These two people really have two ways they can choose to make a life together work without their differing needs creating an endless tug of war. They can organize their worlds in such a way that each only touches the other where needs and desires combine, or they can develop awareness. Through proper understanding both of self and each other, they can become able to support each other’s differing needs, and on a level where both achieve greater satisfaction from the relationship than would otherwise exist.

The greatest difficulty blocking the path to self awareness for the strongly expressing ESTJ is the very fact that our civilized, consensus reality is mostly structured to accord with extraverted sensing and thinking attitudes and logic. Real world “commonsense” is ESTJ commonsense. Anything which insinuates itself between the layers of this commonsense is automatically suspect. Much of the strong ESTJ world view stands or falls by the fact that it is “out there” and has little to do with their own unconscious perceptive biases, while other people’s reliance upon feeling and intuition is “merely subjective” or “irrational” It’s hard to recognize a need for greater self awareness when the wider social and intellectual consensus constantly reinforces and justifies your own general attitude.

For the strongly expressing ENFP, the idea of self awareness is all too often confused with some idealized system in which they find what they believe to be satisfactory motives for everything. Having absorbed or created this grab bag of answers is then equated with “having greater awareness”. Quite often this process is engendered by the misguided notion of inspiring greater awareness in others, missing the point that the real demand is for the individual to come to truly know and understand themselves as a human being. Scratch any strong minded ENFP crusader and under the surface of their all consuming drive to change the world you will usually find an “ism” or “ology” which provides all the ready justifications for their often irrational need to constantly search for something more or better.

While the idea that the unconscious psyche have an effect upon the individual just as great as that of the objective outer world has long been recognized by our medical professions, our churches and courts of law, this truth has scarcely made any impact upon the consensus world of day to day living. The very fact that the subjective world is often the bête-noire of the extraverted person ought to give them pause, to recognize and understand why this should be so. For it is from the unconscious that the dynamics of their own less adapted functions project outward onto a world they believe to be purely objective, where “subjective” interpretations only come from “other people”. While an understanding of these psychological dynamics and their effects, if made even dimly conscious, can bring better balance to the way any strongly expressing type habitually understands the world around them, to the one sided consciousness, such change, or any situation in which the potential for such change might exist, is usually seen only as a threat.

For the ESTJ the most common and most inimical threat to their conscious attitude comes from the feeling side. For them, their own feelings transmute into consciousness as raw emotional energy, and this is then how they tend to categorize the feelings of others. Doing so allows them to reject the input of feeling by deeming it as little more than the expression of “irrational” emotion.

For the ENFP, the most destabilizing and threatening effects upon their personal equilibrium come from the sensation side, particularly any form of physical “sameness” or limitation of their freedom of action. Also, through its effect of confining ideas to rigid logical structures, they see limitations with any purely thinking approach to life, as if strict logic itself posed a threat to their own personal freedom and values.

Making it Work

Except for those chance meetings of particularly opposed minds, most types can get along together at first acquaintance without too much trouble. But when each person sees the world and their place in it in a very different light, continuing to get along can be a problem. Friends tend to accustom themselves to each other’s peculiarities, and, unless they live together, are rarely negatively affected by each other’s personal traits. Real difficulties between people with incompatible needs only begin when they try to create a life together under one roof. Home is where everything gets down to the nitty-gritty. The fact that things seem easy when everything is going nicely for both, but quickly turn into “tit for tat” nit-picking when anything goes wrong, is one of the “just so” stories of relationship psychology.

If we look into the crucible that is the emotional relationship between two people who have chosen to live their lives as one, we see in miniature all the effects created by the difference between the attitudes of these two types. These differences can have crucial effects upon all the relationship dynamics between these partners, including intimacy. There is no part of life where the need for personal choice is excluded from the ENFP attitude, just as there is no part of life where a concrete sense of correctness does not matter to the ESTJ. If we look at how these drives or needs play out, we can see that the real issues between these types derive not so much from any conflict between particular personal needs, but a conflict between two general guiding attitudes, to which all needs, desires, ideas and their various expected outcomes must first conform.

The reason for this is simple enough. The automatic and completely natural immediacy of the strongest function moulds the impact of every psychic datum as it is presented. All conscious perception must first pass the ESTJ thinking test, while ENFP intuition never stops scanning data for intimations and possibilities.

These two people’s eyes are ever on differing aspects of a situation, which, in itself, is not necessarily a problem. The real problem arises when they themselves become the object of each other’s judgments and perceptions. We all know how easily a conversation can turn. From a casual and impersonal mutual assessment of some objective occurrence, it can change in a instant to one where personal subjective measurement of each other’s attitude takes over. Suddenly, we find ourselves in a place we didn’t expect to go, where we now wish we hadn’t said anything at all. If such things happen at the outset of a relationship, then all is well. Because with some increasing self awareness and understanding they will be overcome. If however, this kind of situation is still playing out after some time together, then change becomes harder to achieve and even less likely as the years roll on.

Let’s take a typical relationship. You, an ESTJ and an ENFP, have got together, and you’re rapidly moving towards a strong, emotional connection which you do not want to damage or lose. Prospects for the future are being considered, even if at this time only privately. Now is the time to ask the really essential questions. Yes now, even while you are wandering about in a fog of love struck happiness and believe all is right with the world. Silly to even think that anything could ever spoil this; that the way you feel together now will ever change. Right?

Wrong. If you do nothing, if you do not realize that relationship demands self understanding, if you make no effort to create an attitude space for real development, then… yes, things are going to change. The shine is going to wear off eventually and the real metal is going to show through. No point in trying to polish up later; you can’t consciously re-create something you had no control over in the first place. That was a gift, and something you have to learn to use and develop. You won’t be able to re-make it if you break it.

So what are these questions? First, you must know what it is you need from a relationship. The answers to this question are not selfish desires, but essential knowledge. If you do not know your own needs except through some hazy fog of things you believe about yourself, then you need to get down to some real self understanding. The fact that you are reading this means you have taken at least the first step. So many people do not realize what they need because they do not understand what they need and why they need it. Through your type you will recognize some of the basic demands of your own psychic make up. While the strength of type needs can be mitigated to some extent through a widening of the personal perspective, they nevertheless must be satisfied. They cannot be set aside, neither for the sake of some compromise situation, nor to suit the demands of others. To a strong degree, type needs are absolutes of our personality and their fulfillment is essential to both mental and physical well being.

As an ESTJ, you need to be able to organize and order your life. Both at leisure and at work, you need “food for thought”: things happening which require your analysis and input. You need to be “out there”, involved, and to be recognized for your time, your ideas and your increasing skills. To a great degree, your living and working space should reflect this, and you expect others to respect your need for both social and physical life to reflect an ordered, rational integrity. A relationship with another might cause you to change some of the ways in which you fulfill these basic needs, but it should not inhibit the natural flow of your energy toward their fulfillment.

Much flows from such self understanding, in particular the next question: what can you bring to your partners life? Well, you might say that you can offer strength, security and the mental capacity to overcome problems and organize things so that life flows with the least difficulty. These are the obvious answers which flow from your strengths. But what about your weaknesses? These you also bring into a relationship, and they, too, have just as great an effect upon your partner as your strengths. Your greatest weaknesses flow from your inability to recognize and understand the rationale of feeling, while the rest flow from your insistence on dealing with things from a purely concrete vision of the present. You find it hard to attach or “get into” the human side of things and also miss a lot of the anticipation and excitement that both spontaneity and the exploration of the unknown can bring to life.

As an ENFP you need to explore, to discover meaning and value in all things, particularly the meaning you can actually create, not only with others, but also out of your own explorations of self action. You need the freedom to do this, to make connections, to discover new paths, to find the peaks of life’s abundance. Where possible you like to show others, to lead them toward the same vision and purpose you see. You expect others to understand your need to follow your vision and to recognize that your lack of attachment to any one particular way of life flows from your drive to constantly seek further value for yourself and those around you.

You would expect a partner to see that you bring choice, possibility and affirmation into the relationship. Your gifts would be your readiness and openness to new and exciting ideas, and your preparedness to move with the changes and work together to find the fulfillment of your combined desires. Your partner is, however, also going to come up against the limitations and weaknesses that you bring into the relationship. Along with the good bits, they will also have to deal with your frustration at any form of inertia or stagnation; your fear of purely sensual activities, particularly those which lock you into a place and time, and your distrust of anything which might detract from or oppose your personal feeling values.

