# Duality requires conflict



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Duality can be very difficult.
It is totally worth it in the end, but is not plesant when it is happening.
The best is when you uinite towards a common goal.
If you can't agree on the goal then it starts to flow into the the dysfunctional zone.
My ENTJ buddy tried all sorts of sneaky ways to get me to do something I've told him I would not.
Every activty we tried to do was just a setup for me to do the thing I said I would not.
It is like he has this longterm plan of finding ways to make me submit.
I just dig my heals in in the moment and call out all his manouvering for what it is.
Then I just go do my own stuff for a while.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

@_hornet_ Your buddy doesnt sound ENTj.(You said ENTJ but I think you mean LIE/ENTj). I dont typically approach people with that kind of a hidden agenda/sneaky intent, and I cant relate to people who do.

@_Straystuff_ What have you learned from your conflcits as you say? My best friend is an LSI and taught me to express myself intelligently when I have a problem rather than get angry. I used to be like that too, getting into alot of conflicts with people but I've learned to expresss myself calmly and eloquently and I can tell you that it works better as an exchange between parties. I find that when I yell I am usually yelling alone, the other person isnt listening to me anymore at that point, whereas when talk, rather than yell, I can pretty much get what I want out of people. Not sure why and its not intentional as a form of manipulation, but it works.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Typhon said:


> @_hornet_ Your buddy doesnt sound ENTj.(You said ENTJ but I think you mean LIE/ENTj). I dont typically approach people with that kind of a hidden agenda/sneaky intent, and I cant relate to people who do.


Well that is the thing isn't is?
You frame an issue within the confines of one model, but actually the main issues lie outside it.
His LIE type is accurate enough and it really sets the tone of the relationship.
However the issues that makes him act the way he does is Enneagram related.
So there is no wonder you don't relate to that way of doing buisness.
The only common denominator is the part where he has this strategic longterm take on implemening his hangups.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

hornet said:


> Well that is the thing isn't is?
> You frame an issue within the confines of one model, but actually the main issues lie outside it.
> His LIE type is accurate enough and it really sets the tone of the relationship.
> However the issues that makes him act the way he does is Enneagram related.
> ...


What enneagram type is he and what enneagram type am I?(I dont know, btw)

And perhaps you could be more specific as to what he does when he "tries to get you to do something which you said you wouldnt do"? Could you explain what you mean by that?


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Typhon said:


> What enneagram type is he and what enneagram type am I?(I dont know, btw)
> 
> And perhaps you could be more specific as to what he does when he "tries to get you to do something which you said you wouldnt do"? Could you explain what you mean by that?


My best guess for him is 2w3 7w8 1w9 in that order, but do take the wings with a grain of salt.
From my perspective it is this wanting to help (2), with the need to avoid facing his pain (7), 
coupled with his idealism that repress most anger (1) that kept the issue going.

It was about this girl that both him and I knew.
Infact it was trough her we met.
She is this IEE 8w7 basically a big player in every sense of the word.
Only falls for guys that don't fall for her.
He fell for her and hence not interested.
The LIE realizing my skill in personality typing invited me to discuss the topic in the park with him and her.
It ended up being them fighting and me listening to the fight, interjecting a helpful comment here and there.
I just went all 9 conflict avoidant thinking it was none of my buisness.
I then excused myself, but the LIE insisted on buying us all something to eat.
I still being in a 9'ish daze from all the conflict accepted.
In the resturant it just went from bad to worse and she even cried a little.
At the end I got my wits about me and asked a very pointed question to myself.
Is it time to bring my 8 wing on the field? Have I been used in this situation?
The answer was yes, and I told both of them that I never ever wanted to spend time with just the two of them again.
The LIE tried all sorts of ploys that just happened to end up with a situation that involved the three of us.
I called him out several times over this.
Fortunately he found himself another girl and the issue has stopped.
He does however show similar inclinations in other arenas, but not as strong as that.
She really got to him.


----------



## Monkey King (Nov 16, 2010)

Straystuff said:


> I have to admit I love conflict. Without it you won't learn anything, you just rot in your comfort-zone. Growth needs conflict.



No conflict is conflict itself.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Monkey King said:


> No conflict is conflict itself.


What I think people really want is conflict that are challenging, but managable.
I severely doubt any claim to like conflict that overrun you and leave you trampled in the dirt.


----------



## Monkey King (Nov 16, 2010)

hornet said:


> What I think people really want is conflict that are challenging, but managable.
> I severely doubt any claim to like conflict that overrun you and leave you trampled in the dirt.


Conflict is relative to one's experience. When you peruse through the forums, you will find people trippin' over things that others might find trivial. Ultimately, the individual is responsible for determining whether a conflict has value. 

