# Sternberg Love Triangle



## nonnaci (Sep 25, 2011)

So you NFs are the masters of love/relationships and may be familiar with Sternberg's Triangle. I'm curious as to how legit is the theory in application. i.e. how well can you represent your own relationships along these axes of intimacy, passion, and commitment? And do you notice any patterns (as NFs) amongst your successful or unsuccessful ones?

share!


----------



## strawberryLola (Sep 19, 2010)

It's legit for me. Part of me wishes it was a quadrangle like it needs a fourth aspect to it.

In retrospect, my relationship that had all 3 aspects was the longest lasting one and personally most fulfilling. It happened to be with another ENFP. I don't think this would apply to all ENFPs that I meet or any NFs for that matter.

Sometimes, you run into relationship where there isn't really much clout to it, and learning about how we connect has really helped me to understand where the areas of strengths and weaknesses are. 

All relationships require work to some degree. It's just that some are so incompatible that it makes Sternberg's triangle look like a really warped up one!


----------



## nonnaci (Sep 25, 2011)

strawberryLola said:


> It's legit for me. Part of me wishes it was a quadrangle like it needs a fourth aspect to it.


Interesting, so how would you describe this fourth dimension? The intangibles?


----------



## stayawake (Dec 21, 2011)

I would only say that as Limerence diminishes, for me, true intimacy grows because I begin to see the person for who they really are... and let myself be seen as who I really am too. So I would say I have all those three aspects with my husband of 10 years still, but passion just looks different than it did at the beginning... it has a lot to do with being totally unafraid and safe and at ease and wanting more of that person in your world rather than less. Passion is a strange word... if people expect passion to be the same in the beginning as it is in the middle and the end, they are going to be disappointed.


----------



## orangemallow (Oct 31, 2011)

It's pretty legit for me, only because I can easily map out what my relationships have been like. I've experienced what felt like romantic love with an ESFP and companionate love with an INTJ. 

Here's to hoping that the next one will be consummate love. Hey, third time's the charm right?


----------



## orangemallow (Oct 31, 2011)

stayawake said:


> it has a lot to do with being totally unafraid and safe and at ease and wanting more of that person in your world rather than less.


This is an interesting definition, more so because you're basing it from experience. I would have never defined passion as such. Maybe acceptance or well, love. But passion? Interesting.


----------



## nonnaci (Sep 25, 2011)

Would you say that a lot of your relationships start from friendship and grows into infatuation/passion or is it the other way around? I suppose it really depends on the circumstances of how the two people meet and to each own's desires in a relationship. I was curious if there was a generality between nfs or subtypes in this matter.

And as @*stayawake* mentioned, I do see more companionate love develop much later in the relationship and particularly during old age.


----------



## stayawake (Dec 21, 2011)

orangemallow said:


> This is an interesting definition, more so because you're basing it from experience. I would have never defined passion as such. Maybe acceptance or well, love. But passion? Interesting.


I can see how this would be confusing. Maybe I'm getting all three components mixed up a little, they are hard to seperate sometimes! I've only been with my husband for 10 years, and I got married in my early 20's - so I'm by no means an old person, or an expert at this. When you're in the new stages of a relationship, sternberg uses the word 'Limerance' to discribe basically that lust-fueled way the world shimmers and nothing seems like it was, and no one thinks straight. I don't WANT to have someone in that state over me, because they never really see the real me... just their vision of their ideal me! In any case, not for very long.

When you KNOW someone and are they are known by you, and there are these years together, and hard times won, and sheer gratitude of getting to be with this person your whole life wells up inside you, and you love them despretly and you totally don't feel ashamed of anything in your life, what you look like, what failures or quirks you have, you can give yourself to them whole-heartedly. I don't think that can happen in the early stages of a relationship when there isn't enough intimacy, or proof of commitment. There is always something held back, even if not intentional, because you don't have those years together to experience all the parts of a person. So... when you get to this later stage of things, I can say yes, this complete abandon of self consciousness (in the bad sense) looks a little like comfortableness, but I identify it more as passion. My heart skips a beat and my face breaks into a smile when my husband walks through the door at the end of the day, all the more for knowing that he will probably always do so as long as he lives. The more intimacy grows the more I *want* him. The way I show this is by being unafraid to initiate affection, no fear of rejection, becoming more passionate day by day.