In both cases, the real problem that arises from the negatives here, is that both are usually activated via a strong emotional aversion and their expression rarely allows for easy conciliation or understanding. Try and weave any kind of web, mental or physical, around an ENFP and you will have a fight on your hands. Try and take down an ESTJ with over rationalized feeling or force them to walk blindly into a future they cannot plan and you will get an more than just an argument. These sensitivities and fears must be dealt with at the outset of any relationship. They must be understood, and hence prepared for, by both partners.

The Key

“Right thought, right action, right outcome.” These words of the Buddha are a mathematical equation which can apply to any attitude. To make them work for us, we have to know what “right thought” is in the first place. For our purposes, the right thoughts for an ESTJ are those which bring to mind the limitations and difficulties your partner might have in dealing with your logically structured needs. For an ENFP, the right thoughts are those which bring to mind the difficulties and limits your partner finds in dealing with your need for boundless expression and freedom from constraint.

All things flow from this, right down to the arguments about why the washing hasn’t been put away or why the car keys must always be on the hook in the kitchen. There is simply no easy way out of the problems here, nor can an endless list of what to do and how to do it produce any value unless the two people concerned have already worked out the basics of getting along. The real key here is that perfection is not on the table, that we are human and we must allow for each other to be who we are and what we are. If we can do this without compromising ourselves, then we have achieved the one real quality that creates a good relationship. The rest is then whatever love can bring.

Do you ESTJs relate to any of this? If so, which parts?

 

[chubber]

INTP / ESTJ

The Thinker and the Guardian

An Introverted/Extraverted Relationship​

The level of both harmony and conflict within Introverted/Extraverted relationships can vary considerably, depending on how strongly expressed the introverted and extraverted tendencies are for these types. With very moderate expressions only the general attitudes, desires and interests of the parties involved are likely to be factors of importance affecting the relationship, and these will depend more upon the specific functions of the personalities and less upon their introverted or extraverted expression. In other cases however, particularly where both parties have a strongly expressed dominant focus, the impact of Introversion vs. Extraversion becomes an important factor affecting all the functional dynamics of the relationship. For this reason general statements about the functional give and take within such relationships are of little value where individual differences play such an important part. We have tried to take this into account in the following, but it is worth recognizing that in some instances what might appear as a conflict in one relationship can be a source of harmony in another.

INTP/ESTJ Relationship Dynamics

Functional differences can express through different people in a variety of ways, and this means not all INTP and ESTJ people will be strictly “typical” in their behavior and attitudes. Sexual differences will also play a major part, with typical traits expressing in different guise through male and female personalities. For this reason there are no hard and fast rules for this or any relationship, except where both partners routinely express the strongest and most typical attitudes of their type.

Where such typical attitudes are expressed, however, potential INTP/ESTJ partners will first need to overcome their strongly opposed outlooks and their quite different ways of interacting at both the personal and social levels. Although not usually creating the clash of titans that an INTJ/ESTJ relationship can be, the personality and attitude differences in this relationship can make for a difficult union. While there is no strict reason why the ESTJ and INTP should be always antagonistic toward each other’s attitudes, ordinary business and social circumstances often tend to disallow the real meeting of minds necessary for a proper understanding between these two types.

ESTJ people tend to live in the present and work with the facts at hand, sifting the useful from the unnecessary and the obvious from the uncertain. They always ask immediate questions about things. Questions like, “what is it for?” and “how can it be best used?” and “will it make a difference?” They apply such questions not only to objects and situations, but also to what they interpret from the way others appear and behave. Confronted with the INTP personality however, the questioning, critical eye of the ESTJ finds behavior and appearance only, while all that lies beneath remains enigmatic and hidden from any easy evaluation.

So used to questioning and evaluating things by how they seem, the ESTJ can misinterpret the clues the INTP offers and often has no trouble finding reasons to dismiss them from their strongly focused, immediate view of the world and how it ought to work.

The INTP on the other hand, can find the ESTJ viewpoint too focused upon the physical and the immediate. For them, the ESTJ might appear to lack insight and understanding, seeming insensitive or aggressive in their nature and ways of expression. For these reasons, it usually takes more than just casual social or work interaction to bring these two together sufficiently for more than a passing, non-committal relationship to develop. A shared interest in a project, a shared life experience or a strong sexual intrigue might be necessary before interest is raised sufficiently to negate the antipathy that might otherwise develop between these two.

INTP type distribution between the sexes is similar, with slightly more INTP males than females, while ESTJ males outnumber their female counterparts by more than two to one. In cross gender relationships, the greater likelihood is therefore a male ESTJ to female INTP, while same sex partnerships between males will most likely outnumber those between females.

In considering cross gender relationships, it is important to be aware of the way our natural instinctive and biological drives influence both our social and more intimate interactions with others. While these are constants of human behavior, they do present somewhat differently according to a person’s psychological type and sexuality. Sexual differences can play a major mediating role between partners of strongly opposed type, often turning what might have been negative between same sex partners into positive connections between those of opposite sex.

There will also be those times when something that is felt as an overriding positive for one partner actually brings an increasingly negative response from the other. The actual behaviors which initiate these reactions will depend very much upon each type partner’s sex and the strength of their typical attitudes. For instance, an ESFJ female might be intrigued or merely amused by a classic male advance, while an INTP female might interpret and act upon it very differently. Certainly, in the initial stages of any cross gender relationship, type differences will effect the whole range of mental and physical connections likely to occur between two prospective partners. Without at least some understanding of the way another’s type will affect their natural reactions, the prospects for physical relationship can be narrowed considerably.

For this relationship to work, an understanding of each other’s natural type and the way this focuses their personalities will need to develop between the partners. Neither spur of the moment ad-hoc attempts, nor habitual ESTJ or INTP methods of gaining another’s positive attention are likely to work well between these two. So different in outlook and focus of interest as they are, they are both likely to be more put off than attracted by each other’s typical and habitual methods of human interaction.

Even armed with such understanding however, and whether they might meet in a happy, casual social atmosphere, or are thrust together under the most testing conditions, the outcome between these two types can still remain doubtful – just as likely to be negative as it might be positive. Particularly between those of the same gender, something extra will always be needed; something to tip the balance toward rather than away from each other; something that grips them in a positive way.

Neither the ESTJ nor the INTP naturally use feeling in their normal assessment of situations or the behavior of others. Where the only assessment possible in a personal situation is via feeling, both tend to use their strongest function to divert the problem. Both, in their own way, will attempt to “solve” another’s feeling situation as if it were a thinking problem to be overcome, rather than an essential part of life. In more general situations neither tend to consider the human feeling aspect as the first or most important assessment – if they consider it at all. While the INTP and the ESTJ are affected by feeling in somewhat differing ways, they both tend to suffer their own feelings as emotions. Others usually bear the brunt of the outcome, but are rarely allowed to access to the process. It would be a rare ESTJ who would suggest that “we sit down and talk about how this is making me feel”, and an even rarer INTP who was fully aware of the feeling valuations at work within their own emotions, rather than just seeing the process happening in others.

Understanding how feeling works is not the same as feeling. But it is at least a beginning for these two if they can learn to recognize how feeling drives their emotions, and perhaps come to see it as a possible asset rather than a trickster who tends to stir up trouble at every turn.

Making it Work

Recognition is the important thing here. Recognition of each other’s real self, both beneath and outside of the usual tangle of differing attitudes and ways of dealing with the world. For the INTP this recognition can only come about through attention to the intuitive information they gather. More often than not, the strongly expressing INTP glosses over much of the almost constant imagery that comes via their intuition, seeking out only those things which aid or support their ideas. The strongly extraverted ESTJ uses introverted sensation in much the same manner, using what they need to see and disregarding all the rest as mere background information which needs little attention.

In both partners, thinking tends to jump ahead, often leaving vital secondary information untouched and consequently leaping to the wrong conclusion about the other’s motives or actions. Paying attention to what the secondary function is offering as both insight and telling information can lead them to see into each other’s ways much more clearly.

INTP intuition and ESTJ sensation also have a closer relationship to the unconscious, each function able to act somewhat as a mediator for inferior feeling, offering clues to emotional triggers without engaging unrest and the opposition of strictly logical thought. This might seem “technical” but it is a perfectly natural use of the secondary function that all thinking types make, normally without even noticing it. Strongly expressing types do need to notice, however, for it is their path to widening their awareness of themselves and each other.

