Merit to the MB Relationship Matrix?

[pottersjar]

I found these two pages to be significant. Both have the same assessment of the INTJ relationship dynamics, suggesting that the most natural companion for the INTJ is the INFJ. It makes other interesting correlations. It makes sense to me, and I think it meets with my experience.

But I am curious what others think.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[ElstonGunn]

Jungian type is such a small factor in a person's personality. I wouldn't suggest using it to determine much in regard to the likelihood of success in a relationship. The definitions of the terms are so vague, I don't think that it can be proven or disproven. Add to that individual preferences and standards, and it really doesn't mean much. One person's excitement is another person's drama. One's stability is another's boredom.

[Josh]

I did one of those compatibility test one time and got INTJ as my ideal mate. It's just what i'm attracted to. One thing i do know is i need an introverted thinker, though its such a small portion of the female population that finding one who is also physically attractive is damn near impossible, so i can't be too picky.

[normanajn]

There is actually a fair amount of value from the standard Jung/MBTI matrix.

The most important item to note is the N/S divide. Essentially N's and S's can have meaningful relationship, but it's not as easy as for N/N or S/S pairings.

Outside of that the relationships are fairly straight forward. Just stay away from S's and remember that pairing across the T/F or I/E boundaries can be rewarding as it brings diversity. The J/P split is almost irrelevant to relationships but can help to either give commonality in reaction styles, or provide minor diversity (the difference between an INTJ and an INTP is mainly in their management of information, rather than in their real interpretation of it)

[ElstonGunn]

[...] remember that pairing across the T/F or I/E boundaries can be rewarding as it brings diversity. The J/P split is almost irrelevant to relationships [...]

From what I can tell (which is entirely subjective, of course), I/E , T/F, and J/P all seem like they could gum up a relationship pretty bad. In my case, an adamant extravert who always wanted to be "doing something" would be the death of me (cause of death being either exhaustion or murder/suicide). With an strong perceiver, I'd be annoyed by the inability to make a decision. A strong feeler is likely to see me as a cold and unavailable bastard.

But these are based on theoretical caricatures, and those don't often apply in reality, at least not in such a simple way. Having a strong preference isn't necessarily bad, but inflexibility can lead to a lot of frustration. Any of the splits could cause problems in a relationship if one person is convinced that his or her Thinking or Introversion is the right way to do things.

[SShack]

I think one of things to be wary of with this matrix is that each type responds differently to those who fit these different roles.

INTJ is considered a "contrast" to me, but as an ENTP, I'm drawn to different types of thought patterns and arguments, so that's appealing. However, other types might be inclined to react differently to a person in that role.

[OneHertz]

Socionics has a similar chart. They list "Novelty" as the optimal relationship.

[curiousjane]

Here's a question related to the topic: what on earth do INFPs and INTJs have as companions that produces the so-called "adviser" role?

This has been bugging me for quite some time. I don't get it. We're supposed to have strengths that complement each other, and we're supposed to be teachers to each other, and according to several sites, either one or the other is the beneficiary/benefactor, with the benefits being one sided.

I'm so confused.

[mind_wander]

Here's a question related to the topic: what on earth do INFPs and INTJs have as companions that produces the so-called "adviser" role?

This has been bugging me for quite some time. I don't get it. We're supposed to have strengths that complement each other, and we're supposed to be teachers to each other, and according to several sites, either one or the other is the beneficiary/benefactor, with the benefits being one sided.

I'm so confused.

When I read this too, I thought my eye's went blind. But, if I am correct about this, when an INTJ losts its connection with something. The INFP helps the INTJ find their original center once again with a nicer feel to it.

[Udog]

Jane, where did you get the part about the beneficiary / benefactor and the one-sidedness?

I can answer your question, but I'd like to hear more about this aspect before going into it.

[patata]

Here's a question related to the topic: what on earth do INFPs and INTJs have as companions that produces the so-called "adviser" role?

