User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 36

  1. #21
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    I have a theory that the best combo is for you both to share first instincts but have opposing second instincts. For example, I'm a so/sp and I'm attracted to so/sx.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  2. #22
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I think there is truth to these things. The dominant instinct is not a strength. It is a weakness - like a distortion. It would seem like there would be a great deal of intensity between two sx doms but the two wouldn't help each other to moderate that weakness and so it might not be good for the long term. I wonder if you could end up with two people who are co-dependent and don't have sufficient boundaries. So maybe it is better for the dominant to match up with the secondary - as you say - an sx/sp with an so/sx or something like that.
    I think you meant sp/sx with that last bit. (Edit: Actually, I think I may have read you wrong the first time.)

    I don't necessarily agree with the underlined, though, cuz, while I think the dominant is a weakness, I think it's also a strength.

    I think the greatest weakness is really the weakest of your instincts, while the overabundance of the dominant works in conjunction with the weakest instinct to cause problems in that specific area.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    I have a theory that the best combo is for you both to share first instincts but have opposing second instincts. For example, I'm a so/sp and I'm attracted to so/sx.
    I agree.

    I think it goes something like this:

    Best: 1/2/3 with 1/3/2.
    In between: 1/2/3 with 1/2/3, 2/1/3, and 3/1/2.
    Worst: 1/2/3 with 3/2/1/ and 2/3/1.

    As such:

    Best: sx/so with sx/sp.
    In between: sx/so with sx/so, so/sx, and sp/sx.
    Worst: sx/so with sp/so and so/sp.

    Best: sx/sp with sx/so.
    In between: sx/sp with sx/sp, sp/sx, and so/sx.
    Worst: sx/sp with so/sp and sp/so.

    Best: so/sx with so/sp.
    In between: so/sx with so/sx, sx/so, sp/sx.
    Worst: so/sx with sp/so and so/sp.

    Best: so/sp with so/sx.
    In between: so/sx with so/sx, sp/so, and sp/so.
    Worst: so/sx with sp/sx and sx/sp.

    Best: sp/sx with sp/so.
    In between: sp/sx with sp/sx, sx/sp, and so/sp.
    Worst: sp/sx with so/sc and sx/so.

    Best: sp/so with sp/sx.
    In between: sp/so with sp/so, so/sp, and sx/sp.
    Worst: sp/so with sx/so and so/sx.

    I don't know if this is necessarily true, but it is a rationalistic formula.
    Last edited by Zarathustra; 07-02-2012 at 10:00 AM.

  3. #23
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    I was looking around the site @acronach posted: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tual-Stackings

    It seems valid enough.

    Flow of Instinctual Energies & Compatibility

    When we invest our energy, most of it is devoted to fulfillment of our primary instinct. The remaining energy radiates or flows onto the secondary instinct and finally - onto the last instinct, which receives the smallest share. There are two possible configurations or directions for this flow. In first configuration, energy is invested in the order of sx→sp→so→sx. This direction gives rise to three stackings: sx/sp, sp/so, so/sx. In the second configuration, energy is invested in the order of sx→so→sp→sx, which gives rise to the other three stackings: sx/so, so/sp and sp/sx.

    Syn-flow: sp→so→sx→sp
    Stackings involved: sp/so→so/sx→>sx/sp→sp/so
    Direction: Compelled toward people. Acting upon and with others as a born insider i.e.- deeply human.

    Contra-flow: sp→sx→so→sp
    Stackings involved: sp/sx→sx/so→so/sp→sp/sx
    Direction: Compelled against people. Seething belligerent outsiders; 'antisocial', provoking, reverse-flow change catalysts. In some profound sense, rejecting the human condition, their own and/or that of others.

    The two flows move in the opposite directions. This antithesis can be seen if the instinctual stackings are compared in pairs:

    so/sx - including, associating, affiliating, networking, interconnecting, introducing, unifying, linking, bonding, annexing, cooperating, receiving
    sx/so - confronting, rebuffing, challenging, interrupting, reforming, contradicting, subverting, excluding, eliminating

    sx/sp - intensifying, escalating, enlivening, invigorating, stimulating, energizing, vitalizing, reviving, animating, inspiriting
    sp/sx - dulling, grounding, exhausting, deadening, desiccating, making still, calming, quieting, dampening, numbing, desensitizing

    sp/so - conserving, protecting, maintaining, preserving, supplying, repairing, sustaining, stewarding
    so/sp - using, employing, implementing, utilizing, appropriating, expending, exercising, capitalizing

    It is hypothesized that people with stackings that are part of same flow progression generally have smoother interaction since they are channeling their energies in the same direction. Such interactions have the potential to cover for one's blindspot instinct as well as reinforce one's own instinctual energy flow. For instance, if your stacking is sx/sp, moving energy from sx->sp->so, then someone with sp/so stacking will be reinforcing to your weaker sp->so link as well as covering for your social-last blind spot.
    So I would assume for a person like me, a longer lasting relationship would be better off with SP/SX or SO/SP or another SX/SO(I think that is too much heat and not enough grounded-ness though.)

