# Not "drawn" to dual?



## Oldlady (Sep 18, 2009)

It feels like my dual and mirror are always slipping through my fingers.

It's weird, because when I hang out with them I feel very comfortable. They are giving me exactly what I want, the opportunity to relax and be accepted. So then, why is it so easy for me to let my dual walk away? I don't feel abandoned. 

I had a fairly good mirror friend who slighted me (she was annoyed that I was always depressed... I was going through depression). That was a year and a half ago. I won't see her. I know that the first thing I would do if I saw her would be to get angry. 

Besides that one incident, our friendship was near golden.

HOWEVER, there is a supervisor of mine who drove me to have a near nervous breakdown everyday. I am emailing him even though he won't respond, desperate to get back together so I won't be alone.

WTF is that?

Are positive relations harder to hold together?


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Socionics supervisor or supervisor as in work boss?

I did a poll on intertype relationships and Supervision came out as one of the most frequent relationship types (although it was done by converting Socionics types into MBTI types by functions). I think that in asymmetric relationship types like Supervision and Benefit those involved find aspects about one another that they cannot understand or explain, so then they may be more more prone to obsess about one another and find each other mysterious. If someone is visiting your thoughts over and over again you're more likely to call them or get into contact somehow again. I've read about this pull-push dynamic happening in Supervision relations.


----------



## echidna1000 (Apr 20, 2009)

It could be for two reasons:

1. You were depressed

2. You might be another type in Socionics (not all ENTPs are ILEs), have you tried submitting a questionnaire?


----------



## Oldlady (Sep 18, 2009)

Jack Oliver Aaron, I know you from ENTP.org.

I am fairly sure I am ILE. I do have fun with ISFPs, it's just that I'm not drawn to them. I would never obsess about an ISFP and make myself hang out with them after they were a jerk to me.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

Oldlady said:


> I am fairly sure I am ILE. I do have fun with ISFPs, it's just that I'm not drawn to them. I would never obsess about an ISFP and make myself hang out with them after they were a jerk to me.


ISFPs aren't necessarily SEI.


----------



## Sleepy (Jan 18, 2009)

Oldlady said:


> Jack Oliver Aaron, I know you from ENTP.org.
> 
> I am fairly sure I am ILE. I do have fun with ISFPs, it's just that I'm not drawn to them. I would never obsess about an ISFP and make myself hang out with them after they were a jerk to me.


But this sounds normal. That's how it is when you haven't become close enough with the dual: fun but sort of neutral, no real dualization. I experience that all the time. It's only when you've spent a longer time together and overcome psychological barriers that you realize who much the dual means to you. It doesn't happen with every dual though.


----------



## Zeit (Dec 24, 2012)

ProTip: Some duals smell bad and are unattractive


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

@Oldlady can you post some examples of who you consider to be your duals? maybe youre not identifying them correctly


----------



## Oldlady (Sep 18, 2009)

cyamitide said:


> @_Oldlady_ can you post some examples of who you consider to be your duals? maybe youre not identifying them correctly


No, no no. You are not listening.

I enjoy hanging out with them. They bring out the best in me. I am just not DRAWN to them.

There is a lot of literature out there on the subject already. 

Socionics: Dual Relations, Duality, and Dualization


----------



## Oldlady (Sep 18, 2009)

Sleepy said:


> But this sounds normal. That's how it is when you haven't become close enough with the dual: fun but sort of neutral, no real dualization. I experience that all the time. It's only when you've spent a longer time together and overcome psychological barriers that you realize who much the dual means to you. It doesn't happen with every dual though.


Thank you dual.

How do you spend more time with them to overcome the barriers? It feels so easy to slip away. How do you keep the attraction together until it's up and running?


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Oldlady said:


> No, no no. You are not listening.
> 
> I enjoy hanging out with them. They bring out the best in me. I am just not DRAWN to them.
> 
> ...


I'm drawn to some duals, but not to others. There has to be some personal spark between us.
how large a dual sample size do you have?


----------



## Lotan (Aug 10, 2012)

Personally I've never been drawn to a dual - in socionics or MBTI. Actually, most of my conflicts and relationships-of-mutual-dislike have been with duals or near-duals, whereas most of my friendships and romantic relationships have been with people similar in type. It depends on what you're looking for in a relationship, I suppose, but "opposites attract" doesn't work for everyone. Just do what works for you.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Lotan said:


> Personally I've never been drawn to a dual - in socionics or MBTI. Actually, most of my conflicts and relationships-of-mutual-dislike have been with duals or near-duals, whereas most of my friendships and romantic relationships have been with people similar in type. It depends on what you're looking for in a relationship, I suppose, but "opposites attract" doesn't work for everyone. Just do what works for you.