This has been bugging me for quite some time. I don't get it. We're supposed to have strengths that complement each other, and we're supposed to be teachers to each other, and according to several sites, either one or the other is the beneficiary/benefactor, with the benefits being one sided.

I'm so confused.

Advisor: each has an area of insight that the other lacks

INFPs advise INTJs using their primary process (Fi), which, according to beebe's archetypes, is the INTJs "Child" process.
In the same way, INTJs advise INFPs using their auxiliary process (Te), which is the INFPs "Inferior" process.
They both communicate using N (Ne/Ni), making things easier for both of them. It would be harder for an ISFP to explain "feeling" things to an INTJ because of the S/N barrier.

[OneHertz]

Jane, where did you get the part about the beneficiary / benefactor and the one-sidedness?

Socionics. I would have to look it up on a cheat sheet in one of my books but from what I remember I think it is the INTJ that benefits from the INFP/INTJ relationship and the INFP that just "thinks" they are happy.

[Udog]

Oh, if we throw Socionics into the mix everything gets cluttered up. In Socionics, the INFp leads with Ni and follows with Fe... in other words, a MBTI INFJ. I don't think you can use the socionics "Benefactor" role to describe MBTI INFP/INTJ relationships.

[curiousjane]

Jane, where did you get the part about the beneficiary / benefactor and the one-sidedness?

I can answer your question, but I'd like to hear more about this aspect before going into it.

Yes, it was from the Socionics. But the reason I thought of it was from the original matrix link from the OP. It uses slightly different terms for the same message. And I was aware of the Socionics/MBTI differences (i.e., in order to get the same result, you have to "translate" the MBTI types of INTJ/INFP to INTp and INFj).

From To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Relations of Benefit
INTp is 'Benefactor'
INFj is 'Beneficiary'

And the aggravating "relationship" explanation:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

One partner, called the Benefactor, is always in a more favourable position in respect to the other partner who is known as Beneficiary.

The Beneficiary thinks of the Benefactor as an interesting and meaningful person, usually over-evaluating them in the beginning. The Beneficiary can be impressed and delighted by their partner's behaviour, manners, thoughts and their ability to easily deal with things that the Beneficiary conceives as complicated. When partners are together, the Beneficiary involuntarily starts to ingratiate themselves with the Benefactor, trying to please them without any obvious reason. In the worst cases this starts from little things and then becomes bigger until the Beneficiary realises the foolishness of their situation.

The Beneficiary can see the weakness of the Benefactor, wishing to help their partner to strengthen themselves. Because the strongest point of the Beneficiary is the weak and unconscious point of the Benefactor, the Beneficiary is convinced that they are able to help. However, when the Beneficiary tries to help, the Benefactor usually refuses the help without any good explanation. The Beneficiary usually listens to every word the Benefactor says but there is no feedback, the Benefactor can not hear the Beneficiary. This may be sometimes unpleasant and even irritating for the Beneficiary.

The Benefactor accepts the Beneficiary as somebody who is lower in rank or social position and often undervalues them in the beginning.


In other words, the Socionics INTp looks fondly, if somewhat condescendingly, upon the INFj as a lesser person they get along with, as long as that person listens to their advice?

I just don't like that, and don't think it is true. Which is why the very similar MBTI matrix presented, using the relationship term of "advisor" irritated me just a little bit.

Silly, really. I know.

[punkyplatypus]

The girls I've been attracted to have been an ESFJ (self-typed) and an ENFJ (actually tested). I can see how an INFJ could be attractive, but there is more to relationship compatibility than just MB type (like appearance, values, general interests, etc). I think the MB typing explains more on how we get along than the why we get along.

[Gloed]

In other words, the Socionics INTp looks fondly, if somewhat condescendingly, upon the INFj as a lesser person they get along with, as long as that person listens to their advice?