I find value in all types of conflict. It helps define what I can and cannot tolerate; what others can and cannot tolerate. It also helps me understand the "carebear" side of my partner. He seriously doesn't hesitate to tell me what's wrong and what's right. If all of a sudden he stopped bringing things up (especially since we're in the first year of the relationship) I would think he no longer wants to share what he cares about. 

We teach each other how best to treat each other. I think that's vital information and sometimes it can't be done without stepping on some toes.


----------



## Bahburah (Jul 25, 2013)

I can only speak from my prospective but, yes I would agree.


I was in a relationship with my dual (ESFJ) and I came to questioning my type since there was always conflict, and it seems like there would never not be conflict. Yet we would always come back to each other and the attraction would never fully die.

I dated an ESFP for a bit which is the opposite of my dual and the relationship was much too easy that it made me question my type thinking they where my dual, yet it just got boring and wasn't going anywhere.

Yet with a Semi-Dual I knew (ENFJ) there was natural "conflict" yet that created the attraction.


To me duals are about learning from each other, so naturally there will be conflict.
Your probably not learning anything on a human level like that if it's just too easy.


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora (Aug 16, 2013)

Bahburah said:


> I dated an ESFP for a bit which is the opposite of my dual and the relationship was much too easy that it made me question my type thinking they where my dual, yet it just got boring and wasn't going anywhere.


Umm if you actually found your relationship with an ESFP too easy then it hardly sounds like she was your conflictor. I mean, duality presents some conflict, but conflictor relations are like "what the hell is this?" and there's bound to be more inconveniences than in duality. I'd actually question either your or her type given that you found your relationship with the ESFP easier than with the ESFJ. Or analyze what the conflicts consisted of. Because there can be intense attraction in conflictor relationships and feelings of "too easy, boring" in other relations (mirage comes to mind), so I'd suggest you look into other possible relations.

Side note: You said "I dated an ESFP for a bit". I think it's important to take into account that many of the effects of socionics' inter-type relations are only really noticeable after prolonged interaction, the less close you are to the other person the less of a psychological impact they have on you.



Kintsugi said:


> I'm also realizing now how hard it is to put this stuff into words.


What are you saying? Yours was the most perfect post I've seen in this thread :tongue:.


----------



## May (Dec 27, 2011)

Yes. I think this thread is meant to highlight the nature of conflict when it does happen in dualities. But speaking overall, a dual relationship should really not have _that_ much conflict. Certainly not constant conflict at least.


----------



## Straystuff (May 23, 2014)

Typhon said:


> What have you learned from your conflcits as you say? My best friend is an LSI and taught me to express myself intelligently when I have a problem rather than get angry. I used to be like that too, getting into alot of conflicts with people but I've learned to expresss myself calmly and eloquently and I can tell you that it works better as an exchange between parties. I find that when I yell I am usually yelling alone, the other person isnt listening to me anymore at that point, whereas when talk, rather than yell, I can pretty much get what I want out of people. Not sure why and its not intentional as a form of manipulation, but it works.


Well what you mentioned before is true for me also. When I snap my Ti flies out of the window. Or ok it's still there, but it's crooked by emotions: I say things that I haven't thought through and I don't even mean in the fits of passion. After spending a long time with this person I've noticed that when I snap it's better to walk away untill I'm calm again. These days I give my friend the silent treatment while I let the anger burn down, and then think about the situation with emotions _and_ logic before arguing. Also me sulking is very distressing for my friend for some reason and boy do I love it (if it hasn't come across before this I'm a terrible person :'D).

Also I think I've become more accepting. My friend is a lot more "shades of grey" type of person than I am and she thinks things through before judging. We've had several fights about morality etc. and I think we've been good influence for each other. 

Then there's the thing that "my" LSI tends to call me out from my bullshit. I have a bad habit of being a martyr and she's the only one who can say I'm doing it and take on my following emotional breakdown. I think she makes me more stable.


----------



## Bahburah (Jul 25, 2013)

Pancreatic Pandora said:


> Umm if you actually found your relationship with an ESFP too easy then it hardly sounds like she was your conflictor. I mean, duality presents some conflict, but conflictor relations are like "what the hell is this?" and there's bound to be more inconveniences than in duality. I'd actually question either your or her type given that you found your relationship with the ESFP easier than with the ESFJ. Or analyze what the conflicts consisted of. Because there can be intense attraction in conflictor relationships and feelings of "too easy, boring" in other relations (mirage comes to mind), so I'd suggest you look into other possible relations.
> 
> Side note: You said "I dated an ESFP for a bit". I think it's important to take into account that many of the effects of socionics' inter-type relations are only really noticeable after prolonged interaction, the less close you are to the other person the less of a psychological impact they have on you.


