LovecraftianMonstrosity
New member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2016
- Messages
- 625
First I was introduced to typology by reading Psychological Types by Jung. I think I was around 19 or so. Then I discovered Socionics. I was fascinated. It had never occurred to me to consider people that way before. I felt excited about understanding what really made them tick.
When I first started I considered myself LII or
. This was the early 2000s and Socionics was bursting forward (or it felt that way). This was before subtypes, Reinin dichotomies, or Oldham personalities, all we had was the model A and the Intertype relations theory built from processing the information elements from this model. I was fascinated by quadras and most especially by the concept of Duality.
I became obsessed with the idea of predicting who was what type upon meeting them. I looked at methods of Visual Identification to try to discover the types in real life. I would even compete and argue with a friend about such and such a person. I became obsessed with geometric patterns within the model to see if there was some theoretical way to "balance" dynamics in a random group of people by predicting it in advance given some random list of types. I would even play this game in real life as people walked into and out of say a coffee shop at first simply observing, but as I grew bolder learning to shift the dynamics.
At some point I gave up. There seemed to me to be no coherent way to mesh the types into a coherent framework. It just didn't make sense. Things in life were not as symmetrical as in the model! (It was not a good model.). However, it influenced my thinking. I decided that I was
and so obviously I needed a
type for "balance." Thus began the search for my dual...
But that is a story for another time. The main point was that over time I became disillusioned with & and not only disillusioned, but perhaps a bit hostile as well. While I think of things related to as perhaps a bit unwise I still find them alluring or sexy. But things relating to ? No, it just feels like something I do not even notice whatsoever! (It doesn't interest me.).
Ironically, this fits in very well with model A:
LIIs are usually lacking in outward emotional energy. LIIs may typically seem stiff, cold, rational, unresponsive to emotional concerns, and overly formal in social settings. LIIs may feel uneasy and insecure about their adaptability to social situations. They appreciate the interactive efforts of others to make them feel comfortable, at ease, and a part of the group. They tend to liven up in situations of amusement and conviviality. In situations where they feel comfortable and unconditionally accepted, they may drop their tendency towards aloofness and engage in uncharacteristic silliness.
LIIs may be highly sensitive to the signs of emotional approval that they receive from others. They may be highly appreciative of displays of emotional warmth and friendliness. They may find normative emotional expectations placed on them to be stifling, and tend to prefer nonjudgmental environments without character scrutiny. Additionally, for fear of emotional reprisal, LIIs often tend to be rather noncritical of others' actions.
LIIs may be quite susceptible to acting in accordance to the mood of others, and may undervalue the importance of avoiding argumentation on their mental well-being.
About the Superid functions:
The third row of Model A (functions 5 and 6) is called the Super-id block. The subject will appreciate direct help to the Super-id, and sees tasks related to it as chores best left to others, but also as a source of frequent recreation. When feeling like there's something missing in his life, the subject will try to use his Super-id functions, but with limited effect, as it often comes off as overkill and is usually poorly developed. Only in the presence of complementary types can an individual let loose his child-like Super-id without fear of criticism. But ironically, although these types will maintain a good deal of their Super-id information in the atmosphere, they will at the same time doggedly encourage him to keep using his Ego functions, which in the end is the healthiest thing for him to do anyway.
So in my mind I don't think of myself as any particular type. I don't think it quite works that way anymore. But I am concerned perhaps these 10 year old neurons may be influencing how I perceive my relations with others. For example I tend to think of and as opposing one another (except perhaps when pursuing passion in a relationship). I see things like family, community, holidays, small social gatherings, children, etc as not consciously important to me (though perhaps they are in my subconscious).
If this was MBTI one might say I was an INTP who hated ESFJS, but I see myself as & which is why I think of myself as ENTP in MBTI(?) But perhaps LII is more accurate:
Socionics Types: LII-INTj
Anyhow, none of that truly matters as it was just to set the stage for the main question which is: How do I get along with and ? It seems many of the people I do not understand well value these functions, particularly ISTJS, ISFJS, ESFJS, and ESTPS.
