# What instincts attract you?



## Tharwen (Mar 20, 2013)

i have this theory that each of us would find the same instinct attractive, if you were Xo Zo, Xo Yo would attract you, and Zo Xo.
but im not certain in which order they go, the order would either be Zo Xo, Xo Yo and Xo Zo, or: Xo Zo, Zo Xo and Xo Yo.

i find it hard to piece this from my face to face experiences cause the two entps im comparing to each other also have different enneagrams which influence my liking over them, and different mental health states TOO.. =| and i havent figured which ennea i like more so i cant say how much influence and to what direction it gives in the overall picture, and also its hard to estimate how much more i would like the entp whose currently unhealthy if he was healthy.

what are your thoughts on my theory? just explain your attractions to different instincts.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Tharwen said:


> i have this theory that each of us would find the same instinct attractive, if you were Xo Zo, Xo Yo would attract you, and Zo Xo.
> but im not certain in which order they go, the order would either be Zo Xo, Xo Yo and Xo Zo, or: Xo Zo, Zo Xo and Xo Yo.
> 
> i find it hard to piece this from my face to face experiences cause the two entps im comparing to each other also have different enneagrams which influence my liking over them, and different mental health states TOO.. =| and i havent figured which ennea i like more so i cant say how much influence and to what direction it gives in the overall picture, and also its hard to estimate how much more i would like the entp whose currently unhealthy if he was healthy.
> ...


could you reword this explanation? I'm having trouble understanding what you mean

to answer your question though, So/Sx and Sx/Sp (I'm Sp/Sx)


----------



## Tharwen (Mar 20, 2013)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> could you reword this explanation? I'm having trouble understanding what you mean
> 
> to answer your question though, So/Sx and Sx/Sp (I'm Sp/Sx)


theres a certain hierarchy in which each instinct has a tendency to like more and less, based on shared and not so shared common ground.

say, the top three are liked instincts and the three bottom not, cause the bottom instincts dont share a preferance for your isntinct in the division of opposite instincts. and the top three do share. thus its difficult to find common ground with your opposite and easy with those whom you do share it instinctually.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Tharwen said:


> theres a certain hierarchy in which each instinct has a tendency to like more and less, based on shared and not so shared common ground.
> 
> say, the top three are liked instincts and the three bottom not, cause the bottom instincts dont share a preferance for your isntinct in the division of opposite instincts. and the top three do share. thus its difficult to find common ground with your opposite and easy with those whom you do share it instinctually.


what would be the top 3/bottom 3 of each instinct? do you mean people who share either your dominant instinct, top two instincts or both? (so, for Sp/Sx, it would be Sp/So, Sx/Sp and Sp/Sx respectively)


----------



## Tharwen (Mar 20, 2013)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> what would be the top 3/bottom 3 of each instinct? do you mean people who share either your dominant instinct, top two instincts or both? (so, for Sp/Sx, it would be Sp/So, Sx/Sp and Sp/Sx respectively)


you can swap these instincts in symmetric ways to get the list of any instincts hierarchy based in liking.

so, this list is so sx's like to dislike list:

first, the most liked is sx so, then so sp, so sx, and the botom three which theres no shared preference in the so sx - sp sx axis: sp so, sx sp and sp sx. however, there is a shared preference in one of the other axises for sp so and sx sp, and unfortunately absolutely no common ground with sp sx.

for example, sp so share preference for so sp over sx sp with so sx, which creates a common ground based on so sp'ish ways. mostly in my experience, that common ground is about the superficial smiling and all that. and with sx sp theres the preference of sx so over sp so, which i would say is about sharing wisdom with each other, so theres much to learn from each other. and with the liked instincts, they also share so sx over sp sx preference which ive experienced, is about accepting ones heart and being true to oneself, so these relationships seem nicer because i feel accepted with them.

and yes, you got the sp sx preferences right, but the order of liking is sx sp first, then sp so and finally sp sx themselves. i think the reason why your own isnt as liked as the two others is cause there isnt that much new stuff to share, cause both tend to agree with everything with each other.

i learned this theory from buddhisms reincarnation theory. although obviously, i stripped the reincarnation part off =)


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Tharwen said:


> you can swap these instincts in symmetric ways to get the list of any instincts hierarchy based in liking.
> 
> so, this list is so sx's like to dislike list:
> 
> ...


well, I really like lots of So/Sx's, so that kind of throws a wrench in your theory :wink: also, I don't relate to Sx last types at all romantically. they can be physically attractive, we can have decent conversations, but it just doesn't work sexually lol

if I were to describe my relationships with all the variants (in a romantic setting)
*Sp/So:* not really much there sexually. if I were to do anything with an Sp/So, we would have no know each other for awhile first because I feel like that's the only way they'd be comfortable enough with me for me to not have to hold back

*Sp/Sx:* to be honest, it doesn't work so well. Sp/Sx has a reserved, cat-like sexiness that can be appealing to many (your stereotypical vampire is definitely an Sp/Sx), but I have enough of this being one myself. I'm more than willing to do the approaching and sweep you off your feet, but I need you to melt first before I open myself up completely, and this typically does not happen when with another Sp/Sx. (I recently got swept off my feet by another Sp/Sx, and it ended up _exactly_ like I thought it would. he was probably the most charming guy I ever met, but, alas, I got attached faster than he did and he found someone else who was a more convenient match long term)

*So/Sp:* not for me. they're usually intelligent, insightful and have a wide range of interesting hobbies to talk about, but they're just too damn political for me. when you're with an So/Sp, it feels like you're with several people even when you're alone. 

