# Dual parent and child: unhealthy?



## mrgreendots (May 21, 2011)

I guess in socionics you would call it your dual and semidual. I know that those people usually get along well with some exceptions but I see being raised by one problematic for both the parent and the child.

First of all the child will be brought up trying to follow their parent's example and use their weaker functions while not developing their first two as much as they should.

Second, when the child has a problem, the parent will not feel very comfortable solving a question of the nature of their last two functions.

And unless the parent is aware of cognitive functions, the child will always end up feeling their way of thinking is inferior (added bonus on top of every child feeling inferior around their parents.

The parent may understand the child better than the child understands them but the child would still grow up finding it exhausting to talk to their parents

To me while I definitely understand why duals would get along so well for friendship or romantic relationship, having so much contact with one from such an early age would seem a bit counterproductive.
I want to know what you guys think? This is just something that dawned on me a day ago so input would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

Socionics =/= MBTI. As such, the intertype relations cannot be imported and thrown into a blender with the cognitive functions. Try the Socionics subforum, maybe?


----------



## mrgreendots (May 21, 2011)

I know I used the socionics terms but the thinking behind it is that of the general cognitive functions, it was just easier than saying: a child raised by a parent who possesses the same functions but in the opposite order might end up under developing their first two functions.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

mrgreendots said:


> I know I used the socionics terms but the thinking behind it is that of the general cognitive functions, it was just easier than saying: a child raised by a parent who possesses the same functions but in the opposite order might end up under developing their first two functions.


Arguably, it's not easier, as it causes misunderstandings. Thank you for clarifying what exactly you were trying to say, though. (Doesn't MBTI actually have some sort of tacked-on intertype hypotheses? Are they at all worthwhile?)


----------



## mrgreendots (May 21, 2011)

Kanerou said:


> Arguably, it's not easier, as it causes misunderstandings. Thank you for clarifying what exactly you were trying to say, though. (Doesn't MBTI actually have some sort of tacked-on intertype hypotheses? Are they at all worthwhile?)


I don't use the MBTI point of view that much because I find it difficult to start anything deeper with it than the surface observations that make up the descriptions of the types. Since I can't interview and observe everyone I know on a whim just because I'm curious MBTI doesn't provide the explanations of those behaviors I need either.

(please excuse my inferior Te, it can only explain so well)


----------



## Blystone (Oct 11, 2012)

Socionics duality is bullshit.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

mrgreendots said:


> I don't use the MBTI point of view that much because I find it difficult to start anything deeper with it than the surface observations that make up the descriptions of the types. Since I can't interview and observe everyone I know on a whim just because I'm curious MBTI doesn't provide the explanations of those behaviors I need either.
> 
> (please excuse my inferior Te, it can only explain so well)


The intent of MBTI is merely to assess potential strength and weakness of a person in a workplace.


----------



## mrgreendots (May 21, 2011)

@JSRS01 As an INFP whose supposed dual is the ESTJ, I wholeheartedly agree. I have heard of a few types that get along extremely well with their dual.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

If we're talking about socionics duals.. 

My mom is my dual and we couldn't get along until I was much, much much much older. I just hated her to pieces until then. iunno.


----------



## phalanxgripper (Aug 11, 2013)

you are over complexifying and have become a control freak!
Kids need to learn the way by want not forceful reasoning.
I know a kid with damn strict parents' he had to have a private life on drugs!!


----------



## Teybo (Sep 25, 2012)

Inguz said:


> The intent of MBTI is merely to assess potential strength and weakness of a person in a workplace.


Ugh, no. :bored: Do you really not give Myers any more credit than that? She was an INFP, after all...


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

JSRS01 said:


> Socionics duality is bullshit.


I disagree that it is bullshit. However, neither is it a miracle cure for all relational ills. It is one facet of relationships (others being age, culture, socioeconomic status, IQ, maturity, personal values, etc) that makes for particularly easy and comfortable communication between people, provided there is enough compatibility in other areas as well. You can certainly get along poorly with a dual should other factors be in play.


----------



## Inguz (Mar 10, 2012)

Teybo said:


> Ugh, no. :bored: Do you really not give Myers any more credit than that? She was an INFP, after all...


Nope. It's a neatly branded product for organizations.


----------



## mrgreendots (May 21, 2011)

phalanxgripper said:


> you are over complexifying and have become a control freak!
> Kids need to learn the way by want not forceful reasoning.
> I know a kid with damn strict parents' he had to have a private life on drugs!!


Well before calling me a control freak, I'd like to note that I am 16 and not a mother. It was just a hypothetical question. Any opinion on the actual subject?


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

mrgreendots said:


> Well before calling me a control freak, I'd like to note that I am 16 and not a mother. It was just a hypothetical question. Any opinion on the actual subject?


