# LIE/ESI the only flawed duality?



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

So I read this... 
Yeah TLDR deluxe, I don't care if the mount everest of text scare you, go cry to momma or something.

http://personalitycafe.com/socionics-forum/740810-quadral-complexes-stratiyevskaya.html

It is a very interesting and good layout of the quadras, 
but for some reason most of the Gamma is devoted to how LIE/ESI can never work out.
Now luckily for me I've lived enough and read enough that I have some theories on what is up with that.

However I'd like other peoples opinion on this as well, since as an ESI this really can't hit closer to home.

*My theory:*
The marriage is what screws the relation up.
Convention making ESI's assets and LIE's assets merged, messes up what would otherwise be a good balance.
It is society with their artificial relationship structure that empowers LIE to take advantage of ESI.
If ESI refuses to marry and only share the responsibility for the kids and manage to keep healthy boundaries,
then this shouldn't happen. In my view ESI is vulnerable, because society has made ESI vulnerable.

*Fallback theory:*
If this proves to be the case, that LIE is indeed only a paracite in ESIs life, 
then maybe an ESI is better off with a SEE that at least understands ESI.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

I think that article touches on only one kind of LIE -- a severely unhealthy, reckless, and materialistic one. Fortunately all LIEs aren't like that though  It seems like quite an extreme scenario.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Duality has flaws no matter which type you are.

I don't see any reason to conclude that ESI-LIE duality will fail more often than others.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Night Huntress said:


> I think that article touches on only one kind of LIE -- a severely unhealthy, reckless, and materialistic one. Fortunately all LIEs aren't like that though  It seems like quite an extreme scenario.


Yeah, I'm wondering if the Enneagram may hold clues to that.
Might be that she is warning about dualing up with a neurotic loser basically.
Since she talks about that ESI should test the dual, before comitting to them.



Fried Eggz said:


> Duality has flaws no matter which type you are.
> 
> I don't see any reason to conclude that ESI-LIE duality will fail more often than others.


Do you have any specific flaws in mind or is it more a general sentiment?
I'm all ears.


----------



## Dalton (Jun 10, 2013)

Stratievskaya types herself as ESI. Maybe she's just whining about ESI/LIE duality because she thinks her own love life has been a failure, and everybody else has it so easy. :crying:

(Also, I didn't even read what she wrote, so read this as just a possibility statement, not an assessment/evaluation.)


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Dalton said:


> Stratievskaya types herself as ESI. Maybe she's just whining about ESI/LIE duality because she thinks her own love life has been a failure, and everybody else has it so easy. :crying:
> 
> (Also, I didn't even read what she wrote, so read this as just a possibility statement, not an assessment/evaluation.)


Basically a form of confirmation bias, could be.
I'll keep that possibility in mind.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Enneagram exists within the Sociotypes.

If someone is adamant on maintaining their Sociotype, then a marriage will fail. If you can't freely flow between them in-synch with someone else more than you remain static, then you'll fail at relationships. Relationships are dynamic, not static, and they require that a person accepts and reciprocates feelings and commitment independent of long-term personality changes that one or both may involve. Love is not an emotion; it is a conscious choice to place the well-being of another before yourself over time, independent of if the other person does the same.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

hornet said:


> Do you have any specific flaws in mind or is it more a general sentiment?
> I'm all ears.


I have an EIE friend. We are complete opposites. We find each other's personalities to be fascinating and easy to get along with. We can't stay away from each other for long and we have absorbed chunks of each other's personalities. He's given me advice and I've given him advice.

The flaws? Duality needs a close relationship to work. We don't share any interests. We don't share any strengths. We have our priorities in reverse order of each other. There is a natural divide between us that slows down a lot of useful advice. Dealing with 4D Ne is a bit intimidating as well, even if it is suppressed.

In some ways mirror is superior to duality. Friendships form faster, advice is passed faster, interests are similar, strengths are similar.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

Kinda piggybacking here, but I was thinking about the "power dynamic" in relationships. I think some duals are more balanced in terms of the power society affords them. I bolded the ones I think are unbalanced.

P1("power score")-P2("power score")
*IEI(2)-SLE(5)*
*EII(1)-LSE(6)*
EIE(4)-LSI(5)
*IEE(1)-SLI(4)*
ILI(3)-SEE(2)
LII(2)-ESE(3)
*LIE(5)-ESI(2)*
ILE(2)-SEI(1)

How I determined the "power score":

I (and maybe you) live in a society that hands relatively more power to LSEs*, and also to those with a "Directive" rather than "Informative" Interaction Style* (which is not a Socionics concept - I think it's Berens). This is highly country/culture dependent, though, so you might have a totally different experience.

I assigned one point to sharing each dichotomy with ESTj, and two points to "Directive"ness. LIE/ENTj is Directive and shares 3/4 dichotomies with LSE/ESTj for a score of 5. ESI/ISFj is Informative and shares 2/4 dichotomies with LSE/ESTj for a score of 2.

I don't think there's anything "intrinsic" about this, it's probably more to do with the larger society empowering one of the partners, yes.

*These aren't points I'm prepared to defend, just ones I used for this ranking because they "seem" true.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Enneagram exists within the Sociotypes.


I've heard you say that before, yet I don't understand how that would work out, so I've put the comment aside for now.



> If someone is adamant on maintaining their Sociotype, then a marriage will fail.


Marriage is a social construct that favours some more than other IMO, 



> If you can't freely flow between them in-synch with someone else more than you remain static, then you'll fail at relationships.


I agree that there must be a flow, but since each dual pair is unique in subjective boundaries and objective limitlessness,
I think it is safe to say that the particulars in how that happen in each dual pair would be different.
That is why advice from different types get messy, they don't fully understand the dynamic that you have to face in your pairing,
and instead project the values of their own quadra over onto the other pairing.
Giving very very bad advice that due to cultural forces, might seem like a legit and bona fide way to go about it.
The institute of marriage is one such thing, it is something that has changed over millenia and societies.
It stands to reason that it's current form is shaped more by certain types than others and hence creates and unfair environment.



> Relationships are dynamic, not static, and they require that a person accepts and reciprocates feelings and commitment independent of long-term personality changes that one or both may involve. Love is not an emotion; it is a conscious choice to place the well-being of another before yourself over time, independent of if the other person does the same.


That is an interesting interpretation.



Fried Eggz said:


> I have an EIE friend. We are complete opposites. We find each other's personalities to be fascinating and easy to get along with. We can't stay away from each other for long and we have absorbed chunks of each other's personalities. He's given me advice and I've given him advice.
> 
> The flaws? Duality needs a close relationship to work. We don't share any interests. We don't share any strengths. We have our priorities in reverse order of each other. There is a natural divide between us that slows down a lot of useful advice. Dealing with 4D Ne is a bit intimidating as well, even if it is suppressed.
> 
> In some ways mirror is superior to duality. Friendships form faster, advice is passed faster, interests are similar, strengths are similar.


Yeah I hear you on the 4D, it irks me too sometimes.
Thanks for sharing.



counterintuitive said:


> Kinda piggybacking here, but I was thinking about the "power dynamic" in relationships. I think some duals are more balanced in terms of the power society affords them. I bolded the ones I think are unbalanced.
> 
> P1("power score")-P2("power score")
> *IEI(2)-SLE(5)*
> ...


That makes a lot of sense.
My country is very Delta oriented right now, so to say that LSEs are in high regard is no joke.
So basically for me to have a relationship that works out with a dual,
I need to have very firm boundaries and as much power that I can gather.
It makes total sense.
I think a good start is not telling such a person anything about Jung/Socionics etc
Having full understanding of their motives etc, while they only have their natural powers and insights.
Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

> That is an interesting interpretation.


Honestly, it's really not. That's just common knowledge of people who are in successful life-long relationships.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Honestly, it's really not. That's just common knowledge of people who are in successful life-long relationships.


Let me rephrase myself, *so you* get the point... :tongue:

That is an intepretation that made me think about the issue from a new point of view.
It shifted the holografic representation of love in my head, 
(A little to the left actually, then some blue was added, I noticed it when i zoomed in)
I will geek out over this new POV for a little while now.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

hornet said:


> Let me rephrase myself, *so you* get the point... :tongue:
> 
> That is an intepretation that made me think about the issue from a new point of view.
> It shifted the holografic representation of love in my head,
> ...


I got the point. Mine was that you may want to spend some time reflecting on why you haven't always had access to information that is so extremely common and the foundation of society.

Also, 1 Corinthians 13.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Jeremy8419 said:


> I got the point. Mine was that you may want to spend some time reflecting on why you haven't always had access to information that is so extremely common and the foundation of society.
> 
> Also, 1 Corinthians 13.


You think you have a point since *you don't understand me*.
I can hear the same information twice and both times they can change my inner holografic understanding.
It is not about access, but of peeling of another layer on the onion so to speak.
But that is okay, cause *I understand that you don't understand me.
*Hence I can just move on satisfied that your insistence on the iconic representation of love you try to uphold,
only represent your POV and your way of processing information.
Even if I heard your message repeated a thousand times, 
*the inner view on love would shift every single time.
*


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

hornet said:


> You think you have a point since *you don't understand me*.
> I can hear the same information twice and both times they can change my inner holografic understanding.
> It is not about access, but of peeling of another layer on the onion so to speak.
> But that is okay, cause *I understand that you don't understand me.
> ...


So, maybe focus more on other people's shifts than your own.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Jeremy8419 said:


> So, maybe focus more on other people's shifts than your own.


Nah...


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

hornet said:


> Nah...


So, you're certain of being holographic ego?


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Jeremy8419 said:


> So, you're certain of being holographic ego?


Perhaps...
I reframed myself as all the other ones to see how it would be to be them.

*Vortical-Synergetic* 
is way too chaotic for comfort.
*Dialectical-Algorithmic* 
sounds fun, but the fact that I can't keep up with ILIs in this realm shows the writing on the wall...
*Causal-Determinist* 
sounds fairly rigid...bah boring

But when we talk about holografic, it makes perfect sense, that is how I've operate.
The ESI description also rings eriee true to my actions with people.


> _ESI_ first draws near to a person, then moves away, seeming to probe the individual from all sides,
> cutting off those who could let them down.


