• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

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

Poki

New member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,436
MBTI Type
STP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
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.

Until you can properly apply the functions to real life you have a disconnect which I consider a lack of understanding. Until you can tie the 2 together you dont really understand it as it applies to life, you understand just one portion of it. Once you can blend the 2 together with what you see then can you say you understand it. Until that point its nothing more then definitions.

some people dont start with a definition but work at understanding and merging at the same time.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Until you can properly apply the functions to real life you have a disconnect which I consider a lack of understanding. Until you can tie the 2 together you dont really understand it as it applies to life, you understand just one portion of it. Once you can blend the 2 together with what you see then can you say you understand it. Until that point its nothing more then definitions.

some people dont start with a definition but work at understanding and merging at the same time.

Yeah that's what I did, but if you think you're IXFX then you're probably working from a solely MBTI standpoint with the four dichotomies and not really paying attention to functional theory.

Functional theory doesn't really allow Xs in types; an X just means you don't know what type you are.
 

jackandthebeast

New member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
115
MBTI Type
IXFX
Enneagram
tert
Well mostly what they're saying is that it just doesn't work that way.

And what I'm saying is that I'm so split on the J/P and N/S scales that the choice of a single type to label myself with would be arbitrary.
And that I've observed people around me who it would be similarly arbitrary to type.
I don't know how to make it make sense to other people, and I'd like to. I DO understand MBTI theory, especially in terms of the functions and cognitive patterns; but it seems that I understand in different terms than a lot of people on this forum do. I don't see the issue with that, however- I think here of all places is where it should be accepted that someone processes information differently without it being attributed to a lack of sense or something to that effect.
I can only reply that if the currently accepted theory (sixteen types; sixteen patterns) doesn't account for me or people I know, then, as I see it, that theory doesn't encompass the entirety of human personality, and is wrong.
Please don't reply that I'm putting people down to just type- I'm not saying that- but the system should still be a consistently accurate representation of what it focuses on, and it isn't. Why? Because there are always going to be people in the middle.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
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.

Have you tried reading Jung himself? Or maybe try SolitaryWalker's stuff on here regarding type. He goes into detail here and gives type profiles, and it's hard to find that kind of thing online.

I don't necessarily follow current function theory myself, but I would propose that you must use at least 2 functions better than the rest, and one better than the other. I could even buy a split in the N/S divide, but to say you also have an equal divide on J/P is just asking too much, imo. Let's say you are isfj/infj. Your order will be at least Ni-Si/Fe. Personally, I think that is legit, but most diehard Jungians would probably disagree.

If you are isfp/infp your order would be at least Fi/Ne-Se. Those are both extremely different from Ni-Si/Fe! You cannot be isfj as equally as isfp. Really the only way to tell is to give some deep thought to your primary function. It can be hard to recognize because we are so intimate with it, sometimes we cannot see it, in which case give some thought to your top two, then consider over time, and in various situations, which one you use more.
 

Venom

Babylon Candle
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
2,126
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
And what I'm saying is that I'm so split on the J/P and N/S scales that the choice of a single type to label myself with would be arbitrary.
And that I've observed people around me who it would be similarly arbitrary to type.
I don't know how to make it make sense to other people, and I'd like to. I DO understand MBTI theory, especially in terms of the functions and cognitive patterns; but it seems that I understand in different terms than a lot of people on this forum do. I don't see the issue with that, however- I think here of all places is where it should be accepted that someone processes information differently without it being attributed to a lack of sense or something to that effect.
I can only reply that if the currently accepted theory (sixteen types; sixteen patterns) doesn't account for me or people I know, then, as I see it, that theory doesn't encompass the entirety of human personality, and is wrong.
Please don't reply that I'm putting people down to just type- I'm not saying that- but the system should still be a consistently accurate representation of what it focuses on, and it isn't. Why? Because there are always going to be people in the middle.

INFP ... :doh:
 

Snuggletron

Reptilian
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
2,224
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
10
I can only reply that if the currently accepted theory (sixteen types; sixteen patterns) doesn't account for me or people I know, then, as I see it, that theory doesn't encompass the entirety of human personality, and is wrong.

You missed the point. Your type isn't accountable for your entire personality.

the system should still be a consistently accurate representation of what it focuses on, and it isn't. Why? Because there are always going to be people in the middle.

Functions can work together to mimic other functions. This can make people look like all sorts of things, including 'in the middle' or balanced, for the sake of functioning in roles other than just one. I suspect if all of these people you know are 'x' conglomerate types, where the 'x' represents absolute equal use, they haven't been typed correctly. Or maybe you just feel that filling the 'x' with one of the 8 letters will somehow rob them of their own unique personality.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
And what I'm saying is that I'm so split on the J/P and N/S scales that the choice of a single type to label myself with would be arbitrary.
And that I've observed people around me who it would be similarly arbitrary to type.
I don't know how to make it make sense to other people, and I'd like to. I DO understand MBTI theory, especially in terms of the functions and cognitive patterns; but it seems that I understand in different terms than a lot of people on this forum do. I don't see the issue with that, however- I think here of all places is where it should be accepted that someone processes information differently without it being attributed to a lack of sense or something to that effect.
I can only reply that if the currently accepted theory (sixteen types; sixteen patterns) doesn't account for me or people I know, then, as I see it, that theory doesn't encompass the entirety of human personality, and is wrong.
Please don't reply that I'm putting people down to just type- I'm not saying that- but the system should still be a consistently accurate representation of what it focuses on, and it isn't. Why? Because there are always going to be people in the middle.