FYI, this person is likely a troll.


----------



## Blystone (Oct 11, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> I disagree that it is bullshit. However, neither is it a miracle cure for all relational ills. It is one facet of relationships (others being age, culture, socioeconomic status, IQ, maturity, personal values, etc) that makes for particularly easy and comfortable communication between people, provided there is enough compatibility in other areas as well. You can certainly get along poorly with a dual should other factors be in play.


So if relationships between "dual" types are completely subjective, why should anyone adhere to the doctrines of duality as truth?

It's like saying all brunettes are best matched with blonds, but not all brunettes and blonds are good matches because other factors, like age, culture, intelligence, maturity, and personal values, may interfere with the relationship; but if a brunette is in a relationship with another brunette because their age, culture, intelligence, maturity, and personal values all fall in line with each other; they're not really an optimal match because brunettes are only best matched with blondes. 

It's bullshit.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

JSRS01 said:


> So if relationships between "dual" types are completely subjective, why should anyone adhere to the doctrines of duality as truth?
> 
> It's like saying all brunettes are best matched with blonds, but not all brunettes and blonds are good matches because other factors, like age, culture, intelligence, maturity, and personal values, may interfere with the relationship; but if a brunette is in a relationship with another brunette because their age, culture, intelligence, maturity, and personal values all fall in line with each other; they're not really an optimal match because brunettes are only best matched with blondes.
> 
> It's bullshit.


Socionics is a system of information metabolism. The intertype relations are based on whether the given, requested, and valued modes of information complement each other or clash. The idea behind duality is that _all other things being equal_, it will give you the most comfortable exchange of information/communication out of the 16 possible intertypes. A relationship of lesser compatibility will probably be easier if you have lots of compatibility in other areas than a relationship of duality if you have nothing in common and clashing personal values. But if the compatibility in other areas is the same, duality should be easier overall.


----------



## Blystone (Oct 11, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> The idea behind duality is that _all other things being equal_, it will give you the most comfortable exchange of information/communication out of the 16 possible intertypes.


A few things:

1. In reality, when dealing with people, there is no point in which all things are equal; it's an impossibility. 

2. How do you know it is the most comfortable exchange of information and communication of the 16 types? 

3. "All things being equal", what if I have better and more comfortable communication with someone not my dual?

4. "All things being equal", why would it even matter whether or not one was with their dual?



> A relationship of lesser compatibility will probably be easier if you have lots of compatibility in other areas than a relationship of duality if you have nothing in common and clashing personal values. But if the compatibility in other areas is the same, duality should be easier overall.


Are you in a relationship with your "dual", or are you just really attached to the theory?


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

JSRS01 said:


> A few things:
> 
> 1. In reality, when dealing with people, there is no point in which all things are equal; it's an impossibility.
> 
> 2. How do you know it is the most comfortable exchange of information and communication of the 16 types?


This may help to answer that question. 



> 3. "All things being equal", what if I have better and more comfortable communication with someone not my dual?


If that is an impossibility as you claim above, does this hypothetical situation even matter? But if that was the case, then duality would not be as solid as claimed.



> 4. "All things being equal", why would it even matter whether or not one was with their dual?


 Not everyone wants or needs to be with a dual long-term. Some people prefer to apply their socionic understanding to preventing or resolving conflict within their current relationships, and what they have right now is more important to them than tossing that aside to search after the possibility of something better. And, of course, duality is not limited to romantic relationships. There are dual friends, co-workers, subordinates and superiors, etc.



> Are you in a relationship with your "dual", or are you just really attached to the theory?


I'm not in a relationship at all, and I have no plans to be. If you want personal viewpoints on duality, I recommend checking out the16types. My stepfather is my semidual (for those who think I'm EII and not ESI, he would be my dual); he is LSE. We do have serious problems in some areas while doing well in others, which is why I can say from experience that complementary IMs do not magically make everything work.


----------



## Blystone (Oct 11, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> This may help to answer that question.


It didn't. 




> If that is an impossibility as you claim above, does this hypothetical situation even matter? But if that was the case, then duality would not be as solid as claimed.


The relevance of the hypothetical lies in the exposure of the internal inconsistencies which plague the theories of intertype relationships. 



> Not everyone wants or needs to be with a dual long-term. Some people prefer to apply their socionic understanding to preventing or resolving conflict within their current relationships, and what they have right now is more important to them than tossing that aside to search after the possibility of something better. And, of course, duality is not limited to romantic relationships. There are dual friends, co-workers, subordinates and superiors, etc.


So you don't even accept duality as the quintessential relationship Socionics claims it to be. 




> If you want personal viewpoints on duality, I recommend checking out the16types.


I don't. I want objective proof that duality is a valid theory.


----------