Gulenko Cognitive Styles(wiki) - Wikisocion

I think I can be a hard person to type as I've gone trough several weird transformations.
I've also been oppressed most my life by Alphas, Beta's and Delta's.
As a Gamma the complex of tied hands is very real and very painful.
I've almost killed people with my bare fists out of pure frustration and anger.
Grabbed knives, and other blunt instruments of revenge in blinding anger over my oppression.
Eventually I just shut down into a more or less 9ish state of apathy.
It took the death of two of my delta oppressors before I was able to free myself.
I left the country shortly after on the first plane, with the alpahs and betas feebly trying to stop me.
Alphas failing because of demoracy, 
betas since they didn't know the Si spells the dead magicians used to bind me.
To me being ESI is the only type that makes sense, despite all the harsh ridicule for individuality,
coupled with oppressive denying of freedom of action that is still who I am at the core.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Well, I don't know what to tell you, but you're 1D Fi compared to general society, so that only leaves one type.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Well, I don't know what to tell you, but you're 1D Fi compared to general society, so that only leaves one type.


lol why? 
Cause I don't live up to you expectations?
Such a lowly manipulative tactic to say that my most valued side is my lowest function
A true delta hard at work trying to sculpt me...
Run and hide before I clip your wings for trying to bind my hands 

*Edit:
That is if you are implying that I'm a ESTP...

If you think that I'm a LIE... lol that would be the day...

Anyway I don't trust Delta's at all anymore... (So what you say is filtered carefully)
Subtly trying to snare me to feed their Ne, it is disgusting.
Beta's although annoying at least make it clear when they attack.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

hornet said:


> lol why?
> Cause I don't live up to you expectations?
> Such a lowly manipulative tactic to say that my most valued side is my lowest function
> A true delta hard at work trying to sculpt me...
> ...


It's not an attack to offer someone advice.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Jeremy8419 said:


> It's not an attack to offer someone advice.


Yeah I know right?
Such a paradoxical moral dilemma this one at the surface.
Better just temporarily block you until I've solved this riddle satisfactory.
Saves me much needed mental energy.
Bye for now!


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

hornet said:


> Yeah I know right?
> Such a paradoxical moral dilemma this one at the surface.
> Better just temporarily block you until I've solved this riddle satisfactory.
> Saves me much needed mental energy.
> Bye for now!


Well, we're talking about Fi and your lack-thereof and you're getting pissed... So there you have it.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Should I look at his post?
Nah...probably implying something mean again to make me continue justifying myself.
Thx though, I now know what buttons my grandmother and grandfather installed in me.
It is going to be a delight uninstalling those buttons.


----------



## Freeflowingthoughts (Jun 23, 2015)

hornet said:


> Should I look at his post?
> Nah...probably implying something mean again to make me continue justifying myself.
> Thx though, I now know what buttons my grandmother and grandfather installed in me.
> It is going to be a delight uninstalling those buttons.


You seem very ESI man. Don't worry about him, it is manipulative tactics. He will always make others doubt themselves. Your writing is beautiful and I can definetely see Ni writing and serious Se. The fact that you're manipulated by Ne means you HAVE to be LSI/ESI, and you're incredibly individualistic.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> You seem very ESI man. Don't worry about him, it is manipulative tactics. He will always make others doubt themselves. Your writing is beautiful and I can definetely see Ni writing and serious Se. The fact that you're manipulated by Ne means you HAVE to be LSI/ESI, and you're incredibly individualistic.


Thx appreciate the cheer up!
My dad is LSI, so I think I know pretty well how I'd act if I was one of them.
He taught me to program and we had epic Ti vs Te programming style battles.
He wanted efficency, I wanted a result on the other end to use for something.


----------



## Freeflowingthoughts (Jun 23, 2015)

hornet said:


> Thx appreciate the cheer up!
> My dad is LSI, so I think I know pretty well how I'd act if I was one of them.
> He taught me to program and we had epic Ti vs Te programming style battles.
> He wanted efficency, I wanted a result on the other end to use for something.


Lol yeah! LSIs are process oriented so they can fill your head with peripheral bits of knowledge about the computer, whilst not actually teaching what you want. We both share an LSI dad! 
Stick with the ESTP/INFJ, ENTJ/ISFP, ESTJ/INFP, and INTP/ESFJ for learning things, they speak your language


----------



## ParetoCaretheStare (Jan 18, 2012)

Aren't gammas known to be the "swingers" of the quadras in the first place? That's sort of the intuitive feeling I got when reading the descriptions of the categories of social groups interactions. Marriage seems like a Delta or Beta construct, depending on how _committed_, of course. Lol.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

ParetoCaretheStare said:


> Aren't gammas known to be the "swingers" of the quadras in the first place? That's sort of the intuitive feeling I got when reading the descriptions of the categories of social groups interactions. Marriage seems like a Delta or Beta construct, depending on how _committed_, of course. Lol.


I think any quadra's members can be committed and loyal; they just probably see/express it in different ways.

I'm gamma and I'm 2000% committed to partners, friends, projects, duties, whatever. It's a part of my personal integrity and I would never abandon that.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> Lol yeah! LSIs are process oriented so they can fill your head with peripheral bits of knowledge about the computer, whilst not actually teaching what you want. We both share an LSI dad!
> Stick with the ESTP/INFJ, ENTJ/ISFP, ESTJ/INFP, and INTP/ESFJ for learning things, they speak your language


I see.
When you say speak my language, what are you thinking of then?
I've never seen those types lumped together like that before.



ParetoCaretheStare said:


> Aren't gammas known to be the "swingers" of the quadras in the first place? That's sort of the intuitive feeling I got when reading the descriptions of the categories of social groups interactions. Marriage seems like a Delta or Beta construct, depending on how _committed_, of course. Lol.