  4. #24
    In orbit
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx
    Posts
    291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Avatar7 View Post
    What would discipline needed to clean one's house have to do with one's sex/social/self-preservational drive combination?

    What about just one's desire to live in a clean place?
    Well I do live in a clean place dear, It's rather neither me or my husband like to clean etc. very much because we're much heavily invested in our our areas of interest. I'd much rather read a good book, work or be out and about than play little hausfrau. General household maintenance type of things are to me an annoyance rather than something I like to do, same goes for my husband.
    You might want to ask Zarathustra what he meant. That's what I thought he was referring to. Maybe not.

    EDIT:
    Self Pres people instinctively avoid certain foods and environments, and are likewise drawn to those things that nourish and sustain them. Sp's have a strong reaction against things that threaten to harm their comfort or health.
    http://ocean-moonshine.net/e14285736...position=80:80
    I can tell from experience that neither of us are what you'd call "homebodies". Before we had kids we were both touring musicians with erratic lifestyle, spending long stretches travelling. In those circumstances conditions vary quite alot and you eat what's there when you have time. That's no problem. I'd suspect that it would be for an sp.
    In home life it translates to me as a lack of a "nesting instinct". Before we had children our apartment looked like a toolbox/rehearsal room and we mostly ate takeouts because it was convenient as we were doing other things. I personally feel that type of traditional domesticity is challenging for us, though we obviously have had to adjust to having a family because of the imperative of providing a stable domestic setting for the children. It's not a natural priority for either though and is taxing.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    868

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rail Tracer View Post
    That is one of the more interesting things I've seen in a while.

  6. #26
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mia. View Post
    That is one of the more interesting things I've seen in a while.
    At the bottom of that reference, I found this rather unflattering tidbit:

    sp/sx - The World of Hell - anti-cultural solipsism, the counterculture, the underground
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    868

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    At the bottom of that reference, I found this rather unflattering tidbit:
    I'm sure they only meant it in a good way...


  8. #28
    Senior Member Winds of Thor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mia. View Post
    Essential? No. Easier? Yes.
    Thanks. Certainly outlooks vary with the variants.

    Edit: Pun not intended :/
    "..And the eight and final rule: If this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight."
    'Men are meant to be with women. The rest is perversion and mental illness.'

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I think there is truth to these things. The dominant instinct is not a strength. It is a weakness - like a distortion. It would seem like there would be a great deal of intensity between two sx doms but the two wouldn't help each other to moderate that weakness and so it might not be good for the long term. I wonder if you could end up with two people who are co-dependent and don't have sufficient boundaries. So maybe it is better for the dominant to match up with the secondary - as you say - an sx/sp with an so/sx or something like that.
    Yea, I've seen someone somewhere described it like this:

    Dominant Instinct - Too hot (too much awareness, it causes problems)
    Secondary Instinct - Just right
    Weakest Instinct - Too cold (too little awareness, it causes problems)

    Naturally, like some things suggested here, we want someone to have our weakest instinct at secondary to balance. Makes sense. All theory of course.

  10. #30
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    At the bottom of that reference, I found this rather unflattering tidbit:
    Quote Originally Posted by Mia. View Post
    I'm sure they only meant it in a good way...

    Lol, from what I remember from my small knowledge of Buddhism, being in the two Heaven worlds is the worst place you can be.

Similar Threads

  1. [Inst] Instinctual Variants and Cooperative Video Game Play-style
    By Tyrinth in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-24-2012, 08:40 AM
  2. [Inst] Instinctual Variants and Music
    By Elfboy in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 08-25-2012, 05:28 PM
  3. [Inst] The same instinctual variants in relationships
    By Hopelandic in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-13-2010, 06:07 AM
  4. [Inst] Instinctual variants and relationships
    By BlackCat in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-15-2010, 10:33 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO