# I do not belive in duality



## General Lee Awesome (Sep 28, 2014)

I believe in unicorns tho


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

@johnson.han.3 Lol, you get a cookie!


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Captain Mclain said:


> No i got my theory correct. I know my duals and semi-duals. And all that. It is just that Se-dom are very secretive in some ways. everytime I hang out with them it is like the last time and first time and only time and all time at the same time.  If that make sense haha


You don't sound like an IEI. Se-dual-seek/Se-lead interactions don't happen this way. Maybe you're IEE.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

cyamitide said:


> You don't sound like an IEI. Se-dual-seek/Se-lead interactions don't happen this way. Maybe you're IEE.


I think more that I based much what I said in that post on one single person


----------



## Kyusaku (Mar 18, 2014)

Your dual is a regular person with all the quirks and unhealthiness regular people have. You can't expect your dual to be your soul mate. SLEs can be particularly shallow and over domineering. They can use you like a tool, giving little to nothing back for your services. I know this dual that parties all the time and think she is the hot shit, but she is so helpless when it comes to thinking ahead of time and taking meaningful decisions. You experience the pull, you want to keep interacting with your dual even if that dual isn't worth maintaining any relations with. So duality isn't perfect, but it's beneficial none the less. That's why you keep being attracted to them. My SEE stepsister can annoy the crap out me (and I can be just as annoying to her), but every time we start to discuss we can't stop, and afterwards we both feel well, and we crave more of it, no matter how harshly we can judge each other. She gives me energy, I give her structure, without having to make any efforts or even thinking about it, it's completely spontaneous. You grow without even being aware of it, it's almost magical.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

The thing about duality is that it's not something you can explain to someone else. You have to experience duality in its entirety and how it works in an intimate relationship; it has to occur over a long period of time. Anything less simply isn't sufficient. It's a soul mate kind of thing; it's a feeling of being extremely deeply psychologically fulfilled. It's a feeling as if they are the other side of the coin you are both a part of it and you cannot be without it because you wouldn't feel as complete and whole without it. The longer the relationship lasts, the deeper the psychological fulfillment goes as well. It cannot be replaced with something else. Duality cannot be put into words. Either you've experienced it and you know what I'm talking about or you haven't. 

Duality isn't some magic fix either. You won't get along just because you are duals but you will have an easier time communicating and making sense of things together compared to other ITR. Quadras have that effect in general. It becomes very obvious being an Fi type, and I'm in a room with Fe types and I suddenly cannot feel as if I'm making sense to them anymore because they constantly brush me off or ignore me or interpret things in ways I didn't intend. I can't make them listen, I find their way of interacting obnoxious etc. 

When you're used to hanging out with people of your quadra or mostly valued IMEs together, and then end up in a group who doesn't value your IMEs, it will become extremely obvious as to why socionics explains the ITR the way it does. Most people tend to move in mixed groups with mixed types and therefore have little to no experience with groups that are more oriented towards one functional set over others based on what one values oneself, and as such don't realize how much this actually affects our basic communication. It doesn't mean you cannot communicate with people of opposing types or quadras, especially on an individual basis, but try to do that if you run into a group of them and chances are you will likely feel as if you are are a little insane around them because nothing they say is interesting, and similarly, whenever you express something you think is important to you, they don't give a fuck, may mock it or make fun out of it or not take it seriously etc. 

There's a great episode of this in Simpsons, actually, about this guy Grimes who comes to Springfield to work at the powerplant. Grimes is probably an ILI and finds himself in an environment full of alphas. He literally goes insane because nothing makes sense to him anymore; the way they reason and make sense of the world is so contrary to how he thinks it should be like and no one sees the problem with it. No one understands it the way he does. While exaggerated, it's a good example of what happens when we end up in environments that don't value our own IMEs.


----------



## Strife (Aug 25, 2010)

Helios said:


> Right, and that may work out well for you. However, I find it too compensatory in the sense that I want to learn how to communicate with people who perceive and evaluate things differently than me. I place heavy value on relationships where I can grow significantly. I agree that duality is about ease of flow and exchange-- I conveyed that in my first post on this thread. But in intimate relationships, I have learned a lot more about myself/achieved much more personal growth from the relationships with non-duals than the one relationship I did have with a dual (though I did learn valuable things from that relationship too).
> 
> There just seems to be a duality favoring bias when it comes to intertype relations, and I wish that the more naive subscribers to socionics would realize that some people even have successful relationships with their more conflicting relations and not so successful ones with their duals.