When I first started I considered myself LII or
. This was the early 2000s and Socionics was bursting forward (or it felt that way). This was before subtypes, Reinin dichotomies, or Oldham personalities, all we had was the model A and the Intertype relations theory built from processing the information elements from this model. I was fascinated by quadras and most especially by the concept of Duality.I became obsessed with the idea of predicting who was what type upon meeting them. I looked at methods of Visual Identification to try to discover the types in real life. I would even compete and argue with a friend about such and such a person. I became obsessed with geometric patterns within the model to see if there was some theoretical way to "balance" dynamics in a random group of people by predicting it in advance given some random list of types. I would even play this game in real life as people walked into and out of say a coffee shop at first simply observing, but as I grew bolder learning to shift the dynamics.
At some point I gave up. There seemed to me to be no coherent way to mesh the types into a coherent framework. It just didn't make sense. Things in life were not as symmetrical as in the model! (It was not a good model.). However, it influenced my thinking. I decided that I was
and so obviously I needed a type for "balance." Thus began the search for my dual...But that is a story for another time. The main point was that over time I became disillusioned with
& and not only disillusioned, but perhaps a bit hostile as well. While I think of things related to as perhaps a bit unwise I still find them alluring or sexy. But things relating to ? No, it just feels like something I do not even notice whatsoever! (It doesn't interest me.). Ironically, this fits in very well with model A:
LIIs are usually lacking in outward emotional energy. LIIs may typically seem stiff, cold, rational, unresponsive to emotional concerns, and overly formal in social settings. LIIs may feel uneasy and insecure about their adaptability to social situations. They appreciate the interactive efforts of others to make them feel comfortable, at ease, and a part of the group. They tend to liven up in situations of amusement and conviviality. In situations where they feel comfortable and unconditionally accepted, they may drop their tendency towards aloofness and engage in uncharacteristic silliness.
LIIs may be highly sensitive to the signs of emotional approval that they receive from others. They may be highly appreciative of displays of emotional warmth and friendliness. They may find normative emotional expectations placed on them to be stifling, and tend to prefer nonjudgmental environments without character scrutiny. Additionally, for fear of emotional reprisal, LIIs often tend to be rather noncritical of others' actions.
LIIs may be quite susceptible to acting in accordance to the mood of others, and may undervalue the importance of avoiding argumentation on their mental well-being.
About the Superid functions:
The third row of Model A (functions 5 and 6) is called the Super-id block. The subject will appreciate direct help to the Super-id, and sees tasks related to it as chores best left to others, but also as a source of frequent recreation. When feeling like there's something missing in his life, the subject will try to use his Super-id functions, but with limited effect, as it often comes off as overkill and is usually poorly developed. Only in the presence of complementary types can an individual let loose his child-like Super-id without fear of criticism. But ironically, although these types will maintain a good deal of their Super-id information in the atmosphere, they will at the same time doggedly encourage him to keep using his Ego functions, which in the end is the healthiest thing for him to do anyway.
So in my mind I don't think of myself as any particular type. I don't think it quite works that way anymore. But I am concerned perhaps these 10 year old neurons may be influencing how I perceive my relations with others. For example I tend to think of
and as opposing one another (except perhaps when pursuing passion in a relationship). I see things like family, community, holidays, small social gatherings, children, etc as not consciously important to me (though perhaps they are in my subconscious).If this was MBTI one might say I was an INTP who hated ESFJS, but I see myself as
& which is why I think of myself as ENTP in MBTI(?) But perhaps LII is more accurate:Socionics Types: LII-INTj
Anyhow, none of that truly matters as it was just to set the stage for the main question which is: How do I get along with
and ? It seems many of the people I do not understand well value these functions, particularly ISTJS, ISFJS, ESFJS, and ESTPS.
except I'm an Fi-dom, so no one expects me to be good at Fe stuff.