For the INTP, the work of recognition is not hard, they merely need to pay attention to their partner and accept the information they gather. But it is this acceptance that may not be so easy, with many an INTP wondering why mundane matters must always seem so important, and why their ESTJ partner must always focus so strongly upon on the straightforward, “proper” view of the apparent and circumstantial situation. For the INTP to relax with this recognition, they will need to allow their partner’s way of dealing with the world, along with their interests and ideas, to float by themselves, to “be what they are” without unnecessarily questioning their focus and intent.

For the ESTJ, this recognition of their partner can be a little more difficult, as much of the INTP personality is inwardly focused; centered on a world of experience which is not tangibly present to others. Often, only skillful and unemotional questioning will reveal the extent of this inner experience. The ESTJ will have to learn to look past their own tendency to judge and decide from appearances, and instead, allow themselves to be uncertain and willing to discover the depth, density and complexity of their partner’s inner thinking world.

INTP and ESTJ partners will need to maintain some strong common interests. For thinking types, the need is to connect at a level of mental activity that takes them out of the mundane and into the realm of the new or the untried, where both can experience creative connection via a shared goal. Whether related to home, business or leisure, creative activities which require thoughtful analysis, research, observation and detailed understanding can provide a focus for INTP/ESTJ partners to share and adapt to each other’s point of view. The essence here is to focus on the goal, the problem, or the interest and allow each other to work their own magic. The end result is that individual differences are both included AND disregarded.

For the INTP, living or just working with an ESTJ means you have to get your ideas out there where they can see them; where they know that what you are thinking about is valid to them and worthwhile considering. When making a point, try to put things in concrete terms which relate to what they already clearly see. With a little care and practice, you can organize your mind to include a channel for such concrete communication.

Another area for INTP attention is the shared relationship space. Alone to itself, introverted thinking doesn’t care where it works, while extraverted intuition doesn’t need to have the world ordered in any particular way. The result is often less than tidy. In relationship with an ESTJ, the INTP is going to have to take some notice of the order (or disorder) they leave in their wake. They will need to realize (possibly with some difficulty) that types other than themselves can be strongly affected by any disorganization of their environment. While introverted sensation/feeling types are the most prone to this, the ESTJ can be quite definite about where and why everything is in a certain order. On the flip side, the ESTJ should be aware that their own ideas about order are different to their partner’s and that they should try and organize the relationship space according to the needs and activities of both.

The “feeling side” of this relationship is going to be somewhat awkward at times, with neither partner able to deal with feeling except as it affects their emotions. This means that while there will be no true recognition of feeling in another, feeling in self is likely to evoke strong, unconsciously driven and unavoidable affects. Feeling dives connection; it involves, it draws both like and dislike together and sets a value on the whole. The problem here is that this function works unconsciously, making the connected sense of the relationship something which “works beneath”; something “untouchable”. This means that whenever there is a disturbance, difficulty or need which drives an emotional affect, the whole sense of the relationship is drawn into an equation which otherwise would represent only the problem itself. To the two people concerned it seems the whole relationship comes into jeopardy every time there is an emotionally driven difficulty. This sense, that everything is suddenly on the table just over some small problem, drives a fear of emotional responses, often sufficient to create an ongoing situation in which neither partner ever really comes to understand the connections between them. The relationship will be at times either overvalued or undervalued in that kind of mythological way which sidesteps the natural human truths beneath it. For partners who present strong type dominance, this may be the way things remain and continue. Clinical thinking and emotional workarounds becoming the order of the day in a relationship which never truly leaves the “headspace” of the two people concerned; moments of physical relationship a kind of abandonment to private sensation which either have little real value in the relationship, or conversely, provide the only true value it produces.

The Key

For partners of lesser type dominance and sufficient self awareness to be capable of conscious personal growth, this relationship provides opportunities with every difficulty. Each one of us is different, each unique and capable of unusual character development. While on face value it might be hard to see how these two partners could end up capable of sharing a life together while also remaining able to fulfill their own unique needs, all it truly takes is honesty and a willingness to not only use our strengths to lift each other up, but also admit without shame our personal and all too human deficiencies.

Do the ESTJs recognise any of this? If so, which parts?

 

[chubber]

INFJ / ESTJ

The Protector and the Guardian

An Introverted/Extraverted Relationship​

The level of both harmony and conflict within Introverted/Extraverted relationships can vary considerably, depending on how strongly expressed the introverted and extraverted tendencies are for these types. With very moderate expressions only the general attitudes, desires and interests of the parties involved are likely to be factors of importance affecting the relationship, and these will depend more upon the specific functions of the personalities and less upon their introverted or extraverted expression. In other cases however, particularly where both parties have a strongly expressed dominant focus, the impact of Introversion vs. Extraversion becomes an important factor affecting all the functional dynamics of the relationship. For this reason general statements about the functional give and take within such relationships are of little value where individual differences play such an important part. We have tried to take this into account in the following, but it is worth recognizing that in some instances what might appear as a conflict in one relationship can be a source of harmony in another.

INFJ/ESTJ Relationship Dynamics

While not quite type opposites of each other, the functional differences between these partners are sufficient to show that this relationship will demand some serious adjustments from each. When balanced, the perception and thinking of the ESTJ represents what we like to call the “commonsense” attitude to things. When over expressed however, it cuts a more narrow or one-sided slice through the possible; often ignoring or denying anything that might open its eyes to a wider reality. Even at its best however, ESTJ common sense works well only with nut and bolt reality and the logistics of our collective human interactions. It often fails miserably when applied to the individual and their unique personal world of intellectual and emotional need. Here something else is needed, and it is precisely what the INFJ brings to the table; a deep inner recognition of what it means to be an individual, combined with a humane sense of what is best for others.

The problem between these two outlooks is that, within their priorities, neither tends to take much account of the other. When expressed through individual partners, there can be quite a disparity of interest and concern between these attitudes, both within the partner’s shared world and with each other. At its very best, this relationship of worldly commonsense to deep personal recognition can create an extremely valuable partnership, particularly where both partners are working together for the sake of others. The likelihood of such a valuable coming together will depend, however, upon the self awareness and good will of both partners, as the road to such a worthwhile result can be quite a rocky one.

If the introverted intuitive suffers at all for their typological nature, it is from other’s apparent indifference to their personal and most immediate inner world. In relationship with an ESTJ, the INFJ is going to have a hard time getting recognition of their true self in a world where concrete facts, objectives and actions make up the balance of their partner’s reality.

Similarly, the ESTJ will find it difficult to make any true personal mark on the INFJ, whose world of ideas and feelings is scarcely affected by the real or theoretical state of things in themselves. To them, such things represent only the fleeting positions of so many checkers on a board; interesting only where their patterns affect, or reflect, the true human experience of life. For them, the big picture lies within. They want to find it within others, along with all the human values it contains. They find it difficult to understand that their partner does not share this world; that the big picture for their partner is only visible via an external reality that contains only tokens of that which makes up their own.

Between two people in whose nature it is to find little value in each other’s most immediate experience of life, there is going to be a need not only for serious understanding of their own and each other’s typology, but also a determined effort to breach the gap between these two very different ways of perceiving and valuing what is perceived.

While INFJ extraverted feeling is mostly used to justify and support their intuitive perceptions, it is feeling nevertheless, and being extraverted tends to value perceptions about other people and personally important things in the external world. Straight line, cause and effect logic has little or no effect upon the meaning or value of its judgments, which therefore offer little or no leverage in a shared situation for the ideas and assessments of the ESTJ. All too often, when the ESTJ is giving their view, the INFJ will find themselves thinking: “Yes, but what about this… and this too… Why don’t they fit into this picture? Why does it have to be all so cut and dried… and about things? Where is the human touch?”

The ESTJ, on the other hand, can find the INFJ approach similarly frustrating for its lack of attention to the “here and now” facts and reality of a situation. The intuitive notions of the INFJ often seem misguided or arbitrary to the ESTJ, and, particularly difficult to assess within the situation at hand will be the added criteria of their feeling value. The ESTJ will often be thinking, “I can see how they are suggesting this, but why base it on such a spurious notion? Why not just accept the facts as they are and deal with them first?”