Well yeah, I can totally see the swinger potential in myself and other Gammas.
Yet all types can run around being loose.
My worry isn't so much that any LIE will leave me, I can handle that.
But that they will take all my stuff and then leave me "broke, homeless and with 4 kids to take care of"
as she put it so nicely in that Gamma article.
But yeah I think the marriage is the problem too, it is an artifact designed for other means and ends.
Screwing up what would otherwise be a working relationship.
The LIE with inferior Fi struggle to see the wrong in taking my stuff if it is already declared as legaly theirs.
If I never signed away my stuff in the marriage contract in the first place, 
then LIEs don't hit me as someone who would steal my stuff without my consent.
My attitude towards LIEs should then always be, this is my stuff and that is your stuff.
If we get kids, raising them is a shared project, but you don't get to own my stuff, just cause we share a project.
We define what our project needs and pool in for that, projects on the side is your problem so don't come to me for funding.
Your projects failed? Go work at Mcdonalds to bootstrap your next bright idea then, don't look to me


----------



## Freeflowingthoughts (Jun 23, 2015)

hornet said:


> I see.
> When you say speak my language, what are you thinking of then?
> I've never seen those types lumped together like that before.


Lol. I know the whole Ti Te thing. But these types are all lumped together because they're _result oriented_ so they get to the point, and the other types are _process oriented_, so they're all about the process, every single detail even if it's absolutely useless to what you want to achieve. That's why it's frustrating. Irregardless of Ti/Te. I have no Te whatsoever but IEIs are result oriented. Feel me?


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> Lol. I know the whole Ti Te thing. But these types are all lumped together because they're _result oriented_ so they get to the point, and the other types are _process oriented_, so they're all about the process, every single detail even if it's absolutely useless to what you want to achieve. That's why it's frustrating. Irregardless of Ti/Te. I have no Te whatsoever but IEIs are result oriented. Feel me?


Yeah it makes perfect sense now!
I'm fully aware of the reinin dicotomies, I just havn't memorized them so I didn't see the pattern.
Thanks for that.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> Lol. I know the whole Ti Te thing. But these types are all lumped together because they're _result oriented_ so they get to the point, and the other types are _process oriented_, so they're all about the process, every single detail even if it's absolutely useless to what you want to achieve. That's why it's frustrating. Irregardless of Ti/Te. I have no Te whatsoever but IEIs are result oriented. Feel me?


I have the same issue with result types when I get a task, I feel lost if I don't know the steps well for doing something. Basically I worry that something may go wrong and figuring out which step failed can be a legit pain in the ass. Same thing with getting something to do and no clues of how the hell I can reach the result. However, there's a thing as unrequired details, but those I see as information that don't help me to figure out how to solve a problem.

Also, when I'm in a process I get annoyed when the plans change too quickly, as I need time to adapt to the new task. This is specially grating if I'm busy with a process and my professor says, nope better do this task >_> feels like a waste of time as I can't complete anything.


----------



## Kyusaku (Mar 18, 2014)

Fried Eggz said:


> I have an EIE friend. We are complete opposites. We find each other's personalities to be fascinating and easy to get along with. We can't stay away from each other for long and we have absorbed chunks of each other's personalities. He's given me advice and I've given him advice.
> 
> The flaws? Duality needs a close relationship to work. We don't share any interests. We don't share any strengths. We have our priorities in reverse order of each other. There is a natural divide between us that slows down a lot of useful advice. Dealing with 4D Ne is a bit intimidating as well, even if it is suppressed.
> 
> In some ways mirror is superior to duality. Friendships form faster, advice is passed faster, interests are similar, strengths are similar.


I don't find mirror relationships to be that great because everything is so similar it is stale. Duality life lessons are harder, sometimes even painful to absorb, but overall their quality is the highest you can find. Once you get attuned to the differences no relationship is as fulfilling.

I would add to the flaws that those differences are often a source for heavy biases, feeling vs thinking, etc, and it's rather common that duals belittle each other. When you look at polls on what's the favorite type of each type is, dual partners come last.


----------



## Freeflowingthoughts (Jun 23, 2015)

Kyusaku said:


> I don't find mirror relationships to be that great because everything is so similar it is stale. Duality life lessons are harder, sometimes even painful to absorb, but overall their quality is the highest you can find. Once you get attuned to the differences no relationship is as fulfilling.
> 
> I would add to the flaws that those differences are often a source for heavy biases, feeling vs thinking, etc, and it's rather common that duals belittle each other. When you look at polls on what's the favorite type of each type is, dual partners come last.


Forgive me, but what you said sounded good. I don't know about you, but I freaking love ESTPs. Before I found out about typology at all, I was always drawn in, and fascinated with my dual and they seem to be with me.

The way you talk about duality life lessons, makes me think it could possibly be a conflicter? ISTJ?


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

hornet said:


> Should I look at his post?
> Nah...probably implying something mean again to make me continue justifying myself.
> Thx though, I now know what buttons my grandmother and grandfather installed in me.
> It is going to be a delight uninstalling those buttons.


I've also dodged that bullet many-a-time.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

The Perfect Storm said:


> I've also dodged that bullet many-a-time.


Can be hard to keep curiosity in check.

