| Socionics Personals |  | Female
Straight
16-25
Oceania
Libra
ENFj |
|  | Male
Straight
16-25
Middle East
Sagittarius
INTj |
|  | Male
Straight
26-35
North America
Pisces
INXj |
| | Join now! |
Who is who?Learn how to convert between different systems
V.I.An introduction into the widely used Socionics Visual Identification technique
TestsA collection of Socionics related tests and quizes
Q & AsAsk a Socionics related question or provide an answer to an existing one
ArticlesVarious articles on the subject of Socionics and Types in general
ForumsWant to discuss Type? Head to Socionics Forums!
|
| Questions & Answers |
| Question #1171095166 | Saturday, 10-Feb-2007 |
|
|
| Why are ESTps and INFps duals? Do ESTps treat INFps in a way they do not others? As far as negative traits go, many ESTps have a bad rap for over-materialism and exploitation. So an INFp enters the scene and ... what happens? Do ESTps actually soften? Feel protective of the INFp? Possibly reveal their tender side they don't show others? Do they suddenly give more than take? What happens? Also, why might INFjs find themselves happiest with ESTjs, as the theory goes? ESTjs - sweet as some can be - can become so terribly boring (sorry, ESTjs!), it's hard to believe INFjs wouldn't tire of an ESTj partner in a profoundly stifling way. Do they? Or do INFps experiences that? Perhaps INFjs can appreciate the security and normalness ESTj provides, but then it can get to be too much, too stagnant and stifling. What are the typical "pitfalls" of duality? And how do you know you've met your dual? -- blahblahblah |
|
A22 Why are they duals? The clinical answer is that ESTp's are   , and INFp's are   . The confidence of each balances the other: vs. , and the spontaneous realization of each balances the other: vs. . In theory, these functions are psychological opposites that is they are mutually exclusive. One is strong in if and only if is weak and likewise one is strong in if and only if is weak. A dual relationship will survive, like any other, only so long as the partners treat each other with kindness and consideration. It is important to remember that each personality type has its positive and negative facets. None is entirely good or entirely evil. The initial attraction between ESTp's and INFp's results from the ESTp being thoroughly grounded in the here and now; while INFp is spiritual, mystical, elsewhere and future oriented. -- Anonymous |
| A23 A22 INFjs are far more "mystical" than INFps. As a matter of fact, both ISFps and INTps are often attracted to INFjs spirituality (in different ways) as a common theme in these relations of benefit. -- anonymous |
A24 @A23 I believe that you're confusing INFJ (ala Myers-Briggs) with INFj, the Socionics Ethical,Intuitive Intratim. There is no reason to suspect an INFj -   - of having any particularly special mystical insight. -- Anonymous |
| A25 A24, would you then also claim that ENFj and ENTj (creative ) generally have more mystical tendencies and interests than ENTp and ENFp would? -- blahblahblah |
| A26 @A25. Yes, but they are manifested differently. An INFp, , is the most sensitive of all types to classically mystical experiences. -- Anonymous |
| A27 @A26, well I don't know what you're basing your data on, but based on my experiences with ENXps, INXps, ENXjs and INXjs over the years, I completely disagree. -- blahblahblah |
| A28 @A27, According to Jung was the basis of dreams, visions and other such things. By definition an INXp's confidence is in those personal intuitions. An INTp will render those personal intuitions as objective facts often giving the impression that he is a know-it-all. (An observer wouldn't necessarily count the experience of an INTp as mystical.) An INFp will render their personal intuitions as objective emotions, and hence these have a mystical quality to them. For the extraverts, ENTj and ENFj, , is a product not a raw material. One will often find these types imposing their personal intuitions on the world around them, which in my experience gives them a visionary quality that again is not necessarily perceived as "mystical" by others. As for types, is perception of the structure or possible structure of the contents of the external world. It has little if anything to do with mysticism generally speaking; alchemy maybe, but not mysticism. -- Anonymous |
| A29 @A28. I am an INFj. I have premonition dreams & visions. I am so confident in my premonitions, that I will now warn people of impending events that may be harmful. I am an empath-I feel the actual pain of others, physical and emotional. I have tested my type on this Socionics sight 4 times-often INFx. The tie breaker leads me to INFj-as do all the descriptions of INFj. I share some INFp-but too many differing factors. I am also MB INFJ-impossible??? I don't know..I quess the j/p thing is a problem in both "testing" arenas?? Mysticism is so me. The books on my shelf have to do with astrology, the paranormal, gnosticsm, the meaning of life, religion, philosophers, self healing.. and it's been my quest to understanding premonition dreams and the mysteries of life since childhood, that has led me to where I am in life today...trusting my intuition, my gut, and the messages in my dreams... -- aj |