Everyone of us casts a shadow into the world around us, a shadow made up of all that we leave out of our lives; a shadow formed of all that we lack and all that we have no interest for. In typological terms, our shadow is the creation of our weaknesses and shows itself most often as a negative form of our weakest and most unconscious functionality. What we take no pains over or fails to touch us remains merely ambivalent and uninteresting to us, but to another of different type our failure to be touched by these things could be seen as extremely negative behavior. An ESTJ for example, would scarcely notice the type “shadow” of another ESTJ, while to an INFJ it would be quite obvious as the result of everything they failed to attend to.

And of course, this is going to create one of the problems which will need to be overcome in this relationship, as both these partners can so easily mark each other’s weaknesses as highly visible deficiencies in their behavior.

Making it Work

We must remember that, except where there are such glaring and obvious differences between people which repel them at first meeting, typological differences usually only come into play after people get to know each other; i.e. after they have shed the persona or mask they wear for all occasions. We might say that people only truly start to get to know one another “after the gloves come off”. It would be nice if we were all so self aware that we could overcome all obstacles to others, but in the main this is scarcely true. Few people truly understand themselves, let alone the other person. Only through relationship does this understanding come, and usually at some fair cost to our pride and what we believe about ourselves.

While typological differences between a thinking and an intuitive approach to life can be overcome or at least understood by partners, differences between an extraverted and an introverted attitude can be more difficult to resolve. The main problem is that the introverted person rarely recognizes that their own immediate inner reality and thoughts are not in any way apparent to others, while the extraverted person rarely seems to notice that their own take on the world excludes all that lies beneath the surface. Either attitude can antagonize the other, usually for the perceived exclusion of its own reality. This natural and often unwitting antagonism needs to be well understood and recognized by both partners before any real development of this relationship can occur. Making it work here is going to mean strong commitment to a non-judgmental approach to each other’s behavior and needs.

The differing social and private needs of the partners will need to be addressed within this relationship. The INFJ will require both a private space and a considerable amount of time to be left to their personal interests. The ESTJ will require the freedom to be out and about, to enable fulfillment of their need for connection to the world and others of similar mind and interests. Within the shared space, an early and reasonable adjustment to each others tastes will also be necessary, as differences over “what you like” and “what I like” can so easily dredge up any attitude related problems which have not yet been addressed in the relationship.

Is there truly a way in which an extraverted thinking type can understand how the world seems to an introverted intuitive, and vice versa? Probably not. But armed with the knowledge of such difference they can indeed allow each other’s world view compensate and complement their own wherever this is possible. This means raising the status of the “other” attitude to the same level as one’s own and not automatically assuming control in those situations where one’s own typology seems to match the needs of the moment. Both attitudes must meet the situation and each partner must step back and measure the value of each other’s input and the way their particular needs will be addressed by the solution.

Real relationship is often simply a matter of reversing our first private thoughts from “what I need” to “what you need”. Where this becomes a habit for both partners, then neither will feel compression nor any sense that they cannot realize their full personality within the relationship. However, such simple solutions are rarely easy, and it is often the case that while one partner will commit to or naturally display such behavior, the other will not. Where this happens – and continues to happen – the relationship road is likely to be a very short one.

Below, we offer some suggestions to enhance the development of this relationship:

ESTJ suggestions:

• For yourself, you tend to think first then act, while your partner is more of a “first perceive, then consider” person. For you, the “what is” is fairly obvious, both to yourself and anyone else who can see what you see. For your partner however, the “what is” is a quite different arrangement of the apparent facts. Even when you are both dealing with an obvious outer reality, your partner’s appreciation of it will be essentially an interior one, which does not so much take into account the logical or possible arrangement of things as seen, but an inner image of what this arrangement signifies or symbolizes for them. It would not be so hard for you to or take this into account in your own ideas except that their assessment is then made on the basis of feeling rather than thinking. They ask: “is it of value, and to who’s benefit will it be? Is it the “right” thing, and does it suit the wider situation?” Such questions can easily be frustrating when you’re only looking to a solution which “works”. Taking all these other factors into account seems merely to blur the issue or make everything just that more complex. But the human world requires its needs to be accounted for – otherwise, why do anything? For what reason do we try to achieve goals, if they are not directed towards improving the value of life – either for ourselves or others? These are the questions your partner unconsciously poses to you via their own assessments of the world. They ask you to include such measures within your judgments, because these are the things they need to see valued. You may not be able to sense the values they feel, but you can put these things into perspective with you own ideas. In fact, by doing so, by waiting for their evaluative input, you may reach a conclusion which is superior and creates a far greater and more beneficial effect than one which does not include wider human values within its process.
• Your partner’s intuitive approach to life is rarely on show in the same way as your own thinking approach is. Everyone usually knows what you are thinking; it’s not something you hide. It is often difficult for an extraverted person to understand that an introvert is not hiding what they sense or think; not “keeping it to themselves” for some perverse reason. More difficult also is where their primary function is sensation or intuition, as all communication must then come via a rational secondary function. This not only means their natural introversion is an issue in connecting with others, but their own “irrational” inner processes need also to be first “translated” into the serial logic of words before they can communicate what it is they “know”. As any reasonably self aware INTJ or ISFJ can tell you, this process is rarely satisfactory and is often the cause of much frustration. The same goes for your INFJ partner, whose inner reality and grasp of the multifaceted truth of the present is often far greater than their feeling function is able to put into words at any given moment. It is essential to allow time for this process; to not expect the kind of quick, rational assessment that you are so used to making on the spot. It is not that your partner does not already know what is needed – indeed, they may know before you – but the reality for them is an image they must either put into direct action immediately, or turn into a fully reasoned answer only with sufficient time. Remember, the real world of the INFJ is far more easily seen through what they do than what they say. If you truly need to understand them through words alone, then remember to allow them the time necessary to create a suitable answer.
• As a thinking type, you must have found yourself in plenty of sticky situations with feeling types where you wanted to use the old Homer Simpson line: “just because I don’t care doesn’t mean I don’t understand.” Because, let’s face it, “caring” doesn’t work for you. If there is a situation, then what it takes is some careful thought and some action and it can be dealt with, right? What else is there to be concerned about? The only problem is, it often takes someone else banging on about it to bring to your attention the fact that there is a “situation” in the first place. You don’t often notice these feeling related issues, usually until after it is too late to duck the bullets. One of the things you will notice with your partner however, is that, while they often seem to be either concerned or elated about something or another, you’re never quite able to pin down just what makes up the actual joy or problem of the moment. So many things seem to contribute to their picture of life that you get lost in the process, and the truth of it is that even Homer’s line won’t work, because even if you wanted to care, you just don’t understand. The fact that your partner expresses their ideas through a more feeling approach to life doesn’t mean that they are primarily concerned with feelings. They are essentially concerned with how life works through them; through their actualizing of possibilities and inner images of life that you simply have no access to – that is, without their serializing it for you on a daily basis And you have a strong tendency to expect this from people; to tell you “what its all about” – almost as if it were up to you to personally validate all their ideas against your sense of factual, logical ‘reality’. But you’re going to have to learn that you cannot do this. Not because your ideas are in any way ‘wrong’, but because you are dealing with a ideas and images which belong not just to the world, but to a person and that person’s way of seeing. Without this information there can be no valid reduction of their ideas to ‘reality’, for part of that reality is the person themselves and the laws and logic of their inner world. You need to know these laws and this logic – they have to become part of your idea of your partner through listening, watching, and recognizing the operation of their ways in the things they do and say. It takes time – it is worth the time.

