Is Duality All It's Cracked Up to Be? Share.

[Ezra]

How does it compare to this notion of compatibility though(?): http://www.personalitypage.com/relationships.html

Fundamentally I think the same foundation is there. It just so happens that my girl is IEI and an INFP (although she doesn't at all relate to the description of the INFP), and I'm an SLE and ENTJ, which means we're compatible in MBTI - ENTJ/INFP - and socionics; we're duals.

You would probably have better luck asking this on a socionics forum, you would get some real answers there.

+100

If you're an INFP, your dual is ESTP, not ESTJ.

In socionics the type that shares only your last letter but not the first three is your "relationship of duality."

The type that differs on all four letters is called your "conflicting relationship."

Ehhhhh. Try not to apply socionics concepts to MBTI; it doesn't really work. For example, I get varying results as ESTJ, ENTJ and whatever. But I'm an SLE. My dual is IEI. Said dual could in MBTI be "a bit more J" and thus be an INFJ. Or they could still be an INFP. Just because you type as SEI in socionics doesn't mean you're definitely ISFP in MBTI (nor does it necessarily mean you're an ISFJ who has done "the j/p flip). It's possible - even likely, but it isn't necessity.

 

[jackandthebeast]

I was just wondering about the duality thing because if you're borderline on J and P, your dual would also be your conflicting relation.

 

[BlackCat]

I was just wondering about the duality thing because if you're borderline on J and P, your dual would also be your conflicting relation.

There's no way to be totally borderline on J and P. You can't be an X.

In socionics, if someone was, say, an INFx, that would mean that they value 2 totally different sets of functions, and would also be in 2 completely opposing quadras at the same time.

 

[ayoitsStepho]

I'm all for duality. Bring me an ENTp please.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Why would INFP = INFj? The functions in socionics aren't really related to what Jung put. They just basically took the names and letters and made another system. Most INFPs are INFp. If you read the quadra descriptions, then you would probably not agree with Delta.

Yeah, I'm INFp/IEI in socionics, which is Ni Fe. I try not to let it make my head hurt.

Funny thing is, I've gotten along smashingly with ESTPs, off the bat. Then it turns ugly....occasionally, really ugly.

My ex-business partner is ESTP. If she got ran over by a truck, I'd throw a party .

 

[Heinel]

Yeah, I'm INFp/IEI in socionics, which is Ni Fe. I try not to let it make my head hurt.

Funny thing is, I've gotten along smashingly with ESTPs, off the bat. Then it turns ugly....occasionally, really ugly.

My ex-business partner is ESTP. If she got ran over by a truck, I'd throw a party .

I am pretty sure that is normal. You just need to be tamed by the right one, victim.

 

[OrangeAppled]

I am pretty sure that is normal. You just need to be tamed by the right one, victim.

I'm pretty sure that ESTP came out a bit bruised also. Their mistake is thinking I am a victim .

 

[cafe]

I'm a socionics INFj so my duality would be ESTj. I think my younger brother might be an ESTj, but I'm going to have to read up on the description. When we are just hanging out we get along like milk and cookies. If we are actually trying to accomplish something we get along like a Type A executive dragging a sulking toddler through nettle field on his leg.

FWIW, I have a very happy, affectionate relationship with my husband who is an INTj. Some of the Look-a-like description fits us very well, this does, at least:

Look-a-like partners do not feel any danger from the other partner. The strong sides of the partners are different in the such a way that almost any conversations between them always fall into the area of the confidence of only one of the partners. Look-a-like partners also have similar problems which makes them feel rather sympathetic towards each other instead of being critical of each other's vulnerabilities.

***​

Understanding between partners is usually good. Collaboration between them may be very fruitful especially if partners feel a mutual attraction.

***​

Arguments in Look-a-like relations are not common practice. The partners usually try to help each other, or at least feel when their partner requires some form of assistance. However, in many cases the help is not effective enough because partners have similar problems.

***​

These relations can normally bring a feeling of satisfaction from interaction with an equal and not boring partner.
​

OTOH, we haven't really experienced a lot of:

When partners loose their feeling of sympathy for each other through anger or any other reason, they can apply pressure to their partner's vulnerabilities. This can sometimes be really unexpected and unpleasant for both partners.​

It would be out of bounds for us to do something like that. We try to be fair with each other.