Yep, same. Compensatory is right on the mark IME. It's cool that someone takes care of the things that you struggle with but at the same time it can make you a little lazy and complacent - funny, I actually read that in an article on one of the pitfalls of duality. I too wish that people wouldn't be so biased, I can't remember how many times I've read posts about how amazing duality is, then about a month later that person changes their type or re-types the other person. A lot of this is just confirmation bias IMO, and odds are if any particular 'duality' experience was so amazing, you should probably give credit to that person instead of their type (which very likely only had minimal, if any impact on that experience).


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

Entropic said:


> The thing about duality is that it's not something you can explain to someone else. You have to experience duality in its entirety and how it works in an intimate relationship; it has to occur over a long period of time. Anything less simply isn't sufficient. It's a soul mate kind of thing; it's a feeling of being extremely deeply psychologically fulfilled. It's a feeling as if they are the other side of the coin you are both a part of it and you cannot be without it because you wouldn't feel as complete and whole without it. The longer the relationship lasts, the deeper the psychological fulfillment goes as well. It cannot be replaced with something else. Duality cannot be put into words. Either you've experienced it and you know what I'm talking about or you haven't.
> 
> Duality isn't some magic fix either. You won't get along just because you are duals but you will have an easier time communicating and making sense of things together compared to other ITR. Quadras have that effect in general. It becomes very obvious being an Fi type, and I'm in a room with Fe types and I suddenly cannot feel as if I'm making sense to them anymore because they constantly brush me off or ignore me or interpret things in ways I didn't intend. I can't make them listen, I find their way of interacting obnoxious etc.
> 
> ...


and thats why It didnt work out with an IEE for me, and continue to do so with other IEE.


----------



## westlose (Oct 9, 2014)

Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but duality scares me. If duality is so magical and fulfilling, I don't want to think about how hard it is to be separated from your dual. It must feel like someone is cutting you in a half. Then you feel crippled and worthless.


----------



## aendern (Dec 28, 2013)

Entropic said:


> The thing about duality is that it's not something you can explain to someone else. You have to experience duality in its entirety and how it works in an intimate relationship; it has to occur over a long period of time. Anything less simply isn't sufficient. It's a soul mate kind of thing; it's a feeling of being extremely deeply psychologically fulfilled. It's a feeling as if they are the other side of the coin you are both a part of it and you cannot be without it because you wouldn't feel as complete and whole without it. The longer the relationship lasts, the deeper the psychological fulfillment goes as well. It cannot be replaced with something else. Duality cannot be put into words. Either you've experienced it and you know what I'm talking about or you haven't.
> 
> Duality isn't some magic fix either. You won't get along just because you are duals but you will have an easier time communicating and making sense of things together compared to other ITR. Quadras have that effect in general. It becomes very obvious being an Fi type, and I'm in a room with Fe types and I suddenly cannot feel as if I'm making sense to them anymore because they constantly brush me off or ignore me or interpret things in ways I didn't intend. I can't make them listen, I find their way of interacting obnoxious etc.
> 
> ...


That sounds really special.

I can't recall ever experiencing anything even remotely similar to this. 

And actually, it almost seems like knowing about it would produce placebo effect once you did meet someone of your quadra.

At least for me, I find typing people's quadras super super easy. Not necessarily their exact type from those 4 within the quadra, but just the quadra itself is really simple.

So it almost seems like, because you can so easily distinguish people by their quadras, and because you know that your own quadra is _supposed _to make you like the people within it more. . . 

you see where I'm going with this?

I constantly feel myself surrounded by Deltas. It's like everywhere I go, Deltas. They're everywhere. They're on the internet, they're in my classes, they're on Tumblr (hugely), they're on YouTube (also hugely).

laskjflskfdj

Where are all my Gammas at?

--

And, anyway, I like Deltas. Have nothing against them. They seem extremely practical, homely, materialistic sometimes.. but not in bad ways, really. In ways that I find interesting. I enjoy being around them. I can't think of any times that I haven't enjoyed being around Deltas.