*So/Sx:* I'm attracted to their warmth and enthusiasm (they often look pseudo 7w6-ish or 2w3-ish). their dominant So makes me wonder "how are they doing that?  ". unlike the more dark, reserved So lasters, So/Sx is typically more energetic and playful, sort of like a puppy (playfulness turns me on like crazy!!!) and they usually have more to do, so you can tag along with them if you're bored :laughing: 

*Sx/So: *I'm attracted to their wild, reckless energy but it often comes at a price. while I admire their intensity, the manner in which they are intense can bother me sometimes. compared to the more controlled, beneath-the-surface intensity of an So last type, Sx/So's intensity reminds me of the story of Phaeton driving the chariot of the Sun God. a wild roller coaster that gets too close (burning everything in it's wake) then pulls too far away (like a chilling blizzard). long term, I don't think it would work unless they were very mature or had a core enneagram type that was more controlled (for instance, if they were a 3w4)

*Sx/Sp:* I <3 Sx/Sps! they have the ardent intensity of Sx/Sos, _but it's all focused on you_. most of the time, they're more reserved and mysterious like Sp/Sx (though their Sx "bleeds out" more noticeably), but, once you get to know them, they seem to pull you in and say "come into my world". our interactions have a more subtle, tender nature than I get with Sx/So's and there's this sense that we're all alone together whenever we're talking (so much so that, in extreme cases, it felt like we were eloping :blushed: ). most people tend to find Sx/Sp clingy or "too much", but I actually like the clingy-ness (call me narcissistic, but I like idea of someone being obsessed with me LOL)


----------



## Tharwen (Mar 20, 2013)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> well, I really like lots of So/Sx's, so that kind of throws a wrench in your theory :wink: also, I don't relate to Sx last types at all romantically. they can be physically attractive, we can have decent conversations, but it just doesn't work sexually lol
> 
> if I were to describe my relationships with all the variants (in a romantic setting)
> *Sp/So:* not really much there sexually. if I were to do anything with an Sp/So, we would have no know each other for awhile first because I feel like that's the only way they'd be comfortable enough with me for me to not have to hold back
> ...



"well, I really like lots of So/Sx's, so that kind of throws a wrench in your theory"

well yeah theres THE fact that our opinions about the groups of instincts are more than anything, based on our experiences with them and opinions, which are based by whatever you let them come from. but i still think this theory covers the common ground, by analyzing how much common ground you have with each and that creates the potential for liking and disliking, so its largely potential based.

i have to say i myself have bias towards a group which is in the list of my likings, but as ive got to know them better ive realized the good in them. (So Sp's, i despise their capitalistic tendencies)


funny, i didnt answer the question this thread was about myself at all.

well i think sx so's intensity is VEERY attractive, as long as they use it instead of being just cold boring.

and so sp's, i think they seem to be very accepting of people and warm, but ive never met an intuitor of such so i cant say how i would sexually be attracted to them.

sx sp's as long as their intensity id on, i find their company pleasurable.

sp sx's i find them charming, but their negativism is draining on me.

sp so's i think they are good company, but the thing i appreciate most is what they hate, tender feelings and intensity.

and so sx's, i find their softness extremely sexually attractive.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Interesting thread as I thought myself to be sp/sx but now I'm very certain of sx/sp (like so certain I can't imagine how I could think otherwise). 

Similar to @_Swordsman of Mana_, I prefer sp/sx, so/sx and sx/sp although I find that sx/sp tend to trigger me more initially. I don't need to work on them so much to make them open up like with so/sx and sp/sx who I often feel like they are here but without really being here because their attention is elsewhere. More so with so/sx than sp/sx. Since I get going pretty quickly with sx I think I can feel a bit frustrated because those second find the speed a bit uncomfortable. I narrow and zone in on people right away and I expect the same in return and when I don't it just becomes this frustrating teasing cat-and-mouse game lol. It's fine as long as they don't find someone else because I have also been in the position where I was very much into an so/sx guy and then he found someone else meanwhile who split his attention and they bonded more closely (that person was probably sp/so or similar so it figures) and much faster and it all fell apart. So the way I relate to each is like this:

Sp/sx
They're cool but a bit slow to open up and invest. Takes time and need to be worked on. Can sometimes feel a little distant in terms of sx energy.

Sx/sp
I notice other sx/sp types very quickly it seems, because they entice such a strong sx reaction in myself. I am not quite sure why this is. I am very good friends with one sx/sp type and becoming friends I guess with another. Sx/sp types don't need as much work to open up and when they focus they do so very intensely in a way I find very attractive and satisfying because it's like I can express it all and knowing I get the same treatment back. Avarice is such a bitch.

