Personality Cafe banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Discovering socionics and figuring out my type gave me a well-needed self-esteem boost because I realized what parts of myself are very valuable.. what I take for granted that another type really needs for balance.

And then I learned more and more about the superego block, and true to the theory, I was only ever aware of my deficiencies in the super-id and now I realize more and more just how much I suck with the functions in that domain, in ways I didn't know I didn't know.

Guess it's a trade-off, lol.
 

·
Registered
I demand the return of the crazy face! :crazy:
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
To be honest, I did not realize until about four years ago that other people can directly tell psychological distance/closeness between themselves and others. Lol. I can estimate it by other factors like how long I've known the person, the context in which we met, the context in which we usually spend time, etc. I classify relationships almost entirely based on the context in which we meet-- e.g. if we met at work, then it's a coworker. I can also make some guesses based on their emotional expressions-- but if someone were to express positively towards me but internally dislike me, I would not know.

I didn't realize until I was informed by an LSI -who are not exactly the bastion of strong Fi- that most people can directly tell psychological distance. This was when I realized that my Fi might really be 1D. Since then, I've come to the conclusion that I have no grasp of psychological distance at all. Like you said. I didn't know I had no idea about this.

Also, when I try to understand attraction/repulsion, I can only grasp it as interest/disinterest, which is not the same thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
To be honest, I did not realize until about four years ago that other people can directly tell psychological distance/closeness between themselves and others. Lol. I can estimate it by other factors like how long I've known the person, the context in which we met, the context in which we usually spend time, etc. I classify relationships almost entirely based on the context in which we meet-- e.g. if we met at work, then it's a coworker. I can also make some guesses based on their emotional expressions-- but if someone were to express positively towards me but internally dislike me, I would not know.

I didn't realize until I was informed by an LSI -who are not exactly the bastion of strong Fi- that most people can directly tell psychological distance. This was when I realized that my Fi might really be 1D. Since then, I've come to the conclusion that I have no grasp of psychological distance at all. Like you said. I didn't know I had no idea about this.

Also, when I try to understand attraction/repulsion, I can only grasp it as interest/disinterest, which is not the same thing.
@ the bolded: haha!!

That is so interesting. I'm so aware of it I don't know how it could be otherwise. So you say that you classify relationships almost entirely based on how you meet, so are the classifications able evolve then? if so, how?

For Te I'm getting more aware of how I just am not aware of it, but I still think I don't really *see* it yet if you know what i mean.. one day it'll hit me.. lol!
 

·
Registered
I demand the return of the crazy face! :crazy:
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
That is so interesting. I'm so aware of it I don't know how it could be otherwise. So you say that you classify relationships almost entirely based on how you meet, so are the classifications able evolve then? if so, how?

For Te I'm getting more aware of how I just am not aware of it, but I still think I don't really see it yet if you know what i mean.. one day it'll hit me.. lol!
Yeah, they can evolve if the context changes. So say I met someone at work, then I moved to a different company but kept in touch with them. Then they'd be in the "acquaintence" classification. With some people, I think they might be becoming friends and not only acquaintences, but I'm not sure. Can't really tell. Lol.

I've been thinking lately that the demonstrative is often taken for granted. I'm like that with Te. For instance, if I need to learn a new procedure/process/workflow at work, I basically look at it and just figure it out somehow. Even if there is no training, no instructions, no documentation, no manual. Pre-socionics, I thought everyone was like this. I didn't understand why people needed documentation/instructions, why they needed help with learning workflows, don't they just automatically know what the next step is? Lol. I know this even when it's completely new. I also seem to automatically do things in an efficient way. Te is a pretty convenient demonstrative. =P

Edit: This new PerC layout is another good example. It keeps asking me if I need a tour of the place but I'm just like, why would someone need a tour? Just look at it and figure it out!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Hmm, not sure. I can instantly tell the degree of psychological compatibility with another person from just a short interaction and adopt an appropriate level of communication with said individual. I don't exactly behave the same way with everyone I meet and this stuff is mostly on autopilot. People from my perspective are very easy to read and this happens for me on a intuitive level basically on autopilot. I don't seem to classify people into standard groups based on the context of our meeting.. its more nuanced & complicated than that, the only way I can describe it is: an intuitive holistic understanding of who the other person is and how they function. Its kinda like an instinct, dynamic back and forth, I adapt in real-time. I have an intuitive grasp of just how far a relationship can go in time, which is why I may avoid some people entirely due to incompatibility.

SLIs are usually not focused on and are often unaware of emotional considerations in conversation. They are generally not good at reading people's emotional states and are often not inclined to perceive or speculate about others' underlying emotional states or motivations that are not obvious from their behavior. This can sometimes make them appear uncaring and insensitive.
This is not true for me. IF I'm uncaring and insensitive it is because I want to be despite fully understanding the other person. I almost never make the kind of mistakes an LSI would.

:crazy: I swear, watching LSI interact with people is like a train wreck happening in slow motion right in front of my eyes.

My problem in social interaction has always been a kind of blindness to social convention and sucking at actually expressing feelings or establishing a common feeling with others, which often leads to people seeing me as eccentric. I can never manage to feel like I'm one with the group, feels like I'm always some outsider keenly aware of where I stand and where other people are. Was never good at being part of the herd or someone who adapts to social expectations. I just can't do it.

This is what I meant by me having better than SLI Fi. Not sure what it means. My Fe is terrible tho.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top