There is definitely that air of "I'm not one of these people," but still, it's an enjoyable alien feeling, not a scared alien feeling. (now I'm thinking about Gerard Way's album). Like I'm learning about someone else's culture. I love doing that.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

@Entropic I do not get it. Are you already banned. again? 3th in row


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Captain Mclain said:


> @Entropic I do not get it. Are you already banned. again? 3th in row


This time it's the very forum itself that hates me lol. False positive.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

emberfly said:


> That sounds really special.
> 
> I can't recall ever experiencing anything even remotely similar to this.
> 
> ...


Did you read the gamma description that says gammas come in very small groups of 3-4 people at most, and if there are more of them they tend to break up in appropriately sized groups? 

The thing about gammas, which, if you ever run into one, is that they tend to be like stray cats in the socion. They don't really have a "home" with a group of people exactly like them like with the other quadras. Usually what happens, is that there is one, or a few, stray gammas in every larger social group you run into but rarely if ever will you run into a group explicitly or primarily made up of gammas. There are of course exceptions to this, but I'm speaking generally here. 

Gamma is like the antisocial quadra in this regard, which is ironically frustrating being a gamma because it's nice to speak to people of the same quadra. It's just that we don't like to be in cliques, for most of the part. I think it's because of -Fi which makes us pay more attention to negative relationships and try to avoid them like the plague, so if we don't like someone or a group of people we are out of there and rather do our own thing alone.


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

Entropic said:


> This time it's the very forum itself that hates me lol. False positive.


I warned you about mines.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Ixim said:


> I warned you about mines.


? I am not following.


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

Entropic said:


> ? I am not following.


I know how you got banned the second time and yeah. I know too much. I also cross referenced another post of mine and ...nevermind.

That was weird.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)




----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Shouldn't the inside of that hole look like the sky above?


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Shouldn't the inside of that hole look like the sky above?


Hmm, maybe. xD


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Pretty pictures though


----------



## Sol_ (Jan 8, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> I do not see duality relation being a substantial relation. Awesome for short meetings


Duality more than other IR gives friendship sympathy. It's best for long relations like marriage. Maybe other IR are not good for marriage at all, as there will stay permanent conflicting zones in spouse's personality.

There is a problem to find a dual for meetings, as 5/16 of all people are not your duals, and you choose by many other parameters besides type. Another problem - general low accuracy of types identification, what is seen with low match in typings between any 2 typers when they don't know others' opinions beforehand.
Without experience of relations with dual it's hard to check is it good for long relations. Duality does not guarantee excelent relations, but it's one of strong factors for them.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Shouldn't the inside of that hole look like the sky above?


Not really, because see, the point of the picture is that it is the same hole that you see to the left. It's a vacuum or a black hole though perhaps best explained as a wormhole, so not quite a whirlpool. Because it's a black hole it can in theory be situated or have an end point anywhere else; because it sucks everything in there's no light coming out, only the water. If the hole was made translucent we wouldn't understand that it was the same hole as we see to the left and much of the symbolism, that of circular unity where everything becomes one because whatever we determine to be the starting point is also simultaneously the end point, is lost. It really could not be done any other way in order to represent that symbolism, though I can see why Ne would be inclined to want to make it that way.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Entropic said:


> Not really, because see, the point of the picture is that it is the same hole that you see to the left. It's a vacuum or a black hole though perhaps best explained as a wormhole, so not quite a whirlpool. Because it's a black hole it can in theory be situated or have an end point anywhere else; because it sucks everything in there's no light coming out, only the water. If the hole was made translucent we wouldn't understand that it was the same hole as we see to the left and much of the symbolism, that of circular unity where everything becomes one because whatever we determine to be the starting point is also simultaneously the end point, is lost. It really could not be done any other way in order to represent that symbolism, though I can see why Ne would be inclined to want to make it that way.


Uhhhhh.... The sky overhead that you can't see, not the horizon. If it was noon, you'd see the sun inside the hole on the right.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Uhhhhh.... The sky overhead that you can't see, not the horizon. If it was noon, you'd see the sun inside the hole on the right.


