Relationship Dynamics
I recently received an anonymous comment on my blog article “INTJ and ESFP” that was simply a copy-and-paste of the Socionics text on the “Conflicting” types of relationships. I was disappointed that the commenter did not give his or her name, nor did they offer any original opinion of their own.
However, it did prompt me to write this article, addressing what I see as a major misunderstanding of Jung’s theory — the idea that it’s static and immutable. It doesn’t matter whether you’re an adherent of Socionics or the MBTI — the same stereotypes seem to abound in both.
In practice, there’s a lot of dynamism in the cognitive processes, especially when one uses them in the service of individuation, which Jung claims to be the ultimate goal of self-development. And by incorporating the “archetype dynamics” described in Dr. John Beebe’s theory, it becomes quite an exciting way to progress through life, both in pursuit of one’s own growth, and in relationship with others.
For more information on the topic of type and relationships, I direct your attention to this excellent article: “Relationship Type Combinations”
May 8th, 2009 at 6:31 am
Maybe there is room for maneuvering with intj/fj’s because you have an advantage in comprehension with regard to “typing.” But really the socionic relationship chart reveals what to me are universal laws: over time almost all relationships will be reduced to those descriptions though intuitive types may be capable of some dynamic shifts periodically.
May 8th, 2009 at 7:13 am
Based on my own and others’ professional experience with these models, ALL types are capable of self-development toward individuation, just as ALL types are capable of becoming “stuck” in a particular cognitive process. I’ve seen a few INTJs who become entrenched in their Te because it’s expected of them in their job, and I’ve seen ESTJs who embrace their Fe and Ni later in life, despite those processes being in their “shadow” and difficult to access.
The Socionics relationship chart shows what might be true if the people concerned decide to stay in the “comfort zone” of their two most-preferred processes, but this rarely happens. Humans are living, growing entities.