I just don't like that, and don't think it is true. Which is why the very similar MBTI matrix presented, using the relationship term of "advisor" irritated me just a little bit.

Silly, really. I know.


i asked an infp (mbti) for advice concerning the best way to give emotional support to a friend of mine. she walked away to get a cup of coffee. she literally stood up from her chair and walked away... "i'm going to get a cup of coffee". um... okay. i was still there when she came back. i'm not sure if that's what she expected. ;) anyway, this may be because i did not know her well enough at the time and she felt uncomfortable for this reason, but it also makes me wonder, do you actually want to give advice or do you consider this as imposing your views on someone and are therefore reluctant to do so ?

as an aside, this walking away thing without giving a verbal response whatsoever when you feel uncomfortable seems rather typical for infps. is it ?

edit to add : it is not because a person does not listen closely to what another person has to say that they are not learning by observing how that person acts. being lead by example..

[OneHertz]

yep I checked my published socionics books now that I am home and INTJ(LII) basically "uses" INFP (IEI)

Here is what it says for the relationship when looking at the INFP side:

The communication is always a little bit under pressure, but you(INFP) are drawn to you partner(INTJ) because you see in them the person who can make your plans real. You (INFPs) try to change ("tune") yourself to communicate with your partner(INTJ) in order to gain his trust. This only happens (the trust is gained) when you (INFP) manage to catch your partner (INTJ) off guard, when he (INTJ) is overwhelmed with other things, or extremely relaxed and has a poor control over himself. When he (INTJ) comes to his senses again he realizes that there is something wrong and backs away. You (INFP), in turn, try harder to change yourself and be useful to the INTJ again to gain back his trust.

Sorry about the poor language; I had to translate word for word from Russian and the language structures are a bit different.

This is in a published book and they make the translation from MBTI to socionics right in the book as well so this IS indeed talking about the types in question. It makes perfect sense as well.

P.S. if someone wants a description similar to the above for other relationships then PM me and I might just make a new thread as I think a good deal of you would find it interesting.

[patata]

Yes, it was from the Socionics. But the reason I thought of it was from the original matrix link from the OP. It uses slightly different terms for the same message. And I was aware of the Socionics/MBTI differences (i.e., in order to get the same result, you have to "translate" the MBTI types of INTJ/INFP to INTp and INFj).

From To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


And the aggravating "relationship" explanation:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



In other words, the Socionics INTp looks fondly, if somewhat condescendingly, upon the INFj as a lesser person they get along with, as long as that person listens to their advice?

I just don't like that, and don't think it is true. Which is why the very similar MBTI matrix presented, using the relationship term of "advisor" irritated me just a little bit.

Silly, really. I know.

Neither INTp nor INTj of Socionics match with MBTI's INTJ. Comparing them is futile, trust me.

Was my previous post useful to you?

[OneHertz]

Neither INTp nor INTj of Socionics match with MBTI's INTJ. Comparing them is futile, trust me.

Was my previous post useful to you?

Converts just fine, although not all INTJs are LIIs (majority is), some may be ILI. Might be interesting for you to take a look here:

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[curiousjane]

Sorry, pottersjar, it looks like I may have accidentally derailed your original post. Would any INFJs like to contribute their thoughts?

[patata]

Converts just fine, although not all INTJs are LIIs (majority is), some may be ILI. Might be interesting for you to take a look here:

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Been there, done that.
Process order isn't the same in MBTI/Socionics, so, like I said before, comparison is futile.
NiTeSiFe (Socionic's INTp)
is NOT equal to
NiTeFiSe (MBTI's INTJ)

Yes, they share the primary and auxiliary processes, but that's it. The third/fourth processes matter too.
The same happens with INTj/INTP.

curiousjane: Why are you ignoring me?