Regardless I think that the issue raised in that exchange is a very valid issue.
I've been thinking about how to resolve it and I remember a saying some guy said.
*"I'll give you enough rope to hang yourself with."*
The meaning being that when you get advice from someone you don't know the intention of,
you can just stay uncommitted until they either hang themself or prove the worth of their advice.
It also I think highlights why people are hesitant to take advice,
you never know the motive of the person giving it, might be led straight into a trap.
So advice don't have to be an attack, but it sure as hell can be if the intention behind the advice is to control you.

I think the reason I wasn't willing to take that advice was that he wanted to prod me in the direction of 
submitting to his version of how to deal with a society that tries to restrain you.
When I didn't want to accept it, 
he then seemed to out of the blue make unfounded assumptions about my type.
The advice was the trap and when I refused to walk into it
he tried to push me out of balance to fall into it anyway.
I'm amazed it took me so long to recognize the basic conflicts of interest between the quadras.
Only conflict of interest I got a handle on was with the Beta's, 
it always was clear they wanted to dominate me.
Oh well enough of that rant.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

@hornet

I'm not sure that it's quadra/type related; just someone trying to make you doubt yourself so that you submit to their world-view/perception. It's playing dirty, really.

I'd just ignore it, personally.


----------



## Kyusaku (Mar 18, 2014)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> Forgive me, but what you said sounded good. I don't know about you, but I freaking love ESTPs. Before I found out about typology at all, I was always drawn in, and fascinated with my dual and they seem to be with me.
> 
> The way you talk about duality life lessons, makes me think it could possibly be a conflicter? ISTJ?


I think it depends on the level of closeness, as Fried Eggz said. You can be drawn yet detached from your dual, and not take into account his perspectives and insights. When you do take it into account, it can hurt quite a bit, for different reasons depending on which type you are.

I have several LSI friends, with whom I am close yet at the same time it's a live and let live situation where we are free to be as we are comfortable to be. We appreciate each others presence, but we don't push each other to become better persons. While I met another LSI in which I'm romantically interested, and it's entirely different there. I want to become a better person, push myself. I become aware of my flaws and bullshit and I work very hard to meet higher standards for myself. It hurts, it's difficult, but at the end of the day I grow at such a pace as I have never thought possible before. I've found new heights, new goals, new perspectives.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

The Perfect Storm said:


> @_hornet_
> 
> I'm not sure that it's quadra/type related; just someone trying to make you doubt yourself so that you submit to their world-view/perception. It's playing dirty, really.
> 
> I'd just ignore it, personally.


Well I would ordinarily, but it sort of ties neatly into the article I linked in the OP.
The topic has captured my attention.
I've studied Jung/Socioncis/Enneagram so deeply, 
that when I have a breaktrough like this I can't leave it alone...


----------



## Freeflowingthoughts (Jun 23, 2015)

Typhon said:


> No offense, but this type of reasoning is why so many people I talk to don't like socionics. You're trying to fit his experience into your frame of thinking, when it should be the other way around. Socionics amateurs do this all the time instead of trying to understand types based on people's actual experience. Socionics is not exact science, and furthermore, the aspect of theory which deals with unvalued functions is little understood yet everyone seemsto make a dogma out of a belief without proper research. Instead of saying " it _should _be a crystal clear revelation which calms you" , a researcher would say "I see this goes against what I thought about the demonstrative function, but I'll take into consideration and reconsider my understanding of the demonstrative function".


That's exactly what I'm doing. For me, Te is a nightmare and gives me a headache, but when SLE, or ILE talks, It's so calming and... calming. Everything's right in the world lol. Also, I see he has on his logo "MBTI: INTJ, Socionics" LSI". These are two completely seperate types with a completely different judging axis. Even if you believe LSI is ISTJ in mbti, or if you believe is ISTP in MBTI, then it's a different percieving axis or judging. Take your pick. It's like saying LIE, is an ENFP in MBTI. Anybody who has met these two types in real life, knows the huge difference between the two. The absolute weakness of one is a powerful strength for the other.

Btw, I know it was rude, me and this type have had run ins before.


----------



## Freeflowingthoughts (Jun 23, 2015)

GnothiSeauton said:


> Agreed.
> Also, the point of the demonstrative function should be that you're good enough at 'providing' that information element for the dual who lacks it, so it's merely something you take out on occasion in a way that's tolerable for them. There's nothing that will be "crystal clear" about it to the other partner, nor there is any revelation about it of any sort.


Lol, you just agreed with me and somehow made it so you didn't. You just contradicted yourself. If the dual has 4D Ne, Te whatever, such that she's good at providing it to me, why does that not make it crystal clear? I know instinctively it makes perfect sense and subconsciouslly it fills a void, plus she's so sure of her words, and Te is the type of thing that is literally in front of you.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> Also, I see he has on his logo "MBTI: INTJ, Socionics" LSI".
> 
> Btw, I know it was rude, me and this type have had run ins before.


Wow. You were being rude to me because I disagree with you about MBTI types matching Socionics? Actually stop and think about that; do you really want to be a bigot?



Freeflowingthoughts said:


> That's exactly what I'm doing. For me, Te is a nightmare and gives me a headache, but when SLE, or ILE talks, It's so calming and... calming. Everything's right in the world lol.


What's that got to do with Te? It's not their demonstrative that's calming you, it's their Ji.

