Self-destructive ~ Sakinorva Databank

The Sakinorva Databank

Self-destructive

in Most Likelies

Self-destructive ~ Sakinorva Databank

Self-destructive

Most Likelies

e

i

n

s

f

t

p

j

function

ennea

variant

socio

psyche

INFP 1

8w7 3

4w5 1

4w3 1

sx/so 3

sx/sp 1

sp/so 1

IEI 1

EFVL 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1

h

e

x

a

c

o

total votes 26

5

1

5

5

4

1

1

Click to toggle markup guide.

bold	bold
italic	italic
hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"	[hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"](https://sakinorva.net/library/contextualizing_functions)
	(i){https://i.imgur.com/g0oL9CB.png}

You may not modify this entry's picture.

	Taco110 Ni-Se you'll see ST 2021/03/07 (Sun) 20:02:29 #8675
	In response to post #8664. What the fuck? I didn’t say that sx/so was solely 1-on-1 in its own right. If that’s your takeaway from this then you’re either straw-manning my position or you didn’t understand my argument in full. The 1-on-1 thing is only one of many facets for what fits sx as sx can and often does correlate to things like attraction, indulgence, sex, lust, obsession, likes and dislikes etc. yada yada you get the point. The point here is attraction, whether it be to people or things, hence my original comment. Looking at it as solely a 1-on-1 thing in its own right would absolutely be archaic and retarded, but that’s not what I did. I just focused on one component of it in particular. Also, no shit lmao. Did you not read the part where I said: “Sx is about merging and completely losing oneself to whatever is going on in a more intense way. They seek intensity, especially sx/so.” This clearly fits Freud’s Id theory about indulgence, instant gratification and whatnot. You just repeated my argument and re-packaged it into other terms.

Editing post #8675 by Taco110 What the fuck? I didn’t say that sx/so was solely 1-on-1 in its own right. If that’s your takeaway from this then you’re either straw-manning my position or you didn’t understand my argument in full. The 1-on-1 thing is only one of many facets for what fits sx as sx can and often does correlate to things like attraction, indulgence, sex, lust, obsession, likes and dislikes etc. yada yada you get the point. The point here is attraction, whether it be to people or things, hence my original comment. Looking at it as solely a 1-on-1 thing in its own right would absolutely be archaic and retarded, but that’s not what I did. I just focused on one component of it in particular. Also, no shit lmao. Did you not read the part where I said: “Sx is about merging and completely losing oneself to whatever is going on in a more intense way. They seek intensity, especially sx/so.” This clearly fits Freud’s Id theory about indulgence, instant gratification and whatnot. You just repeated my argument and re-packaged it into other terms.<br>
Replying to post #8675 by Taco110

	Jacobus INFJ 4w5 EIE 2021/03/05 (Fri) 14:01:34 #8673
	In response to post #8671. My reasoning behind claiming that impulsivity correlates with impulsivity is that highly S individuals are more likely to "live in the moment" and not give serious consideration towards potential consequences. That this focus on the present is not part of the strictest definitions of sensation doesn't mean it's not a common result.

Editing post #8673 by Jacobus My reasoning behind claiming that impulsivity correlates with impulsivity is that highly S individuals are more likely to "live in the moment" and not give serious consideration towards potential consequences. That this focus on the present is not part of the strictest definitions of sensation doesn't mean it's not a common result.
Replying to post #8673 by Jacobus

	Jacobus INFJ 4w5 EIE 2021/03/03 (Wed) 18:33:22 #8668
	The question should really be why all the votes in letters and functions are for INFP. I get that INFP fours like to pose as starving artists and troubled martyrs and whatever, but that's far from the most likely type for someone that's actually self-destructive. Self-destruction is tied to impulsivity, and impulsivity correlates with extraversion and sensation.

Editing post #8668 by Jacobus The question should really be why all the votes in letters and functions are for INFP. I get that INFP fours like to pose as starving artists and troubled martyrs and whatever, but that's far from the most likely type for someone that's actually self-destructive. Self-destruction is tied to impulsivity, and impulsivity correlates with extraversion and sensation.
Replying to post #8668 by Jacobus

	LadyX intp 5 2021/02/27 (Sat) 23:13:39 #8662
	(fixing a typo) Just to clarify my view of this: Self-forgetting is very different from Self-destruction. Yes, the so/sx and sx/so people of the world forget to bring snacks and water bottles when they leave home. But they are less likely to perform self-sabotage than sp/so or sp/sx people. Why? Because sp-primary people are so self-focused that not only do they persistently worry about their own survival, but when in unhealthy mental condition they visit the opposite polarity of Self-preservation, which is Self-destruction, and they take it into their own hands to hurt themselves.