And what we're telling you is that N/S and P/J are not actually "scales" when you get outside of MBTI and work with functional theory, so you can't be "borderline" because there's no scale to be borderline on.

MBTI defines the four letters according to four sliding scales, yes, but function theory is different because it doesn't do that. From a functional perspective, you can't be "borderline P/J" because changing P to J or vice versa inverts the entire set of functional preferences.

So all you really know at this point is that you come out near the border on S/N and P/J in MBTI tests, but when we analyze functions we're not paying attention to MBTI and its "four sliding scales" approach. We're paying attention to the cognitive tendencies that define the way you conceptualize yourself and the environment around you, and in these terms you cannot be "borderline" because there's no sliding scale.

Before you decide the system is totally inaccurate, maybe you should make an effort to learn about it. The fact that you still think you're IXFX is a clear indication that you're operating on MBTI alone and don't really know functions.

For instance, do you identify more with Fi or Fe, and why? "IXFX" doesn't indicate any preference for either of the two, which you'll realize is impossible when you learn what those terms mean.


You missed the point. Your type isn't accountable for your entire personality.



Functions can work together to mimic other functions. This can make people look like all sorts of things, including 'in the middle' or balanced, for the sake of functioning in roles other than just one. I suspect if all of these people you know are 'x' conglomerate types, where the 'x' represents absolute equal use, they haven't been typed correctly. Or maybe you just feel that filling the 'x' with one of the 8 letters will somehow rob them of their own unique personality.

^This guy is smart. You should listen to him. Bolded part = BINGO!



^And this guy is right. All of your criticisms thus far are typical of Fi+Ne. I would definitely look at INFP if I were you.
 

jackandthebeast

New member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
115
MBTI Type
IXFX
Enneagram
tert
I was looking for a writing sample.. and this may be an odd choice of one but I recently wiped my old Facebook posts and saved them in a document (thinking I would delete my account); and I just cut it down from about 100 pages to about 10. I don't expect whoever might be reading this to read everything- I'm just not sure what other people will find valuable for evaluation.
I think Si might be more difficult to observe in my writing, but that, at the very least, both Ni and Fi are extremely evident in my posts.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
^ Can you repost that in .txt format? I have MS Word, but I guess I've got an old version because it won't read your document.
 

jackandthebeast

New member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
115
MBTI Type
IXFX
Enneagram
tert
No, the first time I tried to change it to .doc I forgot to get rid of the docx. So it was .doc.docx.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Errr I have no idea why but that came out as garbled computer code. Probably some kind of translation issue between different operating systems, etc.

You could post the full text in a blog or something.
 
G

garbage

Guest
Oh yeah, and also, to answer the OP:

Probably. At least, conceptually, it makes sense that it's beneficial to have someone who balances your weaknesses in a way that you value or find fascinating but still completely understandable (duality) over someone who's exactly like you (identity), but there are also ways for someone to just innately push your buttons with respect to your weaknesses without even realizing it (conflict).

Function theory and type aside, the most fruitful and loving relationships I've seen seem to exhibit this sort of balance.

But Augusta (founder of Socionics) seemed to think that everyone was a drooling, incapable moron without their dual, so there's way too much emphasis placed on it.
 

jackandthebeast

New member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
115
MBTI Type
IXFX
Enneagram
tert
Oh yeah, and also, to answer the OP:

But Augusta (founder of Socionics) seemed to think that everyone was a drooling, incapable moron without their dual, so there's way too much emphasis placed on it.

I kind of got that vibe. A lot of the other intertype relation descriptions aren't very flattering.
 
G

garbage

Guest
I kind of got that vibe. A lot of the other intertype relation descriptions aren't very flattering.

This, too. If it ain't duality, it ain't nothin'.

"If you're married to someone who is not a dual, you will immediately cheat on your spouse when you meet your dual.

If you meet a dual who is of your gender and you're not gay, you will turn gay for them.

Every relationship with someone who isn't a dual is absolutely terrible and will end terribly and you're a terrible person for even trying a relationship with a non-dual."*

*not an actual quote, but, come on.. it's close.
 

jackandthebeast

New member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
115
MBTI Type
IXFX
Enneagram
tert
How about now? I changed the blog settings in my User CP. The default setting was, rather counter-intuitively, that only moderators and people on my ignore list could see my blog.
 
Top