# SX/SO vs SO/SX



## drizzy lake (Apr 28, 2017)

Thought for the longest I'mma So/Sx, however, back then I still typed as a Four though. As of late (and with typing as One now) I'm heavily considering Sx/So. Sx-1s, and to some degree all Sx-first, are known to relate to being Fours, even if they ain't, so that would be a sign for being Sx-first. How can you define the best which one's your first and which one's your second instinct? Or what are the clearest differences between SoSx & SxSo?


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Theoretically, your first instinct is where you have the most neurosis, while your second is fairly healthy/natural. So you are quite adept and interested in the realm of the first but it also is where your anxiety tends to manifest, because in a sense you have the most to lose there. Your second, on the other hand, is a bit of a playground, because your skill level is decent and you don't have so much invested in it. 

I had a very hard time distinguishing between the two myself - clearly my two variants, like yours I suspect, are very close in strength. 

These descriptions from Typewatch were useful to me - they illustrate how different balances of the stacking can come across differently - and so you get a better picture of both sx/soc with strong soc and soc/sx with strong sx:



> *sx/so*
> 
> Quote
> fireside sx/so - strong sx, weak soc and weaker sp. pulls from sp/sx shadow to intensify sx. exhibitionism, wild abandon, most 'on fire' of all stacks or stack ranges.
> ...


More here if you're interested. 

And here is my favorite resource on instincts, period - from a blog where an e5 has shared his notes from a seminar:



Runningfather said:


> Russ [Hudson] said that the life script of a self-pres dominant tends to emphasize continuity, organic development. Sexuals tend to have chapters, and have sometimes “gone down in flames’ with what they’re attracted to. Socials tend to have “pods of affiliation”, that is different groups or activities they’re involved with.
> 
> Look at your actual behavior. If you’re not doing your dominant instinct, then you might feel like you’re taking time away from what’s important. If you have to put in effort in the realm of the instinct, this may be your blind spot. There’s an intelligence to the way that your soul has set things up. Look at it. Look at your particular programming. See what you’ve taken yourself to be. What supports you is an issue of stacking. Relax around it—just look at where the attention goes or does not go.
> 
> ...


In my case I initially typed as sx/soc because I do feel very intensely, care very much about my personal 1-on-1 relationships, and have always been a bit obsessive over "that one special person/place/thing". That said with time I have realized that I'm much more of the "flitting" type than the focused, on fire type. Also - a lack of exhibitionism, intensity. I could go further into it but this thread is about you, not me!


----------



## drizzy lake (Apr 28, 2017)

@angelfish: Thanks, that was insightful.

Okay, I think I found a good way to determine your stacking now. The problem I always had was to decide if I focus on an area like 'Social' out of an over-obsession with it or because I cared too less for it and tried to deal with that kind of insecure weak point, you know? 

I think the best way to define it is like this: An instinct is what makes you worry. The stronger an instinct is in your stacking, the more energy you spend on it, because the stronger an instinct is in you, the more relief you get from feeling secure in it. 

I'm SP-last for example. I know that because when I take care of my SP-needs, I'm just like "yea, nice I guess". Its cool, its an area you tend to neglect and caring for it is important, but feeling secure in it doesn't make me go "yea, life is great now". I value it too low for dealing with it having much an effect on my current life, which is why people usually spend the least energy on their last-instinct since they don't really care for it and therefore dealing with it doesn't give you much perceived relief, satisfaction, secruity, etc. However, this results in it being your blind spot. I guess everybody has to decide for themselves how much they want to care for their blind spot. Since your brain/soul/blah doesn't really pressure you to spend any energy on it, the energy you spend in it is really up to you, like if you want to engage in it at all beyond the most necessary level (like eating f.e. when it comes to SP lol). I started to care about my body for example as I got older. I was never compelled to it, doing so doesn't relief any instinctual anxiety or whatever since I don't value SP much. Its just because I decided to care for it out of other reasons (that are more of an Sx-, So-nature probably).

When it comes to your strongest instinct, the reason you become obsessed with it is because being healthy here makes you feel so secure. So you become unnecessarily perfectionistic in this aspect. I guess the time periods you were the happiest in your life correlate with having a really healthy relationship with your dominant instinct and therefore feeling really secure. However you obsess so much on this that you spend all your energy on it in an attempt to relief the instinct - which is probably not the wisest way to deal with it. The second instinct is the one in which you are probably the wisest in. You care for it in your life, feeling secure here gives you satisfaction, but its not your priority and you are less blinded by this instinctual need to deal with it, which probably results in a more chilled approach in meeting its needs.

However, while this made me even more sure of being SP-last, I still am not sure about if I'm SX or SO first. 
In some way I feel like I'm most conscious of So-stuff but I feel like I get the most relief from feeling secure in Sx - which sounds more SX/SO to me tbh. I guess Istill need some more time to decide what my core motivation is ... :/
I think part of the problem is that both SP-last strategies Seen similar - both are mostly people orientaded.