You somebody who is in stage 2 type development, since you have not perfected your "ego", it is easy to ignore your incompetence with ethics and concrete information.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

Lotan said:


> Personally I've never been drawn to a dual - in socionics or MBTI. Actually, most of my conflicts and relationships-of-mutual-dislike have been with duals or near-duals, whereas most of my friendships and romantic relationships have been with people similar in type. It depends on what you're looking for in a relationship, I suppose, but "opposites attract" doesn't work for everyone. Just do what works for you.


I'm not aware of the concept of duality existing in MBTI.

You won't get along with every dual you meet, but if you consistently clash with practically every dual, either someone's probably mistyped or there's a personality problem you may want to address.


----------



## Mr. Nostalgia (Jan 5, 2013)

Oldlady said:


> No, no no. You are not listening.
> 
> I enjoy hanging out with them. They bring out the best in me. I am just not DRAWN to them.
> 
> ...


_@__Oldlady _Could that be perhaps due to your depression? I know when I've been depressed--as I am now--I'm generally not drawn to ANYTHING, especially people, even if they bring out the best in me. While it could be part of your nature simply to not be drawn to your dual, perhaps depression or fear plays a part in it. I know with my social anxiety, I find it hard even to come close to those I'm drawn to.


----------



## Lotan (Aug 10, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> I'm not aware of the concept of duality existing in MBTI.
> 
> You won't get along with every dual you meet, but if you consistently clash with practically every dual, either someone's probably mistyped or there's a personality problem you may want to address.


Usually in MBTI I see something like your best match being either the exact opposite (ISFP for me) or the opposite except for the N/S dimension (INFP for me). I'm not sure if it's the exact same thing as Socionics duality, though.

In general I find that there's a lot of frustration and conflict (Particularly along the lines of "you're too sensitive"/"you're too insensitive"), and instead of feeling like I can be myself, I feel like I have to compromise a lot. It's possible that there's a mistype somewhere (I know there are 'conflicting' types in Socionics that have a hard time getting along), and it's also possible that I'm at a lower level of development than some of you (I'm still a bit of a young'un) but I've always got along best with people who are similar to me in more ways than they are different. And I always thought that was normal, too.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Lotan said:


> Usually in MBTI I see something like your best match being either the exact opposite (ISFP for me) or the opposite except for the N/S dimension (INFP for me). I'm not sure if it's the exact same thing as Socionics duality, though.
> 
> In general I find that there's a lot of frustration and conflict (Particularly along the lines of "you're too sensitive"/"you're too insensitive"), and instead of feeling like I can be myself, I feel like I have to compromise a lot. It's possible that there's a mistype somewhere (I know there are 'conflicting' types in Socionics that have a hard time getting along), and it's also possible that I'm at a lower level of development than some of you (I'm still a bit of a young'un) but I've always got along best with people who are similar to me in more ways than they are different. And I always thought that was normal, too.


Socionics also says it can be hard to get along with anyone, even the advice on duals carries a caveat. I personally find that most thinkers are insecure about their logic since they don't really like it when you tell them its crap. They become emotional and defensive instead of marching with logic straight on in a rational way.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Lotan said:


> Usually in MBTI I see something like your best match being either the exact opposite (ISFP for me) or the opposite except for the N/S dimension (INFP for me). I'm not sure if it's the exact same thing as Socionics duality, though.
> 
> In general I find that there's a lot of frustration and conflict (Particularly along the lines of "you're too sensitive"/"you're too insensitive"), and instead of feeling like I can be myself, I feel like I have to compromise a lot. It's possible that there's a mistype somewhere (I know there are 'conflicting' types in Socionics that have a hard time getting along), and it's also possible that I'm at a lower level of development than some of you (I'm still a bit of a young'un) but I've always got along best with people who are similar to me in more ways than they are different. And I always thought that was normal, too.


Is it because they try to force you out of your comfort zone, logic and an impersonal view of reality, taking you to your underdeveloped feeler zone you find uncomfortable.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

Lotan said:


> Usually in MBTI I see something like your best match being either the exact opposite (ISFP for me) or the opposite except for the N/S dimension (INFP for me). I'm not sure if it's the exact same thing as Socionics duality, though.


Nope. Duality in Socionics is based in the interaction of IM elements, specifically how they complement each other. Your dual is able to compensate for your (socionics-related) shortcomings in a way that is comfortable. There is an element of being similar, since you both value the same IM elements; there is also an element of being opposite, since within the IM elements you value, you're using the ones the other is weak in. Someone who is strong in the areas you are weak but who values different elements is more likely to grate on you.