When I say too easy I mean that it was just kind of there and it just felt like we where going through the motions just because.

Altho I will say that I was less interested then she was. 

I felt like I had met her and wasn't getting anywhere else with her.


On the other had communication with the ESFJ I knew, while more of a challenge felt more worth it, and that I was being myself in reflection to her. 

While the ESFP I was just being myself, didn't feel like I was learning much.


But your right I've known the ESFJ muuuuuch longer than I did the ESFP.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Monkey King said:


> Conflict is relative to one's experience. When you peruse through the forums, you will find people trippin' over things that others might find trivial. Ultimately, the individual is responsible for determining whether a conflict has value.


This is very interesting and I totally agree.
Someone once used an example of how would you handle life if you would be put into the body of someone else.
Like Obama or even Putin. 
I don't know about you, but the level of conflict they rutinely deal with every day
falls waaaay outside my reference frame.
Most likely a lot of people would just have a breakdown if trust into such a situation.
Just because their valuation of the situation they found themself in now is too different.
While those people who live that life go to bed expecting to wake up to the same issues tomorrow,
it is just normal to them.



May said:


> Yes. I think this thread is meant to highlight the nature of conflict when it does happen in dualities. But speaking overall, a dual relationship should really not have _that_ much conflict. Certainly not constant conflict at least.


The level of conflict does really come down too age and experience,
experience in the sense of facing your shadow daemons.
I remember at age 9 of being in terror of an ENTJ in my class.
When I met him over a decage later he didn't seem all that problematic,
though I still resented him.
Fast forward to now and the ENTJs I meet don't bug me,
I have faced several of the insecurity and inferiority issues they evoked.
I think Jungs model really points out to us our inclination to onesidedness.
Meeting your dual is like being slammed with everything you have tried to pretend was just fine.

Meeting your shadow (Fi/Se ego meets Fe/Si Ego) can be enlightening too
but more on illuminating your dark side. You get too see how nasty a person you really are.
That can be tough, but it pales in comparison to facing down your dual issues.


----------



## May (Dec 27, 2011)

Figure said:


> Second time I have posted Gulenko's socionics workshop interview, but this time I wanted to focus on an interesting paradox Gulenko brought forward - that Duality, as a relationship, essentially _requires_ conflict.


To further respond to the original post, I think an interesting thing about highlighting conflict within dual relations is that it may shed some insight on what it means to dualize. And by extension, what it means to be happy in socionics.

So apparently all schools of socionics determine dual relations to be the best for lifelong relationships. In this sense, within the socion, dual relations are seen as ideal. They are the best for both activity and rest. Furthermore, they are durable (given the initial adjustment period). In fact, the main disadvantage of dual relations is that once you've experienced it and come to be used to it, it could be hard to do without. It's like saying: well this is very good, and the only reason we might not say it is the best is because once you've had it you won't want to live without it! So putting aside this particular qualification, duals become the best/happiest relation.

At this point, we look more closely at the best relation to see its nature. First of all, you can experience a deep sense of peace. Your weaknesses are protected so you feel safe. Your strong functions are encouraged, as your dual needs those aspects of you. So you are both safe and encouraged to be who you naturally are. In the original interview text that the op referred to, we have a comparison between conflict in dual relations and conflict in actual conflict relations. We note: dual conflicts are due to outside stressors on the relationship or possibly outside stressors that have become internalized in the partners. An example of such an internalized outside stressor could be the adjustments you are required to make in prolonged contact in other relations. This is what I tried to refer to in my first post here. Conflict relations on the other hand have conflict that comes from irritation between the partners themselves. Through examining conflict in Gulenko's interview, we recall that conflict relations involve both an opposite temperament and a different quadra's values.

So here, we may have an overall picture of happiness as defined by socionics. Personality is defined by a particular stack of functions. Within this stack, we have leading and dual-seeking functions. A dual forms. A pair of two duals make up a quadra. Quadras then occur in four iterations. So if we begin from the dual ideal, happiness occurs in relations of peace created by security and encouragement of your stack order (-your leading function in particular). Again, what an understanding of the nature of dual conflict (vs. conflict conflict) brings us is: in order for the relation to be peaceful you should have the same values (within 1 of 4 quadras) and a complementary temperament (within 1 of 4 quadra members). Entirely lacking both of these, you find yourself in the worst of all relations. 