[OneHertz]

Been there, done that.
Process order isn't the same in MBTI/Socionics, so, like I said before, comparison is futile.
NiTeSiFe (Socionic's INTp)
is NOT equal to
NiTeFiSe (MBTI's INTJ)

Yes, they share the primary and auxiliary processes, but that's it. The third/fourth processes matter too.
The same happens with INTj/INTP.

They don't have to be the same to correspond. If you are INTJ by MBTI you are not going to suddenly be ENFp by socionics. Everyone has a type and if yours is INTJ you are going to fall under INTp or INTj because none of the other socionics descriptions correspond at all.

[patata]

They don't have to be the same to correspond. If you are INTJ by MBTI you are not going to suddenly be ENFp by socionics. Everyone has a type and if yours is INTJ you are going to fall under INTp or INTj because none of the other socionics descriptions correspond at all.
So, basically, you are saying that because INTj/INTp are the "most fitting" types for INTJ in Socionics, you force it into that category, even if it doesn't fit perfectly?
If there isn't a Socionics equivalent for the MBTI's INTJ, why bother with comparisons?

[OneHertz]

I don't see your argument at all. You have an MBTI type. You have a socionics type. The systems are similar with the difference over the last letter. If you are INTJ in MBTI you will be INTj or INTp. Anything else would be illogical or you are not INTJ to begin with.

[curiousjane]

curiousjane: Why are you ignoring me?

I'm not. Sorry, I'm trying to let the thread go back to its original focus; but yes, your posts were helpful. Thank you.

[Udog]

To the OP, I find the links to be fairly accurate. I'd love to read a more detailed analysis, though, as they are too vague for my liking.

I mean, the INFP / INTJ relationship is an 'advisory' role. The thing is, I find that to be true with many of my friendships, even to non-INTJ types. I need more depth.

[patata]

I don't see your argument at all. You have an MBTI type. You have a socionics type. The systems are similar with the difference over the last letter. If you are INTJ in MBTI you will be INTj or INTp. Anything else would be illogical or you are not INTJ to begin with.
The systems ARE NOT similar, that's the point.

Like I said before:
Process order isn't the same in MBTI/Socionics
NiTeSiFe (Socionic's INTp)
is NOT equal to
NiTeFiSe (MBTI's INTJ)
The same happens with
TiNeFiSe (Socionic's INTj)

If Socionics handles the process order in a different way than MBTI, more reasons to avoid treating them as equals.

There's more to type than "four letters", read about the eight processes here:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[OneHertz]

The processes do not mean the same things in both theories so idk why you keep bringing up the irrelevant orders of them over and over again. Se in MBTI is NOT Se in socionics for example so your comparison is worthless.

INTJ is Introverted Intuitive and Logical, do you agree? Ok. The only socionics types that fit that are INTj (Logical Intuitive Introvert) and INTp (Intuitive Logical Introvert). Name me another one that even REMOTELY fits INTJ from MBTI before talking again.

And who the hell is treating them as equals??? Like I said before, you have an MBTI type and you have a socionics type.

[patata]

The processes do not mean the same things in both theories so idk why you keep bringing up the irrelevant orders of them over and over again. Se in MBTI is NOT Se in socionics for example so your comparison is worthless.
What is the meaning of Se in socionics, then? I would appreciate it if you give me Socionic's definition of Si too, so I can compare what is being a "Sensor" in both systems.

INTJ is Introverted Intuitive and Logical, do you agree? Ok. The only socionics types that fit that are INTj (Logical Intuitive Introvert) and INTp (Intuitive Logical Introvert). Name me another one that even REMOTELY fits INTJ from MBTI before talking again.
There isn't another type that fits better than INTp/INTj with INTJ. The problem, like I already stated before is that even with INTp and INTj being SIMILAR to INTJ, they do not fit perfectly.

And who the hell is treating them as equals??? Like I said before, you have an MBTI type and you have a socionics type.
So you agree with me in that you can't compare them?


This is my final post regarding this issue in this thread, it has been derailed enough. I will only continue by PM, if you want to.