INFJ suggestions:

• It’s easy for you to be a private person, and usually much easier to remain so than to mix it up with everyone else, where you usually find you just can’t get what’s inside to work with what’s going on outside anyway. But if you are going to develop a relationship with an extraverted thinking partner, then somehow you are going to have to help them to see what is real for you. At the beginning of any relationship it is always easy for the introverted person to fall in with the ways of a more worldly and outgoing partner, following on without letting their own inner world stand in the way of relationship – particularly where they can easily see that some of this world is not going mix it with the general flow of things. Following this road only leads to those partnerships where one thinks everything is fine and the other is never quite able to allow themselves to be fully present. In one manner of speaking, this amounts to a kind of dishonesty, but in truth is simply the result of fear, i.e. the fear that one’s own ideas and truths are going to be relativized, rationalized and trampled over by the cold logic of an uncaring world. And it is true that this happens, and why most sensitive people tend to find a niche in the world that works for them and then try to keep within its bounds. To a certain degree, your partner’s attitudes and strengths represent what you see as the harder side of the world. In effect, you find it difficult to believe they could meet you halfway on some to the things most important to you. But keeping such things safely hoarded away from them is still dishonesty. How can they deal with what they do not experience or have explained to them? Partnerships are fifty/fifty splits and you have to be out there, right from the start with everything you bring. One on one is pretty easy for you, so make it an essential part of your time with your partner to open up about what’s going on with you. Share your facts, your experiences, and your feelings in the most natural and easy going way you can. Right from the beginning of this relationship it is essential for you to let your partner see the importance of your inner world and the needs it engenders.
• Both you and your partner’s values tend to align themselves with wider social attitudes, but there is a difference in the ways you approach such things. For them, everything is thought out; rationalized as the best way forward, and their ideas are usually quite in line with what most people would call common practical sense. Your assessments tend to be more of a gut feeling that you know what is the right way forward and it is something you don’t need to figure out. And if you had to defend your decision then it would be along the lines of what is best for others. Unfortunately, what seems best for others is not always going to be what is best for the whole situation, and of course, you can see perfectly well that what we call “practical’ sense is only ‘common’ to a certain prevailing attitude and may not truly be in the best interests of all either. No single attitude can really cover all parts of situation, but a careful joining of two can bring a third idea into play which works better than either one. Whether it is the big decisions of life or merely day to day problems, there is often needed a solution which provides more than just what seems necessary in the moment. The only way to access these ideas is to develop the habit of putting your ideas to your partner, even over the most trivial of things. Try to break or not even start the habit of taking the bit between your teeth the moment there is a problem you ‘know’ the answer to. Your partner is far more likely to vocalize their ideas and answers where they see a need, so you always have ample opportunity to put your points across. Allow them the same access and make it a process where you both enjoy seeking the best answer.

The Key

Reason and intuition tend to work well in a single person, but separated into two personalities and supported by different attitudes, it can be hard to get them together. No amount of argument or grandstanding on either side will work either. There can only be an alchemical approach, a conscious and deliberate offering of the one to the other with the expectation that both will be affected and changed. If and where this can be made to work then a properly developing relationship is possible. The can be no real alternative.

Do any of the ESTJs relate to this? If so, which parts?

 

[chubber]

ISTJ / ESTJ

The Duty Fulfiller and the Guardian

An Introverted/Extraverted Relationship​

The level of both harmony and conflict within Introverted/Extraverted relationships can vary considerably, depending on how strongly expressed the introverted and extraverted tendencies are for these types. With very moderate expressions only the general attitudes, desires and interests of the parties involved are likely to be factors of importance affecting the relationship, and these will depend more upon the specific functions of the personalities and less upon their introverted or extraverted expression. In other cases however, particularly where both parties have a strongly expressed dominant focus, the impact of Introversion vs. Extraversion becomes an important factor affecting all the functional dynamics of the relationship. For this reason general statements about the functional give and take within such relationships are of little value where individual differences play such an important part. We have tried to take this into account in the following, but it is worth recognizing that in some instances what might appear as a conflict in one relationship can be a source of harmony in another.

ISTJ/ESTJ Relationship Dynamics

At first sight, this seems a straightforward, if somewhat one-sided, pairing of types. In respect of typological effects, the real difference here is the attitude of each partner toward the object or situation of their concern. While these differences are easily accommodated within society and general areas of human interaction, in the close quarters of a one-on-one relationship their potential to create division and the need for their mediation within the relationship will be strongly felt. Bring sexuality into the mix and you have an even greater potential for differences over perceptions and the way the needs of each partner should be met.

Because of the functional similarities here, these partners will throw a shared shadow which deepens all the greater behind those areas where they are in particular agreement. This relationship shadow comprises a mix of poorly adapted feeling and intuition which remain contaminated and controlled by the collective and unconscious undercurrents of human behavior. Shadow feeling is expressed in the emotional energy of immature sentiments and attachments. Unsophisticated pleasures sate its positive side, whilst anger, sulkiness and aggressive dissatisfactions, both with self and others, slake its negative thirst for action. Shadow intuition shows itself as a stalking gremlin, for whose tricks, disturbances and irrational provocations one must constantly be on the alert. The unseen presence of this demon shows itself in the way the partners here both deflect and turn from anything which offers no concrete reality or acceptably conventional definition of its purpose.

ESTJ and ISTJ are the most common male types and also are fairly common female types, so there is potential for both same and opposite gender relationships of either type balance. There will, however, be some difference in the likely development of each type of relationship, as gender and sexual preference will play a large part in the way these two impact on each other in the initial stages of a relationship.

Both these types are concerned with the moment by moment realities of their world, with the ESTJ tending to be more interested in the particularities of the immediate situation, while the ISTJ is more interested how these apply to all similar situations in general. For the one, the actual object or situation is of primary importance; for the other it is secondary to the logic of its purpose and its personal importance. For the ISTJ, the object is adjusted to the personal equation, while for the ESTJ, the personal equation is found in the object itself.

In either workplace or domestic life where the focus is on the logistics of some physical aspect of a situation, these differences show up in the way each attempts to deal with its demands. Between workers or casual acquaintances this rarely causes little more than some discussion over the best way to handle things. But between partners, such transactions can also draw the interpersonal physical and behavioral aspects of the relationship into the mix, and this can evoke emotional energy from the shadow side. Should this occur, this energy can transform a mere difference of rational attitude into an obstinate and childish refusal to accept each other’s point of view. The ESTJ sits, points and says: “that is how it is.” The ISTJ says: “that’s not the way it has to be.”

Both these two partners are wary of feeling values, particularly when they are applied by others to concrete, objective situations. While they might understand the feeling/valuing process, they are not moved by it and find it hard to accommodate, both in their outer life and in their relationships. The ESTJ is especially immune to feeling as a rational process, finding its valuations both beside the point and personally provocative. The ISTJ is slightly more adept at

recognizing the objective values of feeling, and hence more likely to give them consideration as something they should try to come to terms with, both in others and in themselves. In company with their more aggressively rational ESTJ partner however, they are more likely to repress this tendency in favor of a more general attitude in which any feeling values are set aside. This same process occurs with intuition, where the object defining rationale of the ISTJ will tend to keep the ESTJ focused upon the situation and less likely to consider its possible implications.

In this way both partners can at times help each other to darken their own shadow. This only makes its projection onto the world and others around them more definite, and hence, even less likely to be seen by either as simply the reflection of their own weaknesses. There is another side to the shadow problem here though, which is interwoven with the specific relationship between extraversion and introversion in these two types. We will discuss this below.

Because of the functional affinity between these types, specific positive connections between them can happen easily. The ISTJ will often find the expressed attitudes and actions of the ESTJ to be enactments of what they see as “right” behavior, while the ESTJ will see the loyal and careful ISTJ as the embodiment of their own conventional beliefs. This connection of clear rational thinking with conventional appreciations of the immediate situation provides a straightforward and non-emotive mediating dynamic which, in many situations, allows these two an almost instant rapport. This will be particularly so where neither of the partners have strongly expressed introverted or extraverted attitudes. Where strong expression is evident, however, an increasing need for adjustment will be likely to affect any ongoing connection, with each partner finding more and more that the objective of their initial rapport was not deep enough to mediate between their real differences of attitude.

For, regardless of functional similarity, there is a significant difference of need between these two types which is not overcome simply through commonality of interests. The introverted ISTJ does not require a constant and reciprocal connection to the world around them, while just such a connection is the ideal of the ESTJ. For the ESTJ, to think properly about a thing requires connection, to be “in the mix” with the object of their concern. The ISTJ relationship to a situation is more complex and abstract and requires the kind of introspective analysis which constant connection disrupts. While the ESTJ is ready and able to respond immediately to real time changes and requirements, the ISTJ is more likely to try and ensure that no such changes will occur. What the ESTJ sees as just contingent parts of the ongoing deal of getting things done, the ISTJ sees as interruptions, deflections and annoyances.

There is a real polarity of energy flow here. The ESTJ gathers energy from the situation, while the ISTJ expends their energy upon it. The ESTJ wants to gain the most energy they can from every aspect of their relationship to the object of their concern, whilst the ISTJ doesn’t wish to waste a single drop upon anything but the activity required to get things done the way they ought to be.

