Dual-type theory: ENFj-ENTp - miscellaneous notes

[tcaudilllg]

*DRAFT*

Fe:Ne

Ponders the meaning of existence; the meaning of choices made; interprets choices; makes people aware of the options they have, or insists that they have none; contests the prevailing meaning of a choice, or affirms that meaning.

Ni:Ti

Knows one's place in the scheme of things; can improve one's position over a span of time; observes logic as having evolved over time; thinking of the times; position at the time; ordinals in the performance of a process; contest of positions over a span of time (rivalty); one's position in time. (hands on a clock).

Te:Se

The work of forces; alignment of force; exchange of force; possession of might; the experience of possessing great strength; the experience of having might; the use of force to obtain; loss due to forces beyond one's control.

Si:Fi

Beauty on basis of attractiveness; relational conduct on basis of like/dislike; interdependence between people of similar values; conflict between persons who hold other values; subjective providence; drawing oneself toward people who offer assistance, away from those who don't.

Ti:Si

Position reliant on health; governing principle of conserved relational constants; movement to equilibrium; being in position to help others, or to make war on them; position of capacity to aid or hinder; contingency of positon on living in harmony with others.

Se:Fe

Message conveying one's will; changes in message indicating changes in will; perception of strength or weakness in others; signaling vulnerabilty; contest of competing messages; confidence in the meaning of things; importance of expressing self-confidence to others.

Fi:Ni

attraction/repulsion due to the path one takes relative to one's own; attraction/repulsion due to changes in course; changing course to increase one's likability.

Ne:Te

observance of an object's potential for work; the capacity to obtain needed resources as a factor of one's potential; loss of potential due to loss of holdings; potential for wealth; dependence of potential upon equitable exchange; the capacity to act flexibly to satisfy changing needs; potential as a determinate of acention to wealth.

[Phaedrus]

You're deluded, tcaudilllg. Deal with it.

[Ali]

question for you tcaudilllg, and by no means do I point it at you - it just popped up with your posts, thats all. Have you considered what someone with dissociative idendity disorder (multiple personality as it used to be known) would come under if tried to be typed with socionics ?

[tcaudilllg]

question for you tcaudilllg, and by no means do I point it at you - it just popped up with your posts, thats all. Have you considered what someone with dissociative idendity disorder (multiple personality as it used to be known) would come under if tried to be typed with socionics ?

It means losing to one of the archetypes, and having the subconscious take over in such capacity. What you end up with is a person who really doesn't care if they have confidence in a position or not, a sudden outburst of activity in search of the dualization they are lacking. I don't mean "go find your dual", either: I mean the acquisition of the stimulation required to empower the disempowered functions. If "Jane" can't get the Si she wants, then perhaps "Joyce" must. Without the Si, Jane may not be capable of feeding her imagination with ideals relevant for her day. Now it is very important to note that DID probably cannot be forced upon persons whom do not already have restrained dualization pathways. Guys fantasize about women they can't have, but if they didn't then they would be forced to grapple completely with the reality that their potential is limited. It would be akin to putting one's psyche through a blender and contorting, disfragmenting it, etc. Fantasy is important, because without it one loses hope that one can tame one's own unconscious and thus, becomes corrupted by it. If one loses hope, what else is left? DID, resulting as it does in a total loss in one's own hope, manifests as an involuntary self-corruption. (contrast with the corrupt type who is confident in the subconscious' superiority, and actually finds hope in it). DID means surrendering oneself to positions one is not confident in.... Think about that for just a moment, how violating an experience that must be. If I were to look down the road and observe that I could corrupt myself in that way, then all of a sudden not only would there be no guarantee of success... there would be no guarantee even of my own survival against adversity. I would have no confidence in myself even to do the minimum necessary to ensure my own survival. How indeed, with such understanding in mind, could I face the day? Such an observation, taken seriously, could not be reconciled to a perosonality built around self-confidence. The only option, therefore, is a personality split which conceals the unstable aspect of reality from the confident side.

[Ali]

. How indeed, with such understanding in mind, could I face the day? Such an observation, taken seriously, could not be reconciled to a perosonality built around self-confidence. The only option, therefore, is a personality split which conceals the unstable aspect of reality from the confident side.