And I'm not sure exactly what this means:

Partners do not have anything against each other but also nothing for which to struggle.​

I mean, life is a struggle -- raising the kids, paying the bills, fixing stuff that breaks, etc but we don't really struggle a lot with one another. We did a little more of that early on but we have most of those conflicts pretty well smoothed out, at least for the last several years.

 

[jackandthebeast]

There's no way to be totally borderline on J and P. You can't be an X.

In socionics, if someone was, say, an INFx, that would mean that they value 2 totally different sets of functions, and would also be in 2 completely opposing quadras at the same time.

And why isn't that possible?

I'd like to hear the arguments against that notion, as I've been wanting to write a thread promoting it but don't understand what other people's reservations are.

 

[Snuggletron]

And why isn't that possible?

I'd like to hear the arguments against that notion, as I've been wanting to write a thread promoting it but don't understand what other people's reservations are.

J/P determines your function projection strongly. For instance:

INFP = Fi, Ne, Si, Te
INFJ = Ni, Fe, Ti, Se

whereas:

INFP = Fi, Ne, Si, Te
ISFP = Fi, Se, Ni, Te

if you're INFx (x representing 50/50 ambiguity) you're basically contradicting your type entirely. The 'x' isn't saying "well I'm not sure if I prefer spontaneity to planning", it's saying, "don't pay attention to the first three letters because they don't matter now anyway." P and J seals the deal more than any other letter (if you're following the rules, anyway).

 

[simulatedworld]

J/P determines your function projection strongly. For instance:

INFP = Fi, Ne, Si, Te
INFJ = Ni, Fe, Ti, Se

whereas:

INFP = Fi, Ne, Si, Te
ISFP = Fi, Se, Ni, Te

if you're INFx (x representing 50/50 ambiguity) you're basically contradicting your type entirely. The 'x' isn't saying "well I'm not sure if I prefer spontaneity to planning", it's saying, "don't pay attention to the first three letters because they don't matter now anyway." P and J seals the deal more than any other letter (if you're following the rules, anyway).

this...

Saying that you're INFX, for instance, implies that your Fi, Fe, Ni and Ne functions are all totally equal, which never happens in practice.

 

[garbage]

Compared to MBTI, Socionics doesn't tolerate ambiguity in any dichotomy position well, though. Conflating the two theories when you're getting down into the details is never a good idea.

 

[jackandthebeast]

this...

Saying that you're INFX, for instance, implies that your Fi, Fe, Ni and Ne functions are all totally equal, which never happens in practice.

No, it would be saying that your Fi and Ni are totally equal, but that your Fe and Ne are close.
How do you know it never happens in practice?
I am an IXFX who knows an IXXX, two ESFXs, and an XSFX who says one of her friends is an INFX. But I know it's just my word against your proclamation that it doesn't happen. So tell me what you'd like from me.

It makes more sense if you think of it like this:
If you're borderline on a trait you don't just get the abilities associated with both types. each of the functions has characteristics of all of its placements. For example, having Fi and Fe as a first and second function, respectively means I focus on both of them; but also having them as a fifth and sixth function means that I feel confident neither in my ability to establish relationships nor my ability to interact socially. In the same way, my Ni and Si are limited in their individual capacities. I'm not very good at predicting future events, nor am I good at creating relaxing states for people. i am, however, good at understanding the conceptual structure of things, or how the qualities that they suggest (Si) and the interactions between them (Ni) generate an overall essence or vibe. I've also seen Se and Ne at work together, in my XXFP and XXXP friends as well as the EXFP musician Amanda Palmer among others.
And I guess I'd attribute this to having all of my introverted functions come before my extroverted functions in the cognitive charts, but I have a very poor sense of external reality. I have trouble generalizing; according to my family, I lack common sense; and I need to assess the conceptual structure of things to understand them. So basically, being borderline on traits makes the traits that aren't borderline more pronounced.

 

[jackandthebeast]

Compared to MBTI, Socionics doesn't tolerate ambiguity in any dichotomy position well, though. Conflating the two theories when you're getting down into the details is never a good idea.

Wouldn't the ability for the theories to be conflated credit the intertype relations though?