Where both partners strongly express their introversion and extraversion, this difference of need can play out in relationship as an almost intractable polarity of attitude toward even the most simple and ordinary tasks and objects of daily life. Mediation of this difference is actually more difficult in partners with a similar focus of functions, as there is no properly adapted third function through which this mediation might occur. For this reason things tend to become more definite, more “black and white” as issues; their resolution in this partnership appealing to a feeling need, which, between these types, triggers emotional responses which only exacerbate differences rather than providing a connecting resolution of them.

An unusual aspect of the shadow problem (mentioned above) comes into play here. The most intense part of the ISTJ personal shadow is represented through negatively processed extraverted intuition. Essentially, they lack the ability to see the way any specific group of concrete facts can represent or become anything other than what it appears to them. They tend to ignore or gloss over those minor details which point significantly toward what are, to them, undesired or non essential aspects of a situation. The ESTJ however, has a strong tendency to notice everything and consider its value to the whole situation. Any constant attention to such details on their part can disturb the ISTJ. “Look, it doesn’t matter. Ok?” says the frustrated ISTJ. “I only mentioned it, because it doesn’t seem to fit in.” says the ESTJ. What neither have is a real appreciation of the possible consequences, and should things explode into disarray because the true detonating potential of one small part of a situation went unnoticed, their can be recriminations on both sides. But there remains also the possibility of shadow mediation as well, with the ISTJ becoming somewhat more amenable to the ESTJ penchant for worrying about every detail.

On the other side, the darkest area of the ESTJ shadow is represented by negative introverted feeling. Indeed, it is this negative feeling connection to objects and situations which drives their extraverted attitude to them, fuelling their need to connect with things at a total, thinking level where every concrete fact is part of a whole appreciation of things “as they are”. For them a brick is a brick and the possibility that a particular brick might represent a world of human feeling to the person who crafted it never crosses their mind. And if such a possibility is mentioned, they will usually negate the connection any way they can, rather than allowing themselves to be drawn into associating their “real” thinking appreciations with another’s feeling. One only has to watch a political interview with an government economist to get the sense of this.

The ISTJ attitude to feeling is a little less negatively defined and more likely to draw them into connection, even if only to note its possible relevance. Their partner’s attitude to human feeling will, however, tend to bolster their more aggressive desire to “think only”, but on the other will sit somewhat sourly within them as something that perhaps ought not be so cut and dried. Either way, they will have little drive nor ability to change their partner’s way of looking at things.

So on the one side, with a certain amount of good will, it is possible for these partners’ natural responses to mitigate the potential dangers of negative intuition, but on the other, virtually impossible for them to affect any change in their shadow relationship to feeling without a conscious and deliberate approach to the problem.

Making it Work

The hardest thing about making this relationship “work” as an intimate and ongoing partnership between two people is the lack of a feeling connection. Without this, a real appreciation of each other’s human reality is difficult to gain, while the understanding of each other’s needs remains only a thought out, mechanical kind of affair whose fragility is made obvious every time an emotional difficulty arises. This is not to say that thinking people cannot understand and deal with real feeling as a rational, valuing process, but in this relationship all feeling is transposed into affect; its barely conscious processes expressing as emotional energy attached to those situations which would normally demand a considered feeling response. Emotion not only destabilizes rational considerations, it also triggers more emotion, creating those explosive kind of attractions and highly charged human activities which are difficult to rationalize after the fact. Angry, irrational arguments certainly fall under this banner, but so, too, do most other urgent, uninhibited forms of human activity.

In a male/female relationship, for example, sexual activity is more likely to be impulsive and driven by sudden emotion, while day to day life will be more a carefully controlled détente, where small areas of misunderstanding might flare into emotion charged debate at the first wrong step.

The reason for these difficulties is twofold. For one, the difference between the extraverted and introverted attitude can be absolute if it is not understood and self mediated by both partners. The second reason is simply the lack of a connecting, feeling response to each other in which differences can be dissolved.

The introverted attitude has a tendency to devalue the object or other person in favor of the idea, the ideal or the process they represent. An extraverted partner therefore finds their rationale, their meaning, their energetic connection to the world to be of little consequence in the introverted scheme of things. As a consequence they find it difficult, not only to remain certain of their connection to their partner, but also to find ways in which they can receive a valuing response from them.

The extraverted attitude has a need of involvement with the object or other person’s outer reality which tends to devalue the inner or abstract ideal they represent. An introverted partner finds their inner reality to be of little meaning and glossed over in favor of the most obvious and concrete facts of their existence – none of which they feel truly represent their real self. As a consequence, they find it difficult to “be” what their partner wishes to see and find it hard to derive real value from their partner’s attention.

Because of the normal give and take within human activity these differences usually only become problematic where intense, one to one connections occur between two people. There will also be a wide range of reactivity depending on the strength of introverted and extraverted expression in the relationship. For this reason it is hard to set a value on any difficulty that may be experienced.

Far more important is the need for both partners to truly understand the difference between their own and their partner’s way of seeing and dealing with the world. For both types, recognizing and understanding this difference is difficult to do without the automatic projection of their own attitude causing the other’s to be seen as somehow inferior. The only real path forward here is for each to see that the world comprises both the concrete and the abstract, that both exist and both need to be assessed for their worth in any real valuation of a situation. The ISTJ will need to find ways to respond to their partner’s immediate appreciations of the facts and realities in which they are immersed.

The ESTJ will need to find ways to connect with and consider the abstracted laws and ideals which guide their partner’s inner reality and thoughts.

All of the above, however great or small its affect within the relationship might be, pales into insignificance in the face of the feeling problem. Where feeling is devalued by the partners and its activity almost, if not totally, unconscious, the relationship has no conscious mediating factor other than what is “thought about.” Certainly, sensory objects and situations can mediate between opposed thinking attitudes where there is no emotional commitment to the object or situation itself, but they cannot mediate opposed attitudes where the situation has an emotional value to the people concerned. Relationship objects and issues will always be invested with the energy of each partner’s unconscious feeling and will always have an emotional value. It is not uncommon for each partner to consider the other’s emotional connections as irrational, whilst being quite unable to see their own as anything other than suitably rational considerations. Such blindness leads only to constant bickering over side issues, whilst the true connecting value of the object or situation goes unnoticed and, more importantly, is never considered.

Whether taken as a bunch of concrete facts or the representation of an abstract reality, the true human value of the object or situation is rarely recognized or understood in its completeness. This is true not only of those things the relationship is concerned with, but also of the relationship itself. By denying the rationale of the one thing which truly connects them, these partners constantly negate the negotiable basis of their relationship.

Both partners here need to recognize and give real space to the fact that, while they may have been initially drawn together by a connection of interests, the real relationship which has developed between them is the result of an energetic connection at a deeper level. Where this energy is positive it is easily set aside in favor of things less difficult to express or deal with. After all, it is “just emotional stuff”. But this same devalued energy also produces most of their problems. In its negative form it is all the more destructive for the lack of acknowledgment of its true origin, i.e. in each partner’s neglected child of feeling.

Recognizing that it is feeling which connects us, even if that feeling represents itself though sticky, annoying or otherwise intractable emotions, is the one thing that can truly overcome the difficulties in this relationship. The ability to recognize and consciously appreciate that this “third thing” is between us whether we like it or not, is the beginning of a path toward contentment and the resolution of differences, no matter how large or small.

Here we provide some suggestions to help maintain the development of this relationship.