To give an example, take IEE. IEE is strong in both N and F IM elements, but it prioritizes use of Ne and Fi. Likewise, it is weak in both S and T IM elements but values Si and Te over Se and Ti. On one hand, we have the SLI, who prioritizes Si and Te (and prefers someone who prioritizes Ne and Fi); on the other hand, we have the LSI, who prioritizes Se and Ti (and who prefers someone who prioritizes Fe and Ni). Both the SLI and the LSI can compensate for IEE's socionic weak points. However, the SLI prioritizes the same IM elements as the IEE, so the compensation will be more pleasurable to the IEE. The SLI is the IEE's dual. The LSI prioritizes the exact opposite IM elements of the IEE; its compensation is more oppositional because it values different things and the focus feels all wrong. The LSI is the IEE's conflictor.



> In general I find that there's a lot of frustration and conflict (Particularly along the lines of "you're too sensitive"/"you're too insensitive"), and instead of feeling like I can be myself, I feel like I have to compromise a lot. It's possible that there's a mistype somewhere (I know there are 'conflicting' types in Socionics that have a hard time getting along), and it's also possible that I'm at a lower level of development than some of you (I'm still a bit of a young'un) but I've always got along best with people who are similar to me in more ways than they are different. And I always thought that was normal, too.


In theory, duality is supposed to free us to be our natural selves, as our dual appreciates what we have to give. Of course, there are many other factors that influence whether two people can have a beneficial and pleasurable association/friendship/relationship, including whether you or the other person is able to express your Socionic strengths naturally (we sometimes cloak or suppress them if we've been taught that they are unacceptable for some reason) but from a Socionic perspective, duality is the most psychologically comfortable relation. 

These might help.


----------



## Lotan (Aug 10, 2012)

Boolean11 said:


> Is it because you try to force you out of your comfort zone, logic and an impersonal view of reality, taking you to your underdeveloped feeler zone you find uncomfortable.


Yeah, you caught me...No sarcasm there, you caught me. I know becoming a more well-rounded person is a good thing, I am just confused by the descriptions saying it's a natural attraction, or something relaxing and comfortable. I always saw a dual relationship as being something that works well only after a period of struggle and unpleasantness. Relationships that have a high payoff eventually, but don't spark immediate attraction.


----------



## Sleepy (Jan 18, 2009)

Oldlady said:


> Thank you dual.
> 
> How do you spend more time with them to overcome the barriers? It feels so easy to slip away. How do you keep the attraction together until it's up and running?


You stay close to them, call them? Wait for someone else more attractive? There are plenty of duals out there. And duals find each other all the time without ever having heard of socionics so it can't be that complicated. It's not necessarily a good idea to force things with a dual, on the other hand, maybe it sometimes is. I believe instant attraction is important, or at least connection at face level. Like you feel there's some energy between you. It's not really related to sociotype imo.

People are so different. Some are outgoing, others more quiet, _regardless of sociotype_. (There is a slight correlation between extra/intraversion and outgoing/quiet but far from always). I'm pretty calm and often quiet so I need someone with outgoing energy for us to feel a natural connection. And that doesn't happen with every dual. I was working this fall with an ENTP (ILE) of the more quiet kind and it was nice but nothing more. But then we were on the same team for several weeks so we spent a lot of time together and became more relaxed. And it was so nice, work didn't feel like work, it felt good to be near her, and I could see she felt the same. Solving problems together was joy, drinking coffee was joy, life was joy... I didn't have romantic feelings for her, (and she has a boyfriend), but in the end it felt like maybe I still had romantic feelings for her, because the chemistry sort of transcends the lack of feelings. Sounds strange, but that's how it felt, maybe.


----------



## Oldlady (Sep 18, 2009)

Sleepy said:


> People are so different. Some are outgoing, others more quiet, _regardless of sociotype_. (There is a slight correlation between extra/intraversion and outgoing/quiet but far from always).


Quite interesting. I am starting to think that there is a lot of variety that mbti doesn't pick up on. 

I am a very uncomfortable/ reserved ENTP, so I do worry that I won't attract my dual. Life is awfully unfair that way. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

Oldlady said:


> Quite interesting. I am starting to think that there is a lot of variety that mbti doesn't pick up on.
> 
> I am a very uncomfortable/ reserved ENTP, so I do worry that I won't attract my dual. Life is awfully unfair that way. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.


The enneagram instinctual variant makes a big difference, if that's been mentioned.