 

[Snuggletron]

No, it would be saying that your Fi and Ni are totally equal, but that your Fe and Ne are close.
How do you know it never happens in practice?
I am an IXFX who knows an IXXX, two ESFXs, and an XSFX who says one of her friends is an INFX. But I know it's just my word against your proclamation that it doesn't happen. So tell me what you'd like from me.

It makes more sense if you think of it like this:
If you're borderline on a trait you don't just get the abilities associated with both types. each of the functions has characteristics of all of its placements. For example, having Fi and Fe as a first and second function, respectively means I focus on both of them; but also having them as a fifth and sixth function means that I feel confident neither in my ability to establish relationships nor my ability to interact socially. In the same way, my Ni and Si are limited in their individual capacities. I'm not very good at predicting future events, nor am I good at creating relaxing states for people. i am, however, good at understanding the conceptual structure of things, or how the qualities that they suggest (Si) and the interactions between them (Ni) generate an overall essence or vibe. I've also seen Se and Ne at work together, in my XXFP and XXXP friends as well as the EXFP musician Amanda Palmer among others.
And I guess I'd attribute this to having all of my introverted functions come before my extroverted functions in the cognitive charts, but I have a very poor sense of external reality. I have trouble generalizing; according to my family, I lack common sense; and I need to assess the conceptual structure of things to understand them. So basically, being borderline on traits makes the traits that aren't borderline more pronounced.

oh dear, this is going to give sim a major hard on.

edit: nevermind 8<

 

[simulatedworld]

No, it would be saying that your Fi and Ni are totally equal, but that your Fe and Ne are close.
How do you know it never happens in practice?
I am an IXFX who knows an IXXX, two ESFXs, and an XSFX who says one of her friends is an INFX. But I know it's just my word against your proclamation that it doesn't happen. So tell me what you'd like from me.

It makes more sense if you think of it like this:
If you're borderline on a trait you don't just get the abilities associated with both types. each of the functions has characteristics of all of its placements. For example, having Fi and Fe as a first and second function, respectively means I focus on both of them; but also having them as a fifth and sixth function means that I feel confident neither in my ability to establish relationships nor my ability to interact socially. In the same way, my Ni and Si are limited in their individual capacities. I'm not very good at predicting future events, nor am I good at creating relaxing states for people. i am, however, good at understanding the conceptual structure of things, or how the qualities that they suggest (Si) and the interactions between them (Ni) generate an overall essence or vibe. I've also seen Se and Ne at work together, in my XXFP and XXXP friends as well as the EXFP musician Amanda Palmer among others.
And I guess I'd attribute this to having all of my introverted functions come before my extroverted functions in the cognitive charts, but I have a very poor sense of external reality. I have trouble generalizing; according to my family, I lack common sense; and I need to assess the conceptual structure of things to understand them. So basically, being borderline on traits makes the traits that aren't borderline more pronounced.

Umm, I don't know what you're talking about. This is largely incoherent to me. It doesn't sound like you're very familiar with the functional definitions.

 

[garbage]

Wouldn't the ability for the theories to be conflated credit the intertype relations though?

To the extent that they can be, yeah. But right here, one asked a question using the Socionics framework, while the responses referred to MBTI. The difference in the theories makes this "miscommunication" very prevalent.


Wait, are we treating 'x' as an 'I don't know' or as an 'it's between the two poles on the dichotomy'? Because the two assumptions carry the rest of this conversation on in a different way.

 

[jackandthebeast]

To the extent that they can be, yeah. But right here, one asked a question using the Socionics framework, while the responses referred to MBTI. The difference in the theories makes this "miscommunication" very prevalent.


Wait, are we treating 'x' as an 'I don't know' or as an 'it's between the two poles on the dichotomy'? Because the two assumptions carry the rest of this conversation on in a different way.

The latter.

 

[jackandthebeast]

Umm, I don't know what you're talking about. This is largely incoherent to me. It doesn't sound like you're very familiar with the functional definitions.

Yes I am familiar with them. It's not unusual for people to have no clue what I'm talking about though. I have trouble articulating myself a lot.. I'll look at my response again later and try to formulate something clearer.

 

[BlackCat]

Well mostly what they're saying is that it just doesn't work that way.