ESTJ suggestions:

• When you and your partner differ over what is important or significant about some object or situation, put it to yourself that this is no mere difference of “opinion”, but a real effect of the difference between the way each of you process information. Your introverted partner actually sees things in a different way, and the judgments they make accord more with the way the situation fits into their personally constructed view of the world, rather than with a concrete and purely objective viewpoint. We need to realize that there is no truly objective view of any situation; that our personal bias always adjusts our perceptions to suit what we expect. Your own bias tends to eliminate the abstract and collective qualities from what you see, while your partner tends to eliminate from their view those perceptive differences which make every situation unique, in favor of a view which sees all similar situations as representations of the same thing. For them, the “idea” of an object; what it represents, is more important than the specific object itself. For this reason, they don’t feel a need to “get all over something” to understand or recognize its significance or potential. Instead of letting this difference between you create sticking points over details and differing perceptions of the value of some particular aspect of things, try and make allowance for the real information their attitude is giving you. This is, that regardless of its particular characteristics, the situation does have affinities with many others, and that through this abstract view there is often the potential for handling things in a general and efficient way which stops us getting bogged down in details which inhibit the necessary process of dealing with the situation. What your partner’s attitude is often subtly telling you is that: if everyone understands the idea and its required processes, then there is often no need to “organize everything.”
• Thinking people don’t often like to talk about feeling values. Their take on feeling is usually skewed by their own lack of true feeling awareness. While feeling in its conscious form judges the quality of an object and its relationship to the person, unconscious feeling tends to bind us negatively to the objects of our life in a “fateful” way. Thinking maintains the distance we need for fear of being swallowed up by the intensity of an unconscious connection we cannot control. Anything which tends to distort or loosen our thinking can then bring tension, guilt and anger, while anything which tends to support it brings enjoyment, relief and a sense of well being. So it is easy to see how emotions can arise from very small causes within a purely objective, thinking relationship. Something the other does which does not align with our sense of the object is sensed as a threat. Emotion is the result, and its energy drives our need to defend ourselves against the threat to our world view. This is how heated arguments begin, but this dynamic is ever in the background, working like a thermostat connected to everything around us. Recognizing that this feeling dynamic is working beneath the surface of our life at all times, and that it is this which connects us to the objects of our interest and desire, is vitally important to relationship development for thinking people. Where emotion begins to affect our mood, our thinking and our interactions, the one valid response we can make is to mentally “drop our hands” and agree to ourselves that: “yes, you are there too, and this emotion is your way of demanding to be heard.” In so doing we can mediate the emotion at a conscious level; feed its energy into a self aware process of balancing our ideas with the object or situation which is creating the energy. Not only does this make argument much harder to sustain and instead, turn its power into one of reasoned debate, it also allows us to turn positive, sensuously connected situations into more consciously realized, joyful experiences without the fear of “losing ourselves” within them.
• Your partner’s focus of life can be very different to yours. They will not only need time and space to themselves, they will also prefer a quieter, less connected environment in which to live and work. You would probably find living only under their ideal conditions to be possible only for short periods, just as they would find the same if they had to live your life. You can’t take a lack of needed input for too long; and they can’t continue to expend their energy on outer matters without a needed break. So it will be necessary for you to take this difference into account, not only in the way you structure your physical life together, but also in respect of social commitments and the like. Do not expect your partner to be able to continuously immerse themselves in such things the way you can. Always leave them an “out” where they might need it. Try and always remember that they do not feel they are “missing out” just because they do not like to take centre stage, nor is their natural behavior in any way a symptom of “irresponsibility” or lack of care on their part.

to be continued in next post due to character volume limitations....

 

[chubber]

continued ISTJ/ESTJ relations...

ISTJ suggestions:

• Doing the “right thing”, giving everything its “proper” value and reacting to change to immediately realign things according what they see as correct; this is your partner’s natural way of doing things. From this flows their penchant for organization, control and the maintenance of those structures which keep everything on an even keel. Without their own constant involvement in these processes they feel everything would fall into a state of anarchic flux. Unlike yourself, they do not fully appreciate the ruling processes which guide things; they do not see the natural flow which occurs when certain situations gather themselves together. They see the group but its focus is not clear, so they need to be its focus; to become its guiding light and the guardian of its actions. At times you shake your head in wonder at their constant need to be on top of things which you see would get along quite nicely without all the attention. There are times when their driving need to be involved and scrutinize every detail becomes annoying. In fact, it can drive you to distraction when it involves something you are trying to achieve. But, instead of letting their ways get under your skin at such times, it is better to take a second look at the situation, remembering that your partner does not see things the same way you do. They actually see, or pay attention to, a lot of things you take for granted. Most of the time your ideas work fine, but what your partner’s attitude is telling you is that there are times when the idea is simply not enough; that just because everything is gathered and ready for action does not mean that every part is aligned to your purpose. So, instead of trying to organize things in a tight lipped way that “short circuits” their input, try and keep them fully in the loop. If they know exactly what result you need, then their involvement can actually make sure your ideas work the way you want them to.
• Feeling is a somewhat difficult subject for you. You don’t have a great problem recognizing and agreeing with those values which apply within the wider, collective world of human affairs, but when feeling comes into your own sphere you tend to shy away from its judgments. You are never certain about its value or its intent when expressed by others, and its affects in your own inner life tend to be disturbing or negative. Just the same, it is the power of feeling that produces those emotional affects which bind us, not only to others, but to our ideas and ways. Where feeling is not consciously applied nor understood as a rational, valuing process, it works unconsciously to offset its neglect in our life, not only by stirring up negative emotions, resistances and such, but also tempting us with desires, fascinations and longings we cannot control. Feeling is then like a neglected child, whose needs are constantly getting pushed up into our life in ways we do not intend nor expect. If we allow that this is true within us, we allow the chance for these things to work for us rather than against. In so doing, the emotional aspects of life become more calm, more useful and easier to consciously manage and direct. Where you are dealing with an extraverted thinking partner, you need to appreciate the affects which neglected feeling can generate, not only in your own life, but particularly in theirs. . It is all too easy to believe life will be rosy as long as no-one gets bogged down in the mud of emotion, but unfortunately this is just a thinkers dream. The energy of feeling is everywhere, and in relationships between thinking people it can create unseen and unexpected emotional minefields. It is almost impossible to predict all the times and situations where these affects can arise between you, so it is important for you to be aware of the process; aware of the reason these things arise and acknowledge its presence between you.
• Dealing with an extraverted partner’s strong function can be difficult for an introvert. At times it feels like they are “all over you”, as if they needed to organize not only their own life, but everything in yours as well – usually the very things you have most under control and therefore say the least about. This can happen right down to the smallest of things and it can feel like it is happening all the time, as if your every move was being weighed in the scales of some higher form of critical judgment. The only way to deal with this is to communicate a little more; to reference those bits and pieces of things which you know are going to be talking points for your partner. This allows them to see that you are also on the ball. Extraverted people seem quite often to completely discount the one thing that is blatantly obvious to an introvert, i.e. that their mind is switched on and working too. Extraverted thinkers need to see thinking in action, to hear the words and see the picture. They can rarely wait for the results to be in, they have to know it is happening and often will not believe it is all under control unless they can see that it is. Talk it out and demonstrate where you can. They need to know they are in the mix and can see what is happening.

The Key

The key to this pair forming a true “life” relationship simply has to be the joint acknowledgment of the feeling, connecting process. Without this, feeling as expressed (and unexpressed) emotion will always form the rocks along the path whose presence will have to be endlessly negotiated and re-negotiated. Here the old wisdom of the Tao comes into play. The ESTJ needs to recognize that they take to the mountain top of Yang all too easily, while the ISTJ tends to hide in the shadows of the valley without realizing it belongs to the Yin. For both, the path belongs to the middle way, but finding it is not easy. It requires both fearlessness and humbleness to admit we are at the mercy of forces outside our control. Merely acknowledging these forces within our lives is often enough to turn their powers to something valuable.

Since [MENTION=22628]Sil[/MENTION] talked about ISTJ vs ESTJ, I thought I would include this one too. So, again, which parts would the ESTJ relate to?

 

[Sil]

continued ISTJ/ESTJ relations...

ISTJ suggestions:

