Love and Relationships in the Context of the Emotivism-Constructivism Trait
The topic of love and relationships is a significant concern for many individuals and professionals alike. It's no secret that people often turn to socionics in search of tools to create harmonious relationships.
At first glance, these topics are often linked to the logic-ethics dichotomy. Ethicals are emotional and rely on feelings, while logicals are rational and rely on analysis. This applies to love and relationships as well.
The dichotomy of sensing-intuition also offers insights. Sensors tend to experience love through physical touch and a sense of ownership, while for intuitives, love arrives at the right time.
Dive into our interactive tool and see the magic unfold. Explore the tool!
But that's not all. A deeper analysis of the structure of Model A reveals new perspectives on love and relationships in the context of the emotivism-constructivism trait.
This article is based on observations from a socionics meeting dedicated to the "emotivism-constructivism" trait, where the topics of love and relationships naturally emerged. The experts and audience clearly divided their positions on these topics according to the trait under discussion.
Definitions and Key Concepts
For the purposes of this article, "love" is understood as the emotional-sensory reaction people have towards each other, largely rooted in physiological factors like hormones, pheromones, and the instinct to procreate.
"Relationships" refer to a stable connection that a person chooses and maintains at a certain distance.
Love can be the reason for a relationship, or it might not be. However, when people seek to establish close, harmonious relationships, they generally mean a connection that carries a mutually pleasant emotional background.
Emotivists and Constructivists
Emotivists are types with logical aspects in the inert block of Model A and ethical aspects in the contact block of Model A. These are the irrational ethicals and rational logicals.
Constructivists are the opposite: irrational logicals and rational ethicals.
The inert block (functions 1, 4, 6, and 7) is characterized by the formation of beliefs and accumulation of experience, which become defining life stances, serving as the foundation for one's life scenarios. People tend to be inert and closed in these stances, showing little inclination to discuss or change them.
The contact block (functions 2, 3, 5, and 8) consists of functions through which a person constantly interacts with the external environment, is attuned to the transit of information in these aspects, and even initiates this transit. They easily embrace new experiences, try on new beliefs, and just as easily let them go. Beliefs related to the contact block functions do not hold deep, defining significance for the individual.
The Role of Love in Emotivism and Constructivism
The psychological and psychotherapeutic implications of the "emotivism-constructivism" trait were explored in the article "Psychological and Psychotherapeutic Aspects of the Emotivism-Constructivism Trait."
Love, as an emotional experience with a hormonal basis, happens to everyone, regardless of their type.
In the structure of aspects, love as an emotion falls under ethics. You might hear naive assumptions from beginners that ethicals are capable of love, while logicals are not, or that ethicals experience more intense emotions than logicals. Such assumptions don't align with socionics and are not supported by experience.
The dimensionality of the function that processes ethical aspects shows the depth and scale of perception, processing, and output of ethical information, not the phenomenon of experiencing emotions itself. In other words, people experience emotions because they are human and have a limbic system. However, how well they understand their own and others' emotions depends on their type.
Returning to the "emotivism-constructivism" trait, it's important to note that emotional experiences for emotivists fall into the contact block, while for constructivists, they fall into the inert block of Model A.
This leads to an intriguing angle of analysis.
For an emotivist, love as an emotion is a transient experience that is easy to enter and exit, which gets swept up in the flow of constantly arriving new experiences and can be washed away by that flow.
For an emotivist, emotional experience is pleasant but variable. Emotivists know that feelings aren't eternal, passion fades quickly, and time heals and dulls emotions. Therefore, love as an emotion is a pleasant adventure, but nothing more. It's certainly not a reason to establish a relationship, as something more is needed.
For a constructivist, emotional experience touches on fundamental aspects. It’s deep and lasting. Constructivists tend to get stuck in their emotions, making love as an emotion a life-defining experience.
Constructivists know that time doesn't heal, logical analysis doesn't help much, and feelings, no matter what they are, retain their intensity for a long time.
Thus, for constructivists, love as an emotion is a strong argument in favor of starting a relationship.
Comparing Emotivists and Constructivists in Relationships
In summary, emotivists are more open to emotional experiences, more prone to falling in love, but less stable in their feelings. Constructivists get stuck in their emotions, are stable, and aren't inclined to transit emotions.
For emotivists, the decision to enter a relationship requires something more reliable and stable than an emotional argument. For emotivists, this "something" lies in the realm of beliefs, concepts, and life views within the context of logic, as logic falls into the inert block of their Model A.
For an emotivist, it's crucial that their partner shares similar views on most major life issues. The partner's level of development, education, intellect, worldview, value system, ideas about good and evil, rights and obligations, and much more related to rational stances and concepts are all essential.
If there is logical agreement and a positive emotional reaction to the partner, that's a significant argument in favor of starting a close, serious relationship.
If there is an emotional reaction but no logical agreement, emotivists will immediately see the situation as a short-lived adventure. If, during the process of getting closer, it becomes clear that the partner's principles contradict those of the emotivist, it signals the beginning of the end. The option to reconsider principles is practically nonexistent.
This context gives new meaning to the numerous jokes in American culture about the animosity between Democrats and Republicans, to the point where marriages between them seem impossible. The TIM of America is LIE, an emotivist. Differences in political views can indeed be critical for emotivists.
A different picture emerges with constructivists. When they have a strong emotional response to a partner, constructivists are more tolerant of differences in principles. In their structure (Model A), all concepts are transient and do not touch the core of personality. They can compromise, overlook certain things, and in the end, avoid discussing highly confrontational topics. And if a heated logical debate arises, it isn't a reason to become disillusioned with the partner (something emotivists would disagree with).
Of course, we’re not talking about extremes. A constructivist might encounter complete opposition on all fronts, making any close relationship impossible, but this doesn’t necessarily cancel out their emotional response to the person.
Complementary Dichotomy: Emotivism and Constructivism
"Emotivism-constructivism" is a complementary dichotomy.
In a dual pair, the constructivist adjusts to the key concepts and principles of their partner, especially if they are emotionally involved with them. The emotivist, through their charm, provokes and initiates an emotional response from the constructivist.
Connections between two emotivists often ignite brightly and intensely, with both trying to captivate each other, but the potential for a relationship becomes clearer when their principles clash. If there's disagreement, neither is willing to compromise, the intensity quickly fades, and the relationship dissolves.
Connections between two constructivists form when there is a mutual emotional response, and they find areas of agreement in principles and worldview that become the focus of their communication. They simply avoid contentious topics.
Interestingly, predicting the outcome of a relationship from an emotivist’s perspective is easier because it lies in the realm of rationality. However, a constructivist’s emotional response is a subjective reality that's harder to predict.
It’s also noteworthy that for rationals, the rational and emotional nature of relationships aligns with the logic-ethics dichotomy. But for irrationals, ethicals tend to show a more rational approach, while logicals are more emotional.
Similarly, the "tactics-strategy" trait, linked to the distribution of sensing and intuition aspects in the inert and contact blocks of Model A, also affects the nature of relationships in a pair. But that's a topic for another article.
Conclusion
The insights into love and relationships discussed in this article are extremely useful for self-analysis, evaluating relationship situations, and finding ways to harmonize interactions between partners.
For analyzing the prospects of specific intertype relationships.
The information presented can be exceptionally valuable for professionals in the field of family counseling, as it offers a new perspective on understanding the norms and structure of relationships, as well as the causes of conflicts.