Why? Did you even read what I wrote? You shouldn't see anything inside the hole - that's the exact point. If you did, it would have to be mirrored in the hole to the left.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

@_Jeremy8419_

The image makes sense to me and is fine just as it is... but I can't really explain why, lol. 

@_Entropic_

I dunno much about wormholes, but, yeah. Something like that. xD


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Entropic

It's a wormhole, not a black hole. You'd see sky in each. You'd only "not get it", if you didn't understand the concept of wormholes at all. I get it, so while grasping the point, I'm still side-tracked by the "well, doesn't actually work like that, but okay..."


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> @Entropic
> 
> It's a wormhole, not a black hole. You'd see sky in each. You'd only "not get it", if you didn't understand the concept of wormholes at all. I get it, so while grasping the point, I'm still side-tracked by the "well, doesn't actually work like that, but okay..."


But that deters from the conceptual meaning that the picture means to imply. It needn't be factual or accurate. I mean, from that standpoint alone, this picture shouldn't exist in the first place because what occurs in it isn't even remotely plausible.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Entropic said:


> But that deters from the conceptual meaning that the picture means to imply. It needn't be factual or accurate. I mean, from that standpoint alone, this picture shouldn't exist in the first place because what occurs in it isn't even remotely plausible.


Well, if they exist, it is plausible. The left one is slightly below sea-level and the gravity of the earth would cause the water to flow from the left and out the right at a speed of probably around 5m/s. There would also be a slight wind flow for the minor difference in barometric pressure between the two spots.
I got the concept and ";p"d kintsugi after he ";p"d ixim lol


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Well, if they exist, it is plausible. The left one is slightly below sea-level and the gravity of the earth would cause the water to flow from the left and out the right at a speed of probably around 5m/s. There would also be a slight wind flow for the minor difference in barometric pressure between the two spots.
> I got the concept and ";p"d kintsugi after he ";p"d ixim lol


...

Yeah, no comment. That's just missing the point, tbh.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Entropic said:


> ...
> 
> Yeah, no comment. That's just missing the point, tbh.


Not really. He used the picture to show a point, and I used the picture to show the same point applies to him making that point. Referenced one circle, was shown another.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Not really. He used the picture to show a point, and I used the picture to show the same point applies to him making that point. Referenced one circle, was shown another.


I explained what I meant. I doubt it can be clearer than that. Conceptual representation > scientific accuracy. The picture wasn't made with the latter in mind, but the former, as is true for most art.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Captain Mclain said:


> I do not see duality relation being a substantial relation. Awesome for short meetings but there is NO PULL. :th_sur:


In Russia, duality does not believe in you.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

PaladinX said:


> In Russia, duality does not believe in you.


The Soviet does not believe in Russia.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Not really. He used the picture to show a point, and I used the picture to show the same point applies to him making that point. Referenced one circle, was shown another.


Are you talking about me...because...last time I checked I wasn't a "he". 

Also, I don't really get your point, tbh. It seems like a lot of Ni-types did appreciate the image so maybe that has something to do with it. *shrugs*


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Entropic

... Ixim circle-derped. Kintsugi posted a picture for the circle-derp. I pointed out the inaccuracy of the picture. Kintsugi saw it. I, therefore, gave her a circle-derp based upon her posting the circle-derp picture. You said it was accurate picture. I said it wasn't. You said accuracy wasn't the point. I said the point of what I said was to make another circle-derp. I have now explained circle-derping to you. You have now been circle-derped. *insert wormhole picture here*
@Kintsugi
Oops. Sorry, never looked at your gender lol. Yes. It is a very pretty picture and I saved it.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

@Jeremy8419

I circle-derped who?!

Honestly, I posted the image because, a) I like it and wanted an excuse to post it, and, b) I think it nicely sums up how I understand the concept of "duality".


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Kintsugi ah. I thought it was in reference to Ixim's post prior to yours, where he came back to where he started from. Was also under the impression that Ixim saw it the same way haha.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

That's some Ne-shizzle right there. xD


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Well it was legitimately right after his post LOL


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Yeah, I understood it the way Kintsugi did here. I didn't see it being related to Ixim's post at all, and I treated the picture as its own unrelated to everything else being said.


----------