----------



## Temizzle (May 14, 2017)

drizzy lake said:


> Thought for the longest I'mma So/Sx, however, back then I still typed as a Four though. As of late (and with typing as One now) I'm heavily considering Sx/So. Sx-1s, and to some degree all Sx-first, are known to relate to being Fours, even if they ain't, so that would be a sign for being Sx-first. How can you define the best which one's your first and which one's your second instinct? Or what are the clearest differences between SoSx & SxSo?


Guess you're a 6 now :/ 

Regardless, if you're sx first I think it's very clear to you. Most of your issues and enneagram problems will arise in the 1 on 1 sphere -- intensely binding to people, causes. Feeling empty if your life remains on a mellow plane. Feeling like you need more. Sex is hardly enough, like you want to completely consume your partner. There is an emphasis on your desirability and you're very picky with who you connect with, but when you find someone who matches your energy level and chemistry you dive deep. DEEP. Like, pour way too much energy into it and overdo it -- there's a fear of putting too much into things that you'll break them. That intensity. 

So is much more concerned with their positioning in a social sphere and is first and foremost conscious to who they are in society or in their community and second about their passions and intensities. An SX first would throw it all away for that deep satisfying connection.


----------



## drizzy lake (Apr 28, 2017)

Temizzle said:


> Regardless, if you're sx first I think it's very clear to you. Most of your issues and enneagram problems will arise in the 1 on 1 sphere -- intensely binding to people, causes. Feeling empty if your life remains on a mellow plane. Feeling like you need more. Sex is hardly enough, like you want to completely consume your partner. There is an emphasis on your desirability and you're very picky with who you connect with, but when you find someone who matches your energy level and chemistry you dive deep. DEEP. Like, pour way too much energy into it and overdo it -- there's a fear of putting too much into things that you'll break them. That intensity.
> 
> So is much more concerned with their positioning in a social sphere and is first and foremost conscious to who they are in society or in their community and second about their passions and intensities. An SX first would throw it all away for that deep satisfying connection.


The problem is that my SX and SO feel so close. I don't know if I would throw it all away for that one deep connection. Thats kind of abstract if you know what I mean, in as hard to apply to real real life.. From my understanding, the second instinct flows into the first - meaning you use your second to dive into your first. So you care for the 2nd instinct cause it serves your 1st. But I can't tell which serves which, Sx->So or the other way around. Its hard to differetiate the energies. :/
SX feels stronger but that just may be my dom-Fi.


----------



## Temizzle (May 14, 2017)

drizzy lake said:


> The problem is that my SX and SO feel so close. I don't know if I would throw it all away for that one deep connection. Thats kind of abstract if you know what I mean, in as hard to apply to real real life.. From my understanding, the second instinct flows into the first - meaning you use your second to dive into your first. So you care for the 2nd instinct cause it serves your 1st. But I can't tell which serves which, Sx->So or the other way around. Its hard to differetiate the energies. :/
> SX feels stronger but that just may be my dom-Fi.


For me, SO serves my SX by making me more drawn to crowds and being social when I have no obsession, looking for that obsession. Once I’ve found it, I leave the SO behind


----------



## drizzy lake (Apr 28, 2017)

Temizzle said:


> For me, SO serves my SX by making me more drawn to crowds and being social when I have no obsession, looking for that obsession. Once I’ve found it, I leave the SO behind


I guess thats what I have to find out still cuz thats the thing I'm not exactly sure about yet. I simply care about both a lot. But, having recently retyped myself a 6, and I'm pretty sure its final this time (there's a quote by Eli Jaxon saying Sixes, especially CP, have the hardest time typing themselves, which explains why it took me so damn fucking long), SX-dom seems more fitting and some of what I feel as strong SO may actually be just about being a 6 period.


----------



## Temizzle (May 14, 2017)

drizzy lake said:


> I guess thats what I have to find out still cuz thats the thing I'm not exactly sure about yet. I simply care about both a lot. But, having recently retyped myself a 6, and I'm pretty sure its final this time (there's a quote by Eli Jaxon saying Sixes, especially CP, have the hardest time typing themselves, which explains why it took me so damn fucking long), SX-dom seems more fitting and some of what I feel as strong SO may actually be just about being a 6 period.


That's right I recall you typing yourself as an ISTP 8w9 before. Must have identified with the aggression but thought yourself not aggressive enough to be an 8w7 so you figured 8w9. 

All I'm saying is, if you were SX, you would know. You would come off as too much to people around you, and you would feel like you're a little misfit for this wold. There would be a heavy longing or itch you wear on your shoulder.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

> _Sx-firsts, on the other hand, aren’t as aware of the interactions between them and others and the environment, rather… their more aware of the chemistry. So while the so-firsts are more “mechanical”, the sx-firsts are more “chemical”._
> 
> _Focusing on sx-first issues involve: Am I close to my gf/bf? Am I close to my family? How much in common do we all have? Do I really like this thing? Am I attracted to it? Is that person attracted to that other person? etc._


Someone with high Social can care about how close they are to someone as well, however, and might identify with the Sx description more especially if they're a Feeler.