There are a number of theories that posit the various IV stackings into relationship "flows," but I'm not sure there's anything conclusive to the "optimal." I've met SEE (my dual) who are actually really grating and annoying - as well as some that are attractive in some ways, but not as supportive as I like on a one-to-one level - therefore, attractive cognitively but not behaviorally. 

When you scrutinize duality, you realize that the theory is actually pretty limited in what it is actually measuring. Socionics isn't about relationships directly - it's about information metabolism and how it sets the scene of relationships, which is but just one determinant in how a relationship will actually progress. The way people metabolize the information others send to them means nothing if they aren't metabolizing it to begin with, which can be the case if you've got, say, a dual pair that is so behaviorally different that they never spend time together to begin with (possible, say, an So/Sp and an Sx/Sp). 

So, it's more complicated than Filatova claims, I'm afraid.


----------



## Sleepy (Jan 18, 2009)

LXPilot said:


> The enneagram instinctual variant makes a big difference, if that's been mentioned.


DCNH is also very good for specifying the compatibility. It's also good as a tool for typing since it gives some hints on what variations to look for in the same type.



Oldlady said:


> I am a very uncomfortable/ reserved ENTP, so I do worry that I won't attract my dual. Life is awfully unfair that way. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.


It can help staying close to very outgoing persons since they can give the energy you (we) need to feel relaxed and connected socially. Go along with nature, not against it!


----------



## Oldlady (Sep 18, 2009)

Sleepy said:


> DCNH is also very good for specifying the compatibility. It's also good as a tool for typing since it gives some hints on what variations to look for in the same type.
> 
> It can help staying close to very outgoing persons since they can give the energy you (we) need to feel relaxed and connected socially. Go along with nature, not against it!


Strangely enough, I actually prefer the introverts. They boost my confidence and make me feel more extroverted, which is how I prefer to be.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

I'm not particularly attracted to my dual's personality. Its like, as friends, cool - but I don't find them interesting in the particular way that makes me feel romantic attraction. I have dated a few duals, and it wasn't really better than any other type in a relationship. My more relevant relationships have been with non-duals. 

I'm more romantically drawn to mirage, identity, requester, congenerity, and mirror. 

I mean, people are complex and theres way more going on than this typology model.


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

Promethea said:


> congenerity


:mellow: 
I needed to google this, where is your Socionics knowledge from if I may ask?


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

Zero11 said:


> :mellow:
> I needed to google this, where is your Socionics knowledge from if I may ask?


Wiki has the translation term. I reckon the problem is the lack of official English translations of socionics.


----------



## Sleepy (Jan 18, 2009)

I'm actually only interested in dating duals nowadays. All other types can seem interesting at first but after that it's mostly boring. A person can be interesting in many ways but that doesn't help if I am out of sync with her. I don't see my dual as very interesting, but she doesn't need to be interesting, that's the point (physical attraction is needed though). There is a shift of perspective: WE are interesting. Things are taken to another level. Duality is the most romantic relationship, because all my reactions are welcomed by the partner. It's also intriguing, we change each other, create something new.

We are so used to objectifying a partner, but a dual is not an object, she or he is a part of you. It's when you realize that, that you start to understand duality.

I can be very fast at picking up the signs of duality. Sometimes it's possible to identify a dual after a few seconds of dialogue, just based on our reactions. The two other dual-like relationships (partial ego-superid match): semi-duality and illusionary, can sometimes be confused with duality based on reactions. Semi-duality can seem like duality when partners are relaxed, and illusionary when partners are active. Duality is duality when partners are both active and passive.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

Sleepy said:


> I'm actually only interested in dating duals nowadays. All other types can seem interesting at first but after that it's mostly boring. A person can be interesting in many ways but that doesn't help if I am out of sync with her. I don't see my dual as very interesting, but she doesn't need to be interesting, that's the point (physical attraction is needed though). There is a shift of perspective: WE are interesting. Things are taken to another level. Duality is the most romantic relationship, because all my reactions are welcomed by the partner. It's also intriguing, we change each other, create something new.
> 
> We are so used to objectifying a partner, but a dual is not an object, she or he is a part of you. It's when you realize that, that you start to understand duality.
> 
> I can be very fast at picking up the signs of duality. Sometimes it's possible to identify a dual after a few seconds of dialogue, just based on our reactions. The two other dual-like relationships (partial ego-superid match): semi-duality and illusionary, can sometimes be confused with duality based on reactions. Semi-duality can seem like duality when partners are relaxed, and illusionary when partners are active. Duality is duality when partners are both active and passive.


i disagree very strongly with your approach.


----------



## Sleepy (Jan 18, 2009)

aestrivex said:


> i disagree very strongly with your approach.