Most of the time, EIEs are not a problem for me. I appreciate their warmth, kindness, gentleness and openness. But I've received Ne advice from them, and it still hurts my head.


----------



## Freeflowingthoughts (Jun 23, 2015)

Fried Eggz said:


> Wow. You were being rude to me because I disagree with you about MBTI types matching Socionics? Actually stop and think about that; do you really want to be a bigot?
> 
> 
> What's that got to do with Te? It's not their demonstrative that's calming you, it's their Ji.
> ...


No, I was being rude because I spoke my mind and pointed something out that I would normally hold back due to some kind of courtesy. Your behaviour in the past waved that right. 

It is the demonstrative that's calming, SFJs and IXTPs can Ti to me all day, but it really doesn't do anything for me.


----------



## GnothiSeauton (Sep 11, 2011)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> Lol, you just agreed with me and somehow made it so you didn't. You just contradicted yourself. If the dual has 4D Ne, Te whatever, such that she's good at providing it to me, why does that not make it crystal clear? I know instinctively it makes perfect sense and subconsciouslly it fills a void, plus she's so sure of her words, and Te is the type of thing that is literally in front of you.


I was agreeing with Typhon, not you.

I was merely pointing out that while that one particular aspect of your dual's demonstrative function may be "crystal clear" to you, your PoLR as a whole does not; this is mostly because they're still filtering that information to you in a way you can metabolize, i.e. through your dual-seeking function. So what I'm saying is, it's probably not a huge stretch to say that some aspects of the PoLR may still be confusing, even when it's being used by your dual.

I believe it was Gulenko who commented once that dual relationships aren't the conflict-free paradise that is sometimes imagined. This is because your dual can hit your weaknesses, and thus, your PoLR.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> That's exactly what I'm doing. For me, Te is a nightmare and gives me a headache, but when SLE, or ILE talks, It's so calming and... calming.


Because they're using Ti. ILE and SLE will solve Te related problems, but in a way that takes on the form of Ti, so that these problems will appear "crystal clear" to you all of a sudden.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Fried Eggz said:


> Ne Gives me a headache. It's also confusing.


Interestingly enough, I don't mind Ne demonstrative for the most part though it can get a bit too vague for my liking. Ne base is far more vague in a disconcerting way though. (ILE not as much tho' if they add enough Ti into it.) My experience/POV.




Fried Eggz said:


> Most of the time, EIEs are not a problem for me. I appreciate their warmth, kindness, gentleness and openness. But I've received Ne advice from them, and it still hurts my head.


Actual example of such Ne advice that has hurt your head? I'm really curious.




GnothiSeauton said:


> I believe it was Gulenko who commented once that dual relationships aren't the conflict-free paradise that is sometimes imagined. This is because your dual can hit your weaknesses, and thus, your PoLR.


Lol I don't know who's that naive.

Yes, I could totally hit the Si PoLR if I wanted to - I don't really care to, though.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> That's exactly what I'm doing. For me, Te is a nightmare and gives me a headache, but when SLE, or ILE talks, It's so calming and... calming. Everything's right in the world lol. Also, I see he has on his logo "MBTI: INTJ, Socionics" LSI". These are two completely seperate types with a completely different judging axis. Even if you believe LSI is ISTJ in mbti, or if you believe is ISTP in MBTI, then it's a different percieving axis or judging. Take your pick. It's like saying LIE, is an ENFP in MBTI. Anybody who has met these two types in real life, knows the huge difference between the two. The absolute weakness of one is a powerful strength for the other.
> 
> Btw, I know it was rude, me and this type have had run ins before.


"This type", you mean LSI in general or @Fried Eggz?

I argued with him about the INTJ thing before. It helped to learn that he only meant the dichotomies and not the functions and that the N is just the official MBTI definition of that dichotomy. It doesn't overlap 100% with the Socionics definition, though it's very close. It does differ on one attribute (with "abstract" being only related to N in MBTI, unlike in Socionics). I'm still not convinced tho' that if he is LSI in Socionics then he could still be N in MBTI because there are other attributes to the dichotomy. But eh. I'm also going with dichotomies only in MBTI because I do agree on how that's sensible enough.

LSI isn't MBTI ISTP btw, that's for sure.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

myst91 said:


> Interestingly enough, I don't mind Ne demonstrative for the most part though it can get a bit too vague for my liking. Ne base is far more vague in a disconcerting way though. (ILE not as much tho' if they add enough Ti into it.) My experience/POV.


ILEs make me zone out so quickly. They're fun when they're not Ne-ing. The Si dual seeking has been entertaining as well; some of them really seem to think they have every disease in the world.



myst91 said:


> Actual example of such Ne advice that has hurt your head? I'm really curious.


He caused me headaches when we were discussing a book and he was reading subtext left, right and centre. He gave me a tip and I don't remember what it was. He hasn't caused these headaches very often, so it's been quite a while.


----------



## Freeflowingthoughts (Jun 23, 2015)

myst91 said:


> "This type", you mean LSI in general or @Fried Eggz?
> 
> I argued with him about the INTJ thing before. It helped to learn that he only meant the dichotomies and not the functions and that the N is just the official MBTI definition of that dichotomy. It doesn't overlap 100% with the Socionics definition, though it's very close. It does differ on one attribute (with "abstract" being only related to N in MBTI, unlike in Socionics). I'm still not convinced tho' that if he is LSI in Socionics then he could still be N in MBTI because there are other attributes to the dichotomy. But eh. I'm also going with dichotomies only in MBTI because I do agree on how that's sensible enough.
> 
> LSI isn't MBTI ISTP btw, that's for sure.


