I think that intellectual intimacy should include having similar mental capacities. People tend to enjoy having others around them that are of similar capability (maybe not in the same exact way; i.e., one has stronger short-term memory retention and another in integration, but generally capable of similar levels of awareness and analysis) rather than obvious differences.
It seems that you also describe emotional intimacy and vulnerability in a coordinated way. One cannot reveal their emotions to another without having a level of trust intimacy, as you mentioned as a form of emotional disclosure.
Could it possible that these forms of intimacy are subset to trust intimacy? It seems possible that vulnerability is the core value, and these different forms of intimacy are expressions of such value. It is interesting that you mention trust-intimacy and understanding-intimacy. A part of me wants to argue that these are intertwined; a part of trust-intimacy is to empathize and understand the other’s position, state or behaviors, and an inverse relationship is seen as you described as well.
I think that intellectual intimacy should include having similar mental capacities.
Seems right, for both reasons of understanding and trust.
A part of me wants to argue that these are intertwined
I think the default is they’re intertwined but the interesting thing is they can come apart: for example, you develop feelings of connection and intimacy through shared experience, falsely assume you can trust (or shared values or whatever), but then it turns out the experiences shared never actually filtered for that.
I think that intellectual intimacy should include having similar mental capacities. People tend to enjoy having others around them that are of similar capability (maybe not in the same exact way; i.e., one has stronger short-term memory retention and another in integration, but generally capable of similar levels of awareness and analysis) rather than obvious differences.
It seems that you also describe emotional intimacy and vulnerability in a coordinated way. One cannot reveal their emotions to another without having a level of trust intimacy, as you mentioned as a form of emotional disclosure.
Could it possible that these forms of intimacy are subset to trust intimacy? It seems possible that vulnerability is the core value, and these different forms of intimacy are expressions of such value. It is interesting that you mention trust-intimacy and understanding-intimacy. A part of me wants to argue that these are intertwined; a part of trust-intimacy is to empathize and understand the other’s position, state or behaviors, and an inverse relationship is seen as you described as well.
Seems right, for both reasons of understanding and trust.
I think the default is they’re intertwined but the interesting thing is they can come apart: for example, you develop feelings of connection and intimacy through shared experience, falsely assume you can trust (or shared values or whatever), but then it turns out the experiences shared never actually filtered for that.