Editing post #8662 by LadyX (fixing a typo)<br>Just to clarify my view of this: Self-forgetting is very different from Self-destruction.<br>Yes, the so/sx and sx/so people of the world forget to bring snacks and water bottles when they leave home. But they are less likely to perform self-sabotage than sp/so or sp/sx people. Why? Because sp-primary people are so self-focused that not only do they persistently worry about their own survival, but when in unhealthy mental condition they visit the opposite polarity of Self-preservation, which is Self-destruction, and they take it into their own hands to hurt themselves.
Replying to post #8662 by LadyX

	LadyX intp 5 2021/02/27 (Sat) 23:06:38 #8661
	Just to clarify my view of this: Self-forgetting is very different from Self-destruction. Yes, the so/sx and sx/so people of the world forget to bring snacks and water bottles when they leave home. But they are less likely to perform self-sabotage that sp/so or sp/sx people. Why? Because sp-primary people are so self-focused that not only do they persistently worry about their own survival, but when in unhealthy mental condition they visit the opposite polarity of Self-preservation, which is Self-destruction, and they take it into their own hands to hurt themselves.

Editing post #8661 by LadyX Just to clarify my view of this: Self-forgetting is very different from Self-destruction.<br>Yes, the so/sx and sx/so people of the world forget to bring snacks and water bottles when they leave home. But they are less likely to perform self-sabotage that sp/so or sp/sx people. Why? Because sp-primary people are so self-focused that not only do they persistently worry about their own survival, but when in unhealthy mental condition they visit the opposite polarity of Self-preservation, which is Self-destruction, and they take it into their own hands to hurt themselves.
Replying to post #8661 by LadyX

	Taco110 Ni-Se you'll see ST 2021/02/26 (Fri) 09:57:57 #8660
	In response to post #8659. Both sx/so and so/sx have high capacity to be selfless because of mutual neglected sp. What the fuck are you on about? One-on-one selflessness fits sx/so and group selflessness fits so/sx better. The more selfless you are, the higher the chance for you to lose control of boundaries and hurt yourself or get hurt in a hypothetical situation. Thus, high potential for self-destruction or destruction from others. That's reality. Does it ever dawn on you that maybe, just maybe that insecurity and mistrust of relationships would make them even less self-destructive? By your own logic it should. Also, experiences are not always the be-all, end-all.

Editing post #8660 by Taco110 Both sx/so and so/sx have high capacity to be selfless because of mutual neglected sp. What the fuck are you on about? One-on-one selflessness fits sx/so and group selflessness fits so/sx better. The more selfless you are, the higher the chance for you to lose control of boundaries and hurt yourself or get hurt in a hypothetical situation. Thus, high potential for self-destruction or destruction from others. That's reality. Does it ever dawn on you that maybe, just maybe that insecurity and mistrust of relationships would make them even less self-destructive? By your own logic it should. Also, experiences are not always the be-all, end-all.
Replying to post #8660 by Taco110

	LadyX intp 5 2021/02/26 (Fri) 01:42:31 #8659
	Statistically, the common stackings are sp/so, so/sx and sx/sp. As an aside, the sx/so stacking is uncommon and is found in the "inspiration" roles where intimate relationships abound - I don't really see such people being self-destructive, but perhaps self-forgetting as they serve others as a priority. I would hypothesize that the so/sx stacking would be least self-destructive since it produces so many human connections and validations. An sp-first has a level of insecurity and mistrust of relationships that is combated by prioritizing individual survival. But that very set of priorities means that survival is on their mind persistently and their struggle with trying to survive has a flip side of giving up and trying to not survive, becoming a martyr. Imagine as an attentional focal point, a "slider" between "survive" (when emotionally healthy) and "don't survive" (when emotionally unhealthy). I am basing this analysis on how I saw things play out for several people that I knew personally.