LSI with Ti 'base' and Se 'creative' is not the same as ISTP with Ti 'dom' and Se 'aux'? You're _sure_?


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Fried Eggz said:


> ILEs make me zone out so quickly. They're fun when they're not Ne-ing. The Si dual seeking has been entertaining as well; some of them really seem to think they have every disease in the world.


If the ILE isn't talking about some concrete enough topic (with Ti strongly utilized), they do have me zone out fast too.  Yeah, the Si seeking is weird too. 




> He caused me headaches when we were discussing a book and he was reading subtext left, right and centre. He gave me a tip and I don't remember what it was. He hasn't caused these headaches very often, so it's been quite a while.


Oh, recently a (quite likely) EIE girl brought up a crazy what if question about some crazy creatures existing or not, and that did hurt my head but then I somehow got to ask her why she even cares about that sort of question and that led to me summarizing in a very nice logical way what her worldview was like. She agreed with me


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

Freeflowingthoughts said:


> LSI with Ti 'base' and Se 'creative' is not the same as ISTP with Ti 'dom' and Se 'aux'? You're _sure_?


I'm very sure... Check the definitions in the two systems. They won't fully match. If that doesn't convince you, go ask or observe the ISTPs on this forum or even on TypoC and they'll give you a load of Si and Fi valuing. Many of them type as SLI in Socionics. It makes sense, they type as ISTP because they go with the flow and Socionics Ip does exactly that too. 

Of course not all ISTPs are SLI in Socionics, it depends on why someone picks ISTP as a type; I've seen ISTP LSI-Se too that was clearly Ti valuing. Refreshing after all the Fi bollocks.

But if someone types at ISTP because of strongly identifying with the P traits and only with a superficial understanding of Ti that may apply to demonstrative Ti just as well and, along with that, identifying with the Sensing traits of detecting smell/temperature/texture/colours over objective traits of objects's (where only the latter would be valued Socionics Se) and going for that certain brand of energy conserving also associated with Socionics Si then there's a good chance they are SLI in Socionics.

We could argue over whether it's MBTI Ti or Socionics Ti that's really introverted logic but I would think Socionics defines Ti in a more logically consistent way with regard to what the jungian dichotomies mean. Could argue over Se/Si/Te as well, and so on...

As for Ti, I've had some arguments with MBTI ISTPs (the ones that type as SLI) about how important it is to keep logic consistent overall... they disagreed with me over that. They don't really like to focus on that or delve that deep in analysis, preferring instead to just look at how things work and fix them with their tools (ringing a bell about Socionics Te+Si eh?). Oh and I must mention this, I had the most fun with one of them telling me that what I was displaying was Ni even after I quoted a Ti description from Jung.. he called that Ni too. :tongue:

So you can see how I really am not too interested in the chaos that MBTI fanfiction is.

Finally, another argument for my claim is, compare the stereotypes (I know, they are just stereotypes but they are supposedly computed from the functions/IEs as an attempt at explaining observations of how certain traits commonly seem to cluster together), LSI is clearly not at all MBTI ISTP, for example it's too into the Beta hierarchy stuff, while MBTI ISTP stereotype is pretty lackadaisical wrt that, related to that is how they supposedly are not interested in pushing others and so on.

I don't really know of an MBTI stereotype that fits well, tbh, at least personally I didn't find anything for myself, I have the above mentioned problems with ISTP and ISTJ lacks Se too much for my liking but maybe because I'm the Se subtype.


----------



## Mr inappropriate (Dec 17, 2013)

@myst91
I typed at ISTJ for a while and frequented their MBTI sub-forum. I'd bet my ass on that the percantage of LSI's in ISTP part is higher than in the ISTJ part. Though the ISTJ decriptions overall, may resemble LSI a bit more, thats because how j and J decribed in both systems are (especially behavioral traits) are very similar if not same.
I think LSI-Se are prone mistype as xNTJ in MBTI. Because MBTI "NTJ" characterisrics sounds very Se on paper.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

crashbandicoot said:


> @myst91
> I typed at ISTJ for a while and frequented their MBTI sub-forum. I'd bet my ass on that the percantage of LSI's in ISTP part is higher than in the ISTJ part. Though the ISTJ decriptions overall, may resemble LSI a bit more, thats because how j and J decribed in both systems are (especially behavioral traits) are very similar if not same.
> I think LSI-Se are prone mistype as xNTJ in MBTI. Because MBTI "NTJ" characterisrics sounds very Se on paper.


I looked at both subforums and I think ISTPs are usually SLI, Fi-doms, LSI, LII, ISTJs are usually LSE, LSI, SLI, Fi-doms... I didn't try to guess at percentages.

Nah I always knew I wasn't NTJ. I never deluded myself into thinking I had Ni+Te :dry:

I don't see how INTJ characteristics sound Se anyway, it's mostly about conceptual thinking, so clearly not Sensing. ENTJ has a bit more Se but it still emphasizes long term Ni and conceptual orientation in their thinking. Willfullness doesn't equal Se.