Sx/so
I don't really have an opinion of sx/so yet because I haven't really interacted with many or gotten to know anyone who is this stacking well. I think in a way the secondary so could be annoying though because whereas sx/sp and sp/sx makes sense to me, people pulling out to fulfill their safety needs, sx/so does not. It's like either it's about you or about people. I kind of feel that I wish they could make up their minds what they want.

So/sx
This stacking has a very attractive energy that's very smooth but the scattered focus of so first is annoying and frustrating as they often feel they need to focus on all in order to feel a sense of one-ness. Does not compute since I'm so last. For me it's you and all about you. 

Sp/so
Probably one of the stackings I find the least interesting overall. Applies to all sx last pretty much. Take a lot of time to open up and when they do they still have issues focusing on you which makes it frustrating as an experience. I think they can potentially be good friends though since they can be pretty loyal.

So/sp
Another weird and difficult stacking for me. It's like the alien stacking from outer space. I don't comprehend so first types and so/sp moreso than so/sx. They're nice people but I think more distant friend-potential than anything particularly deep or intense in the way I crave it and find satisfying.


----------



## Napoleptic (Oct 29, 2010)

@Tharwen , your thread makes me think of this post, which may or may not line up with your own theory:



Choice said:


> *Flow of Instinctual Energies & Compatibility*
> 
> When we invest our energy, most of it is devoted to fulfillment of our primary instinct. The remaining energy radiates or flows onto the secondary instinct and finally - onto the last instinct, which receives the smallest share. There are two possible configurations or directions for this flow. In first configuration, energy is invested in the order of sx→sp→so→sx. This direction gives rise to three stackings: sx/sp, sp/so, so/sx. In the second configuration, energy is invested in the order of sx→so→sp→sx, which gives rise to the other three stackings: sx/so, so/sp and sp/sx.
> 
> ...


Of course, I think personal preferences have at least as much influence over who we find attractive as theoretical compatibility based on personality, if not more so. In this case, I think it would have more to do with a person's preference for people like themselves or people who are different. Take the well-worn phrase "opposites attract", for instance, vs. the complete phrase: "Opposites attract, but the like-minded last."

Also, there are some "instinct x/y, which instinct are you most attracted to" threads floating about this forum somewhere that you might find interesting.


----------



## Tharwen (Mar 20, 2013)

Napoleptic said:


> @_Tharwen_ , your thread makes me think of this post, which may or may not line up with your own theory:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


my theory hasnt that much to do with it, but i still consider that theory too as part of my world view. i would name the group so sp, sx so, sp sx as the productive instincts and the three unmentioned ones as the moralistic instincts.

although, i disagree with that theory in the aspect that same flow instincts should be preferred, cause in my theory theres a hierarchy of the amount of common ground shared and naturally you _need_ common ground for anything sensible to come out of the relationship.


----------



## Choice (May 19, 2012)

*sp/sx here*

Based on the very few people who I may or may not have mistyped. Here are the initial impressions I get (before familiarity sets in and more tolerance is developed)

*Sp/So:* Seems a hit or miss whether I run into em whilst they're in exposition-fairy mode, or completely deflating because whoops, too personal / FU me space NAO. Magically lights up with energy when you throw in more people. I almost never feel like there's much of a problem.

*Sp/Sx:* awkward ripping at each other sensation at times. Even after more acclimatisation they're like a piece of space-filling furniture you sit next to....> a foot away, getting me so settled into the surroundings that I don't even know what's missing until the lack of bonding smacks me in the face.
I'm terrible at carrying conversations in the first place - anything beyond asking direct questions into a narrow topic that eventually descends into crickets chirping (but it IS good for a while) makes me fail miserably.

*So/Sp:* Very comfortable beanbag / couch experience. Except that hole in the chest feeling is more pronounced no matter how I position myself on it. Maybe it's more because they were both introverts? 

*So/Sx:* Warm buzz after 2 cups of alcohol that stays. Runs the show so I can chill. Feels like mild entertainment that you can't hate and always smile at minus the dizzy lung choking howling laughter. Can also be intimidating when they try to bring me into the crowd too much e.g_. I understand that you love everyone,_ but _you're inviting me out with a bunch of people who dislike me / I'm apathetic to __ What for, atmosphere?
_
*Sx/So: *GIVE ME A BREAK! Then we'll be fine, promise! Incredibly untamed energy. Too much closeness - I want to withdraw into myself, but their So instinct jumps in and they wish to expand even more! Very thrilling ride in short to medium doses. I keep wanting out, getting drawn back, before finally slamming the lid til next time.

*Sx/Sp:* overtime! overtime! overtime! Highly focused on each other, stimulation channeled right at me, and I'm there so long I forget to stop (just like sx / so, except less energy drain). What I'm most easily drawn to, but would take longer rest periods from once in a rare moon. I get jealous of how long they can sustain their energy + keep & juggle multiple close friends. 

both Sx-firsts can be annoyingly clingy depending on the person.


----------