Editing post #8659 by LadyX Statistically, the common stackings are sp/so, so/sx and sx/sp. As an aside, the sx/so stacking is uncommon and is found in the "inspiration" roles where intimate relationships abound - I don't really see such people being self-destructive, but perhaps self-forgetting as they serve others as a priority. I would hypothesize that the so/sx stacking would be least self-destructive since it produces so many human connections and validations. An sp-first has a level of insecurity and mistrust of relationships that is combated by prioritizing individual survival. But that very set of priorities means that survival is on their mind persistently and their struggle with trying to survive has a flip side of giving up and trying to not survive, becoming a martyr. Imagine as an attentional focal point, a "slider" between "survive" (when emotionally healthy) and "don't survive" (when emotionally unhealthy). I am basing this analysis on how I saw things play out for several people that I knew personally.
Replying to post #8659 by LadyX

	Taco110 Ni-Se you'll see ST 2021/02/26 (Fri) 00:18:46 #8658
	In response to post #8657. Variants are the area that I know least about in typology alongside psychosophy, but with my limited knowledge its pretty clear to me that sp-last is the most fitting for this entry. Any self preservation-last stacking in theory could work, but the sexual variant is about the intensity of the experience, which is why I choose it over so/sx. So/sx is slightly more stable because they are primarily group-oriented and care what other people think of them; they're people-pleasing. Sx is about merging and completely losing oneself to whatever is going on in a more intense way. They seek intensity, especially sx/so. Sx/sp can pump the brakes in a way that sx/so can't because of secondary sp. Also, side note, it is about sex, unlike what the fucktards on the Christian websites have to say about it. It's literally called the sexual variant for a reason. Your reasoning for sp-first and sx-first fits sp/so and sx/sp better than sp/sx and sx/so respectively, moreso than purely sp-first and sx-first.

Editing post #8658 by Taco110 Variants are the area that I know least about in typology alongside psychosophy, but with my limited knowledge its pretty clear to me that sp-last is the most fitting for this entry. Any self preservation-last stacking in theory could work, but the sexual variant is about the intensity of the experience, which is why I choose it over so/sx. So/sx is slightly more stable because they are primarily group-oriented and care what other people think of them; they're people-pleasing. Sx is about merging and completely losing oneself to whatever is going on in a more intense way. They seek intensity, especially sx/so. Sx/sp can pump the brakes in a way that sx/so can't because of secondary sp. Also, side note, it is about sex, unlike what the fucktards on the Christian websites have to say about it. It's literally called the sexual variant for a reason. Your reasoning for sp-first and sx-first fits sp/so and sx/sp better than sp/sx and sx/so respectively, moreso than purely sp-first and sx-first.
Replying to post #8658 by Taco110

	LadyX intp 5 2021/02/25 (Thu) 23:56:13 #8657
	I based this instinct vote on being detached from the passion for living and for intimate exchange of sx. The people I know who self-destructed were low on use of the sx bias. Yes, sp is about individuation, which can be about keeping distance, then when they periodically try to reference to the group they can feel insufficient, thus creating a sense of poor self-esteem. The sx-first people are less concerned with group-referencing and end up with excessive self-esteem. What is the basis for your sx-first vote for this? A form of self-destruction that is driven by loss of a strong connection to an object of passion?

Editing post #8657 by LadyX I based this instinct vote on being detached from the passion for living and for intimate exchange of sx. The people I know who self-destructed were low on use of the sx bias. Yes, sp is about individuation, which can be about keeping distance, then when they periodically try to reference to the group they can feel insufficient, thus creating a sense of poor self-esteem. The sx-first people are less concerned with group-referencing and end up with excessive self-esteem. What is the basis for your sx-first vote for this? A form of self-destruction that is driven by loss of a strong connection to an object of passion?
Replying to post #8657 by LadyX

date	username	vote
21/03/05 14:16	Jacobus	ESP
20/01/27 15:36	Fuzzy	INFP
21/03/07 19:55	Taco110	ESFP
19/01/20 06:06	LadyX	INFP
19/01/15 06:35	tch	INFP

date	username	vote
20/01/27 15:36	Fuzzy	INFP

date	username	vote
21/03/03 15:05	Tman	8w7
19/01/21 04:39	Taco110	4w3
19/01/20 21:23	Diobono	8w7
19/01/20 13:39	Teru Mikami	8w7
19/01/20 06:06	LadyX	4w5

date	username	vote
21/03/03 15:05	Tman	sx/sp
21/03/03 07:31	ally	sx/so
19/01/21 04:39	Taco110	sx/so
19/01/21 04:21	Teru Mikami	sx/so
19/01/20 06:06	LadyX	sp/so

date	username	vote
21/03/11 14:35	Tman	846
19/01/21 04:52	Taco110	468
19/01/21 04:21	Teru Mikami	826
19/01/20 06:07	LadyX	458

date	username	vote
20/01/27 15:36	Fuzzy	IEI

date	username	vote
21/02/26 11:43	Jacobus	EFVL