Oh and yes, J / P and j / p are pretty similar trait-wise.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

myst91 said:


> Oh and yes, J / P and j / p are pretty similar trait-wise.


That explains why I get INTP in tests despite not valuing Ti and Ne. To be honest I use INTJ as a reference for Ni+Te, as MBTI is so flawed that I don't bother with it anymore. Socionics and Jung helped me far more to understand how I think as they clearly explain how the functions work and the interaction between them. Also reading quadra info made clear that I'm Gamma.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

crashbandicoot said:


> @_myst91_
> I typed at ISTJ for a while and frequented their MBTI sub-forum. I'd bet my ass on that the percantage of LSI's in ISTP part is higher than in the ISTJ part. Though the ISTJ decriptions overall, may resemble LSI a bit more, thats because how j and J decribed in both systems are (especially behavioral traits) are very similar if not same. I think LSI-Se are prone mistype as xNTJ in MBTI. Because MBTI "NTJ" characterisrics sounds very Se on paper.


That was my impression, too -- the ISTP forum is full of LSIs, of course some other types post there like ESIs, SLI, and some mistyped IEIs, but the general feel is very beta. Even looking at the ISTP thread titles like this one _http://personalitycafe.com/istp-for...-ability-figuring-out-persons-weaknesses.html_ these threads are mirroring the *Beta Quadra complex*.


----------



## Mr inappropriate (Dec 17, 2013)

myst91 said:


> I looked at both subforums and I think ISTPs are usually SLI, Fi-doms, LSI, LII, ISTJs are usually LSE, LSI, SLI, Fi-doms... I didn't try to guess at percentages.
> 
> Nah I always knew I wasn't NTJ. I never deluded myself into thinking I had Ni+Te :dry:
> 
> ...


In mbti sterotypes, ENTJ is this sorta monster who pushes everyone out of the way to gain money, commands everyone left and right and occasionally kills kittens for fun. Intj is the same but talks less, plans more.
There is lots of forcefullnes attributed to Entj. Ofc, when you dig a bit deeper in mbti, you can see this isnt the likely case.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

crashbandicoot said:


> In mbti sterotypes, ENTJ is this sorta monster who pushes everyone out of the way to gain money, commands everyone left and right and occasionally kills kittens for fun. Intj is the same but talks less, plans more.
> There is lots of forcefullnes attributed to Entj. Ofc, when you dig a bit deeper in mbti, you can see this isnt the likely case.


It's just Se HA for the ENTJ stuff. INTJ isn't really depicted as a monster, just as a conceptual thinker who has planning and (again, the conceptual type of) strategic skills with strong will. The INTJs I know are pretty much like that, too though they do typically struggle with willpower so that one thing is off.


----------



## myst91 (Sep 9, 2014)

cyamitide said:


> That was my impression, too -- the ISTP forum is full of LSIs, of course some other types post there like ESIs, SLI, and some mistyped IEIs, but the general feel is very beta. Even looking at the ISTP thread titles like this one _http://personalitycafe.com/istp-for...-ability-figuring-out-persons-weaknesses.html_ these threads are mirroring the *Beta Quadra complex*.


Then why on earth do most of them pick SLI? All those enneagram 9 ISTPs with Fe PoLR-y feel to their posts.

So far I'm like, I find three SLIs then one LSI and so on. As I said, I haven't calculated percentages but it's something like that so far.

EDIT: I checked that thread. It does not really prove conscious Se ego in the first post - _"but does anyone here have the ability to kind of *unconsciously *KNOW peoples' weak points?"_

Tell me, have you ever conversed at length with those ISTPs beyond superficially glancing at thread titles? I have, over several months, and that's where my observations come from.


----------



## Freeflowingthoughts (Jun 23, 2015)

crashbandicoot said:


> In mbti sterotypes, ENTJ is this sorta monster who pushes everyone out of the way to gain money, commands everyone left and right and occasionally kills kittens for fun. Intj is the same but talks less, plans more.
> There is lots of forcefullnes attributed to Entj. Ofc, when you dig a bit deeper in mbti, you can see this isnt the likely case.


Exactly, LSI and INTJ have nothing in common. @myst91 I honestly don't get why other types seem to find the MBTI theory so complex and difficult. I am INFJ _not_ INFP. This isn't confirmation biase, or whatever other terms, when I first started I read both, the INFJ description was a _revalation_, the INFP one was simply inaccurate. Every single sentence being true vs one or two if I really twist it. The transition to socionics was another simple one. Ni-Fe in MBTI, to Ni-Fe in socionics. Again, why is this so hard? The descriptions, the ITR, the poems about us, the quadra articles, everything fitted, everything fitted to a tee. The Se valuing, aligning it with Nietschze, socionics is really a beautiful framework. Also, I'm fascinated how Ni-Fe in Socionics suddenly turns to Fi-Ne in Myers Briggs. Why does the function ordering flip, Feeling turns into intuition lol. Are you really trying to say that Socionics Ni = Fi MBTI. Socionics Ti= Si MBTI._It is ridiculous_. The Ni and Ti in both systems, there is a strong resembelance and correlation to Ni Ti in MBTI. Ti to Si has absolutely _no_ correlation. Again, why is this so hard? Don't be skeptical, simply ask yourself, is this _true?_ That's what I did, and INFJ fitted, and IEI fitted to a tee. Even the tiniest grain of sand. Just ask yourself, is this true.


----------