| A30 @A29 aj, you say "Mysticism is so [you]." This indicates to me predominant . Sorry, dear that's just the way I see it. Strong empathy with others is also an indicator of . As an introvert your introverted function is dominant by definition, so if I haven't misread what you wrote, your behavior and choice of reading material is that of an , a socionics INFp. Keep in mind that the Socionics Type Assistant only reflects how you see yourself - it is not the final word on your actual socionics type. Besides the j/p dimension is typically the most difficult to determine. Further, if the theory is correct a person is typically very talented at using the functions of opposite color to their dominant ones; but they don't often do so consciously. -- Anonymous |
| A31 @A30. Wow, you seem to be very knowledgable in Socionics. I have only taken a short course in Jungian Psychology-I would be very interested in any more suggested reading material you may have for me to better understand Jung and Socionics. Much of the knowledge I truly treasure, comes from Life itself and from within-from the collective unconscious, and from an internal "knowing" that I have had since childhood. However, I feel many "messages" I get come from the external Universe also. There is a "oneness" with us all. A connection. We really do create our own realities, and we can pull others into that reality. What I read and have read, verifies what I have already felt is real. I am not someone who believes in only black or white-there is grey, or only yes or no-there is maybe. I do believe in possiblities. The possiblity that I am not a Socionics INFj, nor a Socionics INFp-but rather I should just leave the test score as is-a Socionics INFx. Having grown closer to the spiritual understanding of Self, integrating both the conscious and unconscious aspects of ME..as we should all work towards...To integrate is divine. Integration involves recognition, confrontation, acceptance, and living the unconscious in our conscious life. This process can take years. And usually at mid life it is evident that it has taken place, if you allowed it to happen. Some people never integrate. If you are young, you probably do not yet understand. Experience is knowledge, knowledge is powerful. So much of Life has to do with each individual soul-ok, I'll stop now..my mystical side is showing..Now, back to the original post-blahblahblah @A21. I met my ESTj husband after he admired me from afar for some time. He walked up to me at a dance one night to introduce himself-we talked for a short while. The next several conversations were by phone...before he actually asked me out. Whenever we went out, and through our marriage, he had an evident pride in me. (For 20 years he served me breakfast in bed every weekend)..Now, after many postings I'm not sure if my type is what you wanted-I'm so confused!!(Self pulling out hair!!)So, I don't know if I can be much more helpful-until I study more...Great conversations here though!! -- aj |
|
|
| A32 @A31. Thank you for the complement. I've read Jung to see what he actually had to say about personality types. I've read all of the English websites on socionics. Many of them are translations of Russian sites and for that reason difficult to follow. What I understand of socionics has taken me awhile to put together. Here are some things I know: 1. There is no black or white when it comes to people. However, you can partition the space of people's choices and force them to choose between one extreme and another. To the extent that their choices on such a forced choice basis reflect their usual behavior, you wind up with an acurate stereotype. 2. According to Jung, there are four psychological archtypes (Plato said three. Galen, four. According to the Enneagram, nine. The Zodiac, twelve. You get the idea. Personality stereotyping is nothing new.) and two attitudes for each, introverted and extraverted. 3. When Augusta followed Jung's work by developing socionics she did so under the assumption that pure Jungian archtypes did not exist. She further assumed that the rational (judging) functions, and the irrational (perceiving) functions occur in pairs - one having the extraverted attitude and the other, the introverted attitude. Additionally one of the first intertype relations she observed were mirror relations - partners having the same dominant functional pair, but opposite ordering so that one is an extravert while the other is an introvert. Given all of that, a little math is called for at this point: 4 functions x 2 attitudes x 2 orderings = 16 types. Once a person has determined his/her two dominant functions and what order they fall, the remaining functions follow a rigid hierarchy. In other words, if you are an INFj, for example, your role function is always going to be Ti, your PoLR is always going to be Se, your dual seeking function is always going to be Te, your hidden agenda always Si, your control function Fe, and your standard function Ni. All of that is interesting but not very useful. The main utility of socionics is that people of different types will be able to "push your buttons" in various general but nevertheless predictable ways. Figuring out how people of one type influence those of another is then nothing more than an algebra of sorts. -- Anonymous |
| *Please note that the opinions expressed are not necessarily those of socionics.com* |
|
| Would you like to add anything? |
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)
|
|