----------



## strawberryLola (Sep 19, 2010)

nonnaci said:


> Interesting, so how would you describe this fourth dimension? The intangibles?


Absolutely! The intangibles, connection that words cannot describe- subtle things that really let a couple know they are just get each other- be it a smile from the most idiosyncratic things they do to ignite that connection that's natural.

It's one thing to like someone and feel intimate feelings with them. There's another higher level of connection that goes deeper, and that's what I'm describing- it's almost even spiritual. Passion usually dies out after 3 years (typically) for women when their ocytocin levles peak off, and then it needs working on again.

Liking- we can like anyone and feel that friendship. I guess then- Sterberg would call it consumate love where all 3 (passion + intimacy + commitment) are there. It just seems to gel more from an unconventional viewpoint when that connection is that deep, and it really doesn't require much effort to get the sparks to be there. To sustain the relationship through the hardships are daily life is where the intangibles that define the couple a a unit really matters. 

That kind of bond is almost irreplaceable. You can find it with another person, it just won't be the same, especially when it doesn't come from a place of innocence (eg- first love). That's another discussion. Intangibles are what make the relationship very meaningful- that's where couples learn to laugh to de-stress with one another.


----------



## Mr.Venture (Dec 25, 2011)

@strawberryLola and @stayawake, I've really enjoyed your posts.

Before I get started I should let you know that I've been engaged three times and divorced once in my short time on this planet. In the past I've been the very definition of someone who's in love with the idea of love. That's been changing over the last while as I come to appreciate more truths about myself, but that's the history I'm drawing from.

In a straight-forward sense, I would say that Sternberg's three components do a decent job of describing the different types of loving relationships out there. When I look at my own relationships (friendships and others included), I can see how they fit into the categories described. Stayawake, it sounds like you're very lucky to have discovered a consumate love to share your life with; your gratitude comes through loud and clear.

However, personally I find that each of the components has a different importance - depending on the individual and the time in their life. A similar, but slightly more _useful_ framework for me is: chemistry, compatibility, and commitment. Each of those factors can be important for me in different ways, and each can grow or diminish in importance depending on circumstance. I tend to place a fair amount of importance on the first and last of those factors, and less importance on compatibility. Chemistry (like intimacy) is the rush I've often used to evaluate relationships in the past, but it is also the one most subject to the waft and weft of circumstance. Commitment plays less of a role, but it is summed up by one idea: zero sexual infidelity. I've tried open relationships in the past and, while I recognize their value and can even see a role for them in my life, I have no desire to practice consentual nonmonogamy over the long term. Compatibility (liking the same things) actually seems to be something I don't want too much of. There's just an awareness on my part that I am prone to losing myself in romantic relationships, and sometimes having distinct interests and passions can be a good protection against that.

I guess the thrust of what I'm getting at is that it can be more important to understand yourself than your partner, or the relationship itself. Understanding how you function in a relationship, and understanding what serves you best and not trying to be all things possible is probably the only honest way to your own happiness. I could look at Sternberg's theory and then start evaluating my relationships according to external measures, and then try working on them to make them better, and so on... However, from my own experience, that way lies madness. Instead, if I am mindful to my feelings and my situation, if I pay attention to what's going on, then at least any mistakes I make will be honest ones. Honest mistakes afford learning moments.