In very general terms, we might say that socionics defines happiness as follows. First, most fundamentally, we have the assumption of the dual nature of man. Desire arises. Given the nature of desire, we seek something which we ourselves lack. This is our complement. It is a relation with this dual which results in "the best" happiness. Happiness becomes a sort of peace. Strong enough that you may even forget its presence (your dual's presence). Further, what is required for this happiness is a temperament match and value match in your relations. While there is peace, conflict does occur in your happiness since you exist in the world. It does not occur due to you or your dual's nature. Socionic happiness, in this way, seems to be consummate with being in dialogue with what you (and you in particular) desire. Conflict within this happiness only occurs when you don't get what you want due to factors outside of your relation. Since happiness requires desire and desire requires conflict (as you exist in the world), happiness requires conflict.

Whew. Not sure if that's useful.

Maybe the moral of the story is that after thinking about it and writing this post, I now no longer care about socionics and have become buddhist :tongue: Ah, just kidding.

Edit: whoops. Wanted to make a few minor edits.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

Pancreatic Pandora said:


> What are you saying? Yours was the most perfect post I've seen in this thread :tongue:.


Yay! :blushed:

I have a _really _short attention span and it's a REAL effort to string a coherent sentence together sometimes.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

hornet said:


> My best guess for him is 2w3 7w8 1w9 in that order, but do take the wings with a grain of salt.
> From my perspective it is this wanting to help (2), with the need to avoid facing his pain (7),
> coupled with his idealism that repress most anger (1) that kept the issue going.
> 
> ...



Blinded by love. That being said, maybe he is LIE. I know that when I fall for someone, I fall hard. 

Not sure why he wanted you to be there, though, maybe he thought you could fix things? Does he know about typology systems? I have a hard time imagining talking about such things with people I know IRL as almost noone is into typology, lol.

I also heard that if you try to get with someone who is your benefactor, it wont work.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Typhon said:


> Blinded by love. That being said, maybe he is LIE. I know that when I fall for someone, I fall hard.
> 
> Not sure why he wanted you to be there, though, maybe he thought you could fix things? Does he know about typology systems? I have a hard time imagining talking about such things with people I know IRL as almost noone is into typology, lol.
> 
> I also heard that if you try to get with someone who is your benefactor, it wont work.


Yup I told him that the stars was not aligned. LOL. xD
Yeah he know that I do typology and he know that I'm fairly good with it.
He is actually in shock and awe over my "skills".
Hence he wanted me to fix it.
Problem is that I had zero leverage over the IEE, for natural reasons, 
so I just tried to point out the obvious tradeoffs of the realition.
He had deaf ears and just continued to do his thing and failing miserably.

I stay far away from IEIs myself no good can ever come out of such a thing.
Getting it on with your supervisor relation ain't a very good plan either.
IEE in my case, hence I've only stayed on friendly terms with the girl in question,
even though she likes to try to come on to every guy she crosses paths with.

I talk about typology to anyone who will listen.
I've narrowed down what types want to listen pretty good too.
Though I'm not going to try to set up typology interest charts. xD


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

hornet said:


> Yup I told him that the stars was not aligned. LOL. xD
> Yeah he know that I do typology and he know that I'm fairly good with it.
> He is actually in shock and awe over my "skills".
> Hence he wanted me to fix it.
> ...


Of course he hopes you can fix it. Thats a human reaction. Explaining all this stuff about typology might not help either, if he doesnt get typology, or merely sees typology as a form of black magic which he hopes he can manipulate to his advantage. I dont think he'll "understand" all this tuff based on hints either; you need to be clear. Also have you told him this girl is only interested in guys who aerent inetersted in her? I think you should, he might not get how her psychology works, since LIEs aerent good at grasping these kinds of subtleties in relationships. If you tell him that thats the case, he might feel like hes less in the dark. Fact is, I dont think he gets whats going on.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Typhon said:


> Of course he hopes you can fix it. Thats a human reaction. Explaining all this stuff about typology might not help either, if he doesnt get typology, or merely sees typology as a form of black magic which he hopes he can manipulate to his advantage. I dont think he'll "understand" all this tuff based on hints either; you need to be clear. Also have you told him this girl is only interested in guys who aerent inetersted in her? I think you should, he might not get how her psychology works, since LIEs aerent good at grasping these kinds of subtleties in relationships. If you tell him that thats the case, he might feel like hes less in the dark. Fact is, I dont think he gets whats going on.


You are totally right in the aprisal of the situation.
You forget that it is in the past and that he has got a new girl now. 

Him and her was the first two cheerleaders I had on this.
She read up on it independently and got some semblance of understanding.
Him on the other hand... 
Yeah black magic is a good word to use.
I've explained it to him, but he don't seem to get it all that much.
He falls off whenever it becomes hard inner work, his 7 fix is allergic to critically reflecting on himself.


----------