• Doing the “right thing”, giving everything its “proper” value and reacting to change to immediately realign things according what they see as correct; this is your partner’s natural way of doing things. From this flows their penchant for organization, control and the maintenance of those structures which keep everything on an even keel. Without their own constant involvement in these processes they feel everything would fall into a state of anarchic flux. Unlike yourself, they do not fully appreciate the ruling processes which guide things; they do not see the natural flow which occurs when certain situations gather themselves together. They see the group but its focus is not clear, so they need to be its focus; to become its guiding light and the guardian of its actions. At times you shake your head in wonder at their constant need to be on top of things which you see would get along quite nicely without all the attention. There are times when their driving need to be involved and scrutinize every detail becomes annoying. In fact, it can drive you to distraction when it involves something you are trying to achieve. But, instead of letting their ways get under your skin at such times, it is better to take a second look at the situation, remembering that your partner does not see things the same way you do. They actually see, or pay attention to, a lot of things you take for granted. Most of the time your ideas work fine, but what your partner’s attitude is telling you is that there are times when the idea is simply not enough; that just because everything is gathered and ready for action does not mean that every part is aligned to your purpose. So, instead of trying to organize things in a tight lipped way that “short circuits” their input, try and keep them fully in the loop. If they know exactly what result you need, then their involvement can actually make sure your ideas work the way you want them to.
• Feeling is a somewhat difficult subject for you. You don’t have a great problem recognizing and agreeing with those values which apply within the wider, collective world of human affairs, but when feeling comes into your own sphere you tend to shy away from its judgments. You are never certain about its value or its intent when expressed by others, and its affects in your own inner life tend to be disturbing or negative. Just the same, it is the power of feeling that produces those emotional affects which bind us, not only to others, but to our ideas and ways. Where feeling is not consciously applied nor understood as a rational, valuing process, it works unconsciously to offset its neglect in our life, not only by stirring up negative emotions, resistances and such, but also tempting us with desires, fascinations and longings we cannot control. Feeling is then like a neglected child, whose needs are constantly getting pushed up into our life in ways we do not intend nor expect. If we allow that this is true within us, we allow the chance for these things to work for us rather than against. In so doing, the emotional aspects of life become more calm, more useful and easier to consciously manage and direct. Where you are dealing with an extraverted thinking partner, you need to appreciate the affects which neglected feeling can generate, not only in your own life, but particularly in theirs. . It is all too easy to believe life will be rosy as long as no-one gets bogged down in the mud of emotion, but unfortunately this is just a thinkers dream. The energy of feeling is everywhere, and in relationships between thinking people it can create unseen and unexpected emotional minefields. It is almost impossible to predict all the times and situations where these affects can arise between you, so it is important for you to be aware of the process; aware of the reason these things arise and acknowledge its presence between you.
• Dealing with an extraverted partner’s strong function can be difficult for an introvert. At times it feels like they are “all over you”, as if they needed to organize not only their own life, but everything in yours as well – usually the very things you have most under control and therefore say the least about. This can happen right down to the smallest of things and it can feel like it is happening all the time, as if your every move was being weighed in the scales of some higher form of critical judgment. The only way to deal with this is to communicate a little more; to reference those bits and pieces of things which you know are going to be talking points for your partner. This allows them to see that you are also on the ball. Extraverted people seem quite often to completely discount the one thing that is blatantly obvious to an introvert, i.e. that their mind is switched on and working too. Extraverted thinkers need to see thinking in action, to hear the words and see the picture. They can rarely wait for the results to be in, they have to know it is happening and often will not believe it is all under control unless they can see that it is. Talk it out and demonstrate where you can. They need to know they are in the mix and can see what is happening.

The Key

The key to this pair forming a true “life” relationship simply has to be the joint acknowledgment of the feeling, connecting process. Without this, feeling as expressed (and unexpressed) emotion will always form the rocks along the path whose presence will have to be endlessly negotiated and re-negotiated. Here the old wisdom of the Tao comes into play. The ESTJ needs to recognize that they take to the mountain top of Yang all too easily, while the ISTJ tends to hide in the shadows of the valley without realizing it belongs to the Yin. For both, the path belongs to the middle way, but finding it is not easy. It requires both fearlessness and humbleness to admit we are at the mercy of forces outside our control. Merely acknowledging these forces within our lives is often enough to turn their powers to something valuable.

Since [MENTION=22628]Sil[/MENTION] talked about ISTJ vs ESTJ, I thought I would include this one too. So, again, which parts would the ESTJ relate to?

So much reading material...I'll get through this probably over a couple of days. If not, I've forgotten about it.

 

[chubber]

So much reading material...I'll get through this probably over a couple of days. If not, I've forgotten about it.

You said I should watch this space. So here I am watching...

 

[EJCC]

Will reply in more detail via PM.

It sounds like you're picking up on a fairly significant amount of discordance between us that might not be entirely accounted for by instinctual stacking.

Re: ENFP. It's possible I use a significantly larger amount of Ne than you. The only hitch with ENFP for me is that 1) I've never related to posts by ENFPs and 2) inferior Fi is pretty accurate for me.

Reinforces ENTJ in my mind.

Oh, that's unexpected. I'm quite surprised you don't relate to it at all. Especially about emotions pulling you into the present. Where do emotions take you on a past-present-future scale? Or do they not extend to that at all?

They either take me into the past, or they take me so far into my own head that time is irrelevant.

Do you generally perceive your emotions more in terms of usefulness (both practically and in terms of moral guidance)? Do you ever play around with your own emotions to just explore them as things?

I don't like exploring my own emotions unless I have a goal. Though I suppose I generally don't like doing anything unless I have a goal. I don't have much patience for purposeless things.

What kind of state do strong emotions bring you to?

Chaos. If the emotions are negative, then add confusion and alarm to that.

Also, embarrassment after the fact. This is the case with strong positive emotions too. (I think that's more e1 than MBTI.)

Huh. I wasn't aware anything I said was distinctly non-one. But it's been awhile since I delved into the enneagram, so my knowledge isn't what it used to be.

Do you also rule out 5w6 and 6w5 now?

I don't think I'm ruling them out? Not sure. But at this point I'm leaning more towards 5w4 than 5w6.

I use Si to engage in what I would call "sensation matching." Say I am standing at a street corner and am suddenly struck by a sensation. I can quickly take that sensation and run it through my internal database of past experiences to find matching sensations from previous experiences. I can identify not only what triggered the sensation in the present, but identify past moments that are sensationally congruent with the sensation I am currently experiencing.

Sensation primarily refers to a set of feelings/ideas/thoughts that are subjectively connected with a point in time. Or multiple points in time. They may or may not be at all related to what was actually happening at that point in time.

Si for me is largely involuntary.

I guess that could be Si. But to be honest it could also be Se with a good memory. I'm usually not aware of specific sensations, as much as I'm aware of something generally feeling "wrong". Only then can I zero in on it.

Edit: I am so rarely in the present moment that it's actually kind of hard to talk about physical sensations unless they're REALLY strange relative to "the usual". In that sense, your description of Si works, because at any given moment, I'm not really looking at my surroundings, so much as I'm looking at the general concept of my surroundings. How they relate to my prior experience of them, how they measure up to the Platonic ideal of them. Even when I'm in a brand new environment, I'm not in the moment, because I'm so disoriented by the lack of Platonic ideals. The lack of precedent to go from. I go into planning mode, and try to decide what potentially similar things can act as an interim precedent.

 

[Sil]

[MENTION=20044]chubber[/MENTION]


whyyyyyyy

the text is so much
the reading is freaking long
i cannot focus

 

[chubber]

[MENTION=20044]chubber[/MENTION]


whyyyyyyy

the text is so much
the reading is freaking long
i cannot focus

Concentrate, look in my eye...

 

[Sil]

Any SJs tend to get really technical about word choice and meaning in discussions? Not to be a dick, but as a byproduct of wanting to have clear communication without any underlying misunderstandings?

Do SJs tend to be very selective about word choice when discussing something?

 

[prplchknz]

Do you like the fact that ESTJ rearranged spells JEST? and how do you feel about the stereotype that ESTJs never jest? I don't believe that, I swear i've seen them do that more than twice

 

[Sil]

Do you like the fact that ESTJ rearranged spells JEST? and how do you feel about the stereotype that ESTJs never jest? I don't believe that, I swear i've seen them do that more than twice

I've never thought about rearranging the letters, but I quite like JEST.

 

[SD45T-2]

Do SJs tend to be very selective about word choice when discussing something?

I usually am.

 

[EJCC]

Any SJs tend to get really technical about word choice and meaning in discussions? Not to be a dick, but as a byproduct of wanting to have clear communication without any underlying misunderstandings?

Do SJs tend to be very selective about word choice when discussing something?

Sometimes. But it depends. I care about everyone being on the same page, but too much definition talk is pointless and drives me crazy.

 

[Virtual ghost]

What kind of questions ESTJs prefer to be asked ?

 

[EJCC]

What kind of questions ESTJs prefer to be asked ?

Probably not questions as vague as this one.

But seriously: my initial instinct is to say that I don't care, but there are particular types of questions that annoy me, including overly vague questions, leading questions, condescending questions, and questions that totally miss the point.

 

[prplchknz]

Probably not questions as vague as this one.

But seriously: my initial instinct is to say that I don't care, but there are particular types of questions that annoy me, including overly vague questions, leading questions, condescending questions, and questions that totally miss the point.

what's the point you are refering to?

 

[EJCC]

what's the point you are refering to?

Depends on what we're talking about?

 

[prplchknz]

Depends on what we're talking about?

i honestly don't know what we're talking about, and if you don't either than i guess we both can make something up

how do you feel about that and other ESTJS?