I think, OP, you may be currently in a relationship and wondering if it the right one for you (or have a friend in that situation, etc.). I'm sure that if you just ask yourself questions like "what am I doing?", "how am I feeling?", and "what am I seeing?" you will find the answers you're looking for. Honest self-exploration will yeild honest answers, and those answers will help the universe unfold for you in just the way it should. It's not easy, and I don't know you personally, but you have my complete confidence nonetheless.

Best of luck OP


----------



## nonnaci (Sep 25, 2011)

Doyouknowastar said:


> [MENTION=13429]
> However, personally I find that each of the components has a different importance - depending on the individual and the time in their life. A similar, but slightly more _useful_ framework for me is: chemistry, compatibility, and commitment.


Comparability in this case would be a similar set of _life values_ whereas chemistry would be the combination of Sternberg's passion and intimacy? From what I observe, many relationships end because some neither parties were willing to cross the boundaries that they impose on themselves or on the other.



Doyouknowastar said:


> [MENTION=13429]
> I think, OP, you may be currently in a relationship and wondering if it the right one for you (or have a friend in that situation, etc.). I'm sure that if you just ask yourself questions like "what am I doing?", "how am I feeling?", and "what am I seeing?" you will find the answers you're looking for. Honest self-exploration will yeild honest answers, and those answers will help the universe unfold for you in just the way it should. It's not easy, and I don't know you personally, but you have my complete confidence nonetheless.
> 
> Best of luck OP


Close, but I've never attempted/fell/pursued a real _relationship_ before. However, recent events have cast light on the possibility of such a relationship to blossom. So indeed, part of the initial post and the research into Sternberg's model are my ways of self-exploration via extroverted thinking. Note that I do not deny the existence of my own feelings in this situation, but experience has taught me that its much easier to put feelings in some context or model before acting on them.


----------



## Mr.Venture (Dec 25, 2011)

Fair enough @nonnaci, context can be crucial in interpreting and framing what we observe. Since fearlessness is impossible when it comes to romantic relationships, I'll just say good luck. When you know what you feel, and when you believe you'll be okay no matter what kind of response you get - and you will be okay, even if it hurts for a while - then you can move forward with the necessary confidence. You'll end up making the right decision for yourself, and that is the best we can do.

Just an aside, when I mentioned compatibility, I didn't mean values per se. Think of it instead as an indication of how likely you are to spend time together because you enjoy doing the same things. That's why it's less important for me; one of the best protections I've got against losing myself in a relationship is personal space. If I can get that space then I can stay in touch with that _inner voice_ that is so crucial to my self-awareness. That may be different for you. Maybe you hear your inner voice much more strongly than I do, and you are more prone to creating distance that doesn't allow a relationship to flourish to its true potential. If so, then compatibility would be much more important in your case.

Wish I had the book on me where I got this from, but I'm visiting my folks, away from my home town. In any case, I wish you the best of luck. And keep us posted to what you decide for yourself, will you?


----------



## strawberryLola (Sep 19, 2010)

Powerful and True:


> I'm sure that if you just ask yourself questions like "what am I doing?", "how am I feeling?", and "what am I seeing?" you will find the answers you're looking for. Honest self-exploration will yeild honest answers, and those answers will help the universe unfold for you in just the way it should. It's not easy, and I don't know you personally, but you have my complete confidence nonetheless.


I think that's where people get messed up in the mumbo jumbo and start to be something that they're not and get mixed up and confused.

It's about the journey, and sometimes we need to go through that process to really understand, to know, and to cherish what we have when we find it again. It's a learning process.

What makes it frustrating is when we can connect with someone emotionally (compatibility-wise), but the physicality is not there, or when we connect with someone physically and the commitment is there- the emotional aspects of understanding aren't. And sometimes, too much of being a friend in a relationship leads to being a friend and the passion dies out.

Those situations that are circumstantial can relate to so many factors such as social stress (physiological and psychological). Sometimes, when life gets tough, the last thing people think about is sex, because our biological make-up is to preserve what we can in order to survive, and that diminishes cortical levels that help with sexual peaking (and healthy hormones that generate that passion).

