I've been reading about the emotional attitudes and I know it's based on vultology so in essence it has to do with how a person expresses themselves and such. I know I am Seelie and definitely relate to it, being a highly sensitive and emotionally affected person, but I definitely have a side to me that is more Disagreeable and Unseelie i.e. I express disagreeableness and anger in many cases towards my brother, but I wouldn't show that same anger to someone in public unless I was pushed to the edge.
I just read some quotes by Amy Lee who is NeFi I--- Unseelie where she said she is deeply emotional and her music shows how she experiences sorrow. Yet she is an Unseelie type, which is categorizes as being blunt, assertive and not as emotionally sensitive as Seelie types are. Are Unseelie types still going to experience intense emotions? Or is the experience of emotions a different concept than an emotional attitude? Is it more like a spectrum? I'm a little confused.
I also feel like when it comes to Adaptive and Directive I wonder how a Directive type would experience emotions compared to an Adaptive type. If I look at Alanis Morissette, she seems to describe herself as feeling things very deeply when she isn't on medication (at least that is one of her lyrics from Reasons Why I Drink). Yet she is a Directive type, and in her earlier work You Oughtta Know she expresses that vindictiveness and anger very much.
I guess my question is, how do Disagreeable (Unseelie/Directive) types experience emotions in comparison to Agreeable types and can a person really apply this metric to every single individual, or is there variation as well with the development levels?
So for this question-- the model's understanding of emotional attitude has broadened a little now, to recognize that people can be high in both modalities or low in both. In these cases, if a person needs to be given a designation, it's the one that is highest, but both can be very strong in a person and they can switch between the modalities just like a person might switch between Ji and Pe modulation, based on contextual processing. In other words, we're often not just one or the other, but both at different times and moments.
That said, it remains a vultological category worth tracking because we can clearly notice when a person is in one of these modalities or the other, and we can quantify that--- even if it's not an exclusive attitude we're always in. And it still seems to be true that a general tendency to be more of one than the other (vultologically), matches a general psychological attitude.
As for how a dominant attitude may experience the opposite attitude, I would frame it something like this:
Edit: I'm actually not very happy with this articulation.. I think it's not subtle enough, and I can think of exceptions, but alas..
In general, each attitude resorts to the other attitude in select circumstances, while remaining within a primary modus operandi.
I hope that makes sense! 🙂
Thank you so much for your reply. Ah yes I see what you mean by having a default state and being selective with the opposite attitude. I am definitely mostly Agreeable myself, but definitely have those moments where I have to force myself to be more assertive and defend myself.
I think it is like an axis, where one leans more heavily towards one side than the other, but then there are moments when a person temporarily swings to the other side in moments of either stress (having to defend oneself) or relief (letting your guard down).