----------



## nep2une (Jun 15, 2017)

Ah lovely, now I'm also questioning having set mine as so/sx because of this:

coolside sx/so - strong sx, strong soc, weak sp. pulls from so/sp secondary, political activist streak, 'cooled' by soc with some intellectual reserve, channels sx into social causes.



Temizzle said:


> An SX first would throw it all away for that deep satisfying connection.


God, I feel like my advice to them would be, "Please don't." That tends to be my first reaction to hearing that kind of sentiment as someone who used to believe all I needed was a relationship. Guess that depends on exactly what that means, though. If it means losing all interest in anything but your obsession and only living for it then, no. Just no. That just doesn't sound healthy to me.


----------



## drizzy lake (Apr 28, 2017)

Temizzle said:


> That's right I recall you typing yourself as an ISTP 8w9 before. Must have identified with the aggression but thought yourself not aggressive enough to be an 8w7 so you figured 8w9.
> 
> All I'm saying is, if you were SX, you would know. You would come off as too much to people around you, and you would feel like you're a little misfit for this wold. There would be a heavy longing or itch you wear on your shoulder.


ISFP 8w9 that is. 
Its just the typical CP-6 mistype. After more pondering I settled on Sx-first now. I think it really just comes down to having a stronger than average second instinct, which someone in this thread already mentioned is an option.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Remnants said:


> Someone with high Social can care about how close they are to someone as well, however, and might identify with the Sx description more especially if they're a Feeler.


Yeah. That was me. I do feel all of this: 



Temizzle said:


> Feeling empty if your life remains on a mellow plane. Feeling like you need more. Sex is hardly enough, like you want to completely consume your partner. There is an emphasis on your desirability and you're very picky with who you connect with, but when you find someone who matches your energy level and chemistry you dive deep. DEEP. Like, pour way too much energy into it and overdo it -- there's a fear of putting too much into things that you'll break them. That intensity.


This is where it gets fuzzy: 



Temizzle said:


> So is much more concerned with their positioning in a social sphere and is first and foremost conscious to who they are in society or in their community and second about their passions and intensities.


While so/sp typically are clearly about position/role in community and the greater good, so/sx is not always so clearly structurally oriented, I think. Part of the joy of sx is in subversion and of allowing sx to take over. I love Typewatch's wording of sx being the vice chairman who sleeps with the so chairman of the board because think about that relationship. The chairman is still in charge, ultimately, and does have the power to make individual decisions that override everything. But is it pleasing to the chairman to override the person he's sleeping with? Probably not, no, especially with him being social and wanting to be inclusive. Does the person he's sleeping with have insidious effects on the chairman, whether they mean to or not? Yes, I'm sure. If we remember the sx vice chairman's personality: he prioritizes the passion, the intimacy, the depth, the fire, the ability to merge above all. So the chairman is swept into that, too, even though he also is aware of his responsibility to the rest of the board, and he rather likes the rest of the board as individuals and appreciates them, too. So he ends up moving back and forth between the two, drawn by the darker and more intense appeal of sx, but finding joy in the ability to dance in the lightness of the social realm, too. 

Especially as an introvert Feeler I think it has been hard to see myself in some social descriptions. I am not particularly suave or ambitious. I do not like sociopolitical play. I do not like networking. I do feel deeply empty if I'm not making enough intense, meaningful connections either with my world and/or with my intimates. I do have a good amount of (typically concealed) personal storm and fire, often regarding 1-to-1 relationships. (I initially wrote 1-on-1... Freudian slip?) That said, my main obsession and angst is "where do I fit in and who and what do I fit with?" - and that's still a deeply social question, even with its sx undertones of "clicking". I can identify good connections but remain so concerned with how it all fits together, what I should prioritize, etc.

I think this is a good point and potentially a litmus test: 



Temizzle said:


> An SX first would throw it all away for that deep satisfying connection.


I won't throw away my whole world for that. I will fight very, very hard to keep both, but ultimately I will release a singular connection in favor of the ability to continue connecting with my world. I don't value the deep submerge with one alone over the ability to form many meaningful connections and to maintain the ones I already have. Of course - I like some deeper than others!

That said the easier answer for me was simply that I'm a "lighter" person than sx. I'm more dancing sunshine dapples than sx/so's dancing blazing fire.


----------



## ShugerBby (7 mo ago)

d e c a d e n t said:


> Someone with high Social can care about how close they are to someone as well, however, and might identify with the Sx description more especially if they're a Feeler.


OMGGG that's exactly my problem now....I'm an infp


----------



## Schizoid (Jan 31, 2015)

Sx/so here, and deep intense connections with people is incredibly important to me.

I tend to get my feelings hurt easily whenever I sensed a psychological distance with the people around me, especially if I wanted to get to know someone on a deep personal level, but I get the sense that the feeling isn't mutual and they aren't interested in getting to know me on a deep personal level.

I think So-doms are less likely to take it personally when people around them doesn't want to get close to them.

But as an Sx-dom, I tend to take it very personally to the extent that I'll start withdrawing from that person. I guess I'd rather be alone by myself than to deal with shallow/superficial connections.


----------