Such a personality split either conceals it or comes to accept it (perhaps not from the same confidence as you suggest),perhaps even rationalizes it, but at some level of acceptance just the same.

It means losing to one of the archetypes, and having the subconscious take over in such capacity. What you end up with is a person who really doesn't care if they have confidence in a position or not, a sudden outburst of activity in search of the dualization they are lacking. I don't mean "go find your dual", either: I mean the acquisition of the stimulation required to empower the disempowered functions.

My question of course is - could then an entj, disassociating with his personality (for coping or whatever reasons), be in that phase when seeing himself through the lens of socionics, find himself as coming out as an isfp. Or vice versa.

And it's not necessrily disassociative disorder either. It's the pop-concept of having the shadow personality turn up due to stress, etc - if this reugularly oscillates in the extreme, would not then one find himself coming out as an..

Or in terms of having social masks. You have a mask for work, a mask for society, depending on what survival mechanisms your being worked on..in an extreme case, would not then one find himself...

I'm essentially asking you for a basis of dual-type theory and a Relative, or statistical norm, as such - even if it is theorized as you see it. Have you considered it might be more-applicable for for cases where you take it on as a defense mechanism rather than a norm ? If not, then on what observation(s)/on whom/on how many people/ .. have you come to develop this theory..

Do you follow what I am trying to ask of you?

[tcaudilllg]

Stress happens, from a psychological standpoint, because one has been put in a situation under which one believes one must forgo personal fulfillment for a long period of time. People respond differently to stress. I respond by giving more time to the personal fulfillment side, and only meekly approach the demands which are encroaching upon me from outside. A stressful situation is an overbearing one, and I tend to put off confronting it until non-response becomes an immediate threat to future satisfaction. A situation is stressful, though, because it is imposed upon me without my really understanding how to approach it. (this because it is asking me to give up things that I believe I should have).

Your alter ego manages personal gratification, giving you the stimulus you need to anchor your ego. Without that stimulus you will begin having issues coping with your present situation. Most of us at that point say, "hey, I'm a hedonist", or "I'm a party person!" and go wild with other people who have the same needs for gratification. DID people are so estranged from their alter egos that they think they must be the "good boy" or the "good girl" and so, indulge themselves in NOT self-gratifying. It's as though the ego has assimilated the alter ego and made the choice between the angel and the devil moot: the person has clearly argured in favor of the angel. The problem happens when feelings of belief come to the fore: beliefs often cannot be reconciled with what is in essence a consensus society. The DID person feels themselves compelled to adhere to the consensus, yet their beliefs tell them that something isn't completely right. This is the stage for the seperation, finally manifested when the consensus appears to be moving beyond the threshold of tolerability, or has already moved to such and one's coping method has failed. Unable to rationalize the defense of their own persons in the face of a crippling situation, the alter ego itself finally has reason to differentiate itself, and to even take over. Most people's alter egos are poorly developed and incapable of managing even the most simplistic interactions, but perhaps the ego's absorbtion of the alter ego has the unintended effect of enriching it. Perhaps those private fantasies of people doing horrible things don't go unnoticed, and account for the manifestation of the alter ego as a person in its own right.

[kensi]

*DRAFT*

Fe:Ne

Ponders the meaning of existence; the meaning of choices made; interprets choices; makes people aware of the options they have, or insists that they have none; contests the prevailing meaning of a choice, or affirms that meaning.

Ni:Ti

Knows one's place in the scheme of things; can improve one's position over a span of time; observes logic as having evolved over time; thinking of the times; position at the time; ordinals in the performance of a process; contest of positions over a span of time (rivalty); one's position in time. (hands on a clock).

Te:Se

The work of forces; alignment of force; exchange of force; possession of might; the experience of possessing great strength; the experience of having might; the use of force to obtain; loss due to forces beyond one's control.

Si:Fi

Beauty on basis of attractiveness; relational conduct on basis of like/dislike; interdependence between people of similar values; conflict between persons who hold other values; subjective providence; drawing oneself toward people