Beyond Sternberg's theory, OP- I'm wondering if there are other factors that are contingent and prevent the ability for people to connect. Outside external pressure can eventually erode a beautiful and delicate relationship internally as well.


----------



## nonnaci (Sep 25, 2011)

strawberryLola said:


> Beyond Sternberg's theory, OP- I'm wondering if there are other factors that are contingent and prevent the ability for people to connect. Outside external pressure can eventually erode a beautiful and delicate relationship internally as well.


Hrmm, for internal constructions, the only thing thats stopping the self from connecting with others is the self. A love for others may simply be an extension of one's love for the self as human beings are inherently (genotype/to an extent the phenotype) so similar. Expanding on this pov, a self that is undeveloped or has somehow developed in an orthogonal direction would have trouble connecting with others.

In the former case (some examples): 
-a lack of self-respect (low expectations, internal+reverse rosenthal effect)
-a cognitive dissonance between the ego (current self) and superego (desired self)
-isolation (a lack of external stimuli / new information will hinder development)
-voided attachments (what was once meaningful but no longer so)
-self defense (the self is fragile and wants to hold onto itself. it will see what is wants to see ala confirmation bias, which will only feedback onto itself, hence equivalent to isolation)

Latter case:
-Artificial conditioning/association (create own mental constructions and try to associate aspects of the human drive with other things), aka creating walls
-Detachment/Independence (a life style/value choice, genetic abberation, e.g. forms of aspergers), although its arguable that this is not innate and there exist fundamental causes for this


----------



## Mr.Venture (Dec 25, 2011)

I'm not sure I understood everything you were saying @nonnaci, but it sounded to me like you were saying that the only thing that stops a person from starting a relationship is themselves.

It has been a difficult and painful lesson for me, but I do not believe that is true. One thing that seems obvious to me is that not all relationships are possible for a person, and an example of that would be timing. I can't tell you how many times I wanted to start a relationship with someone else - or someone else has wanted to start a relationship with me - and it couldn't happen because it was just the wrong time for one or both of us. A healthy number of my female friends became so because, even though there was a romantic interest to begin with, we were mature enough to recognize that it just wasn't the right timing. I, like most people, find it hard to let go of something I want when the universe doesn't want to give it to me. However, experience has taught me that when I try to fight the universe's clear will I usually end up causing more hurt than I ever intended.

But, before you assume I'm telling you to let this one go, one thing we DO get to own completely is our own choices. I believe this was something @strawberryLola was trying to get at. In a sense, when you are mindful of the decision you are making and why you are doing so, then there is no wrong decision you can make. Like Lola said, our journey is something we have to go through, not around. When I try to avoid this simple fact then I find that, not only am I responsible for more hurt entering the world, but I've also become disconnected and been left a little more hollow in the process. The lovely flip side to that is that when I embrace that responsibility for my own choices then everything I experience adds richness and depth to my story and to other's. Pleasure, pain, joy, and heartache, they all become nuturing forces that give meaning to my experience and feed the goodness of the world.

Again, look honestly at the situation, look honestly at yourself, hold back your judgement and trust in your inner wisdom. You'll do just fine that way.

*sends compassion*


----------



## nonnaci (Sep 25, 2011)

Doyouknowastar said:


> I'm not sure I understood everything you were saying @_nonnaci_ , but it sounded to me like you were saying that the only thing that stops a person from starting a relationship is themselves.


Not the only thing, I thought I'd bring up only the internal Fi issues that one may have. As you've mentioned, timing is quite important and when I look at my situation, I'd agree that both the timing and environments are ill suited for any progress. However, much of the dissonance I experienced dealt more with a conflict of internal values rather than external. Hence, I agree that stepping through one's own choices is important as its ensures that the self is developed rather than neglected/shunted. As for inner wisdom, heh the lack of experience in these matters precludes that inner voice.

Thank you for your help tho!


----------