It's hard to know what exactly you are disagreeing with when you don't explain it. It's not really an approach, these things are based on my experiences with duals I've dated.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

aestrivex said:


> i disagree very strongly with your approach.


What is wrong with people feeling their way to their dual? @SleepyDo you just get the feeling that the person is your dual? Perhaps through evaluating your emotional signals towards the person when interacting?


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

I doubt I've had any duality in romantic relationships so far so you could say I don't know how to be drawn to duals in that sense; though I have a friend with whom it might be duality or perhaps activation relationship. Very good friend but can't imagine her as bf if she was male  That is assuming she would be unchanged in every other respect. Now maybe if I was a male version of myself, things could be different, she could be my gf alright. As you can see I think gender/sex roles probably matter. As does every other factor outside socionics....


----------



## Sleepy (Jan 18, 2009)

Boolean11 said:


> @_Sleepy_Do you just get the feeling that the person is your dual? Perhaps through evaluating your emotional signals towards the person when interacting?


As an SEI I am usually quite sensitive to the impressions I get from people and I can remember them and compare with other people. Strictly speaking it's not about emotions but some basic internal reactions like vague feelings of comfort, irritation, indifference etc, it's a little hard to explain. It's not about liking either, it's a more "fundamental" or almost "biological" reaction. With time it got easier to identify the socionically relevant reactions I get. I disagree with those who think that you always "like" your dual. It's not so, duality is beyond that.

Of course I don't rely on impressions only when typing someone. There are lot's of other things as we all know. But it actually took me awhile to learn to focus on the actual information, before that I only noticed my internal reaction to that information. But it's fun to notice how these impressions vary when comparing the dual-like relations semi-duality and illusionary, that's why I mentioned them.


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

Sleepy said:


> It's hard to know what exactly you are disagreeing with when you don't explain it. It's not really an approach, these things are based on my experiences with duals I've dated.


I am disagreeing with your mentality. The core element of your mentality that I am disagreeing with is the nonfundamental role that emotional attitudes have in guiding life decisions.

That is to say -- if you do not already know what I am going to say -- socionics is a theory that makes a prediction about interpersonal compatibility. This prediction is always fuzzy and the assessment is always fuzzy. While I believe that socionics is fundamentally a "good" theory as it does a decent job tackling an extremely challenging question about how different people interact, it nonetheless does an imperfect job. It doing an imperfect job is not the principal point, but it is important to note that there is an element of needlessly limiting oneself based on the premises of a theory.

The more crucial point is that by "deciding" to only date a dual, emotionally guided decision making is suppressed. As you are aware of, socionics is often misused, by people who use it as a replacement for their own self-concept, and take on the self-concept of whatever type they have adopted. This is the fault of the users and not the theory -- socionics is a theory that makes some fuzzy predictions; someone who decides that socionics does more than that is misusing the theory and has primarily themself to blame. What you are describing is not identical to replacing one's self-concept with socionics, but it is comparable. Even if there is less ego invested in making the decision to date duals as opposed to noticing that dating duals works better, the act of making a choice suppresses the emotional module that should be making that decision.


----------



## Sleepy (Jan 18, 2009)

aestrivex said:


> but it is important to note that there is an element of needlessly limiting oneself based on the premises of a theory.
> 
> The more crucial point is that by "deciding" to only date a dual, emotionally guided decision making is suppressed.


Ok, I understand, thanks. These things are interesting, I've been thinking about them too. I haven't "decided" to only date duals, but at this point in my life I have been through alot of dating and this is simply how my mind works. The kind of comfort and psychological support a dual offers is uncomparable. So, yes, I romanticize duality, but I know what I'm doing, and what the limits of socionics are. I can sort of fall in love or be very interested in almost any type, but it never lasts. I have tried to put socionics to the side and just dont' give a damn and go after a cute quasi-identical or supervisor. Doesn't work for me.

It's not just "theory" that duality is the best relationship. It really is so and it is possible to experience this in real life. But it is only after one has been through many relationships that one starts to see it. I mean that one has enough comparisons to see that socionics is valid. I discovered dualiy when I was 34 years old, and it was like "This is what I've been looking for my whole life, why the hell haven't I noticed these people before"

Sometimes it looks as if a person limits himself to a theory, but socionics actually makes you more sensitive to certain stuff, and can help you see what you really want. Augusta said herself that people often ignore the negative reactions they get from a non-compatible relationship "thinking that things will change".

I don't think I limit myself too much to the theory. I've been open to dating other people too, and if I really try to predict I can see myself ending up with a semi-dual, identical or activator. I would still miss something, but for the kind of person I've turned out to be, it is proabably more likely to happen. Not sure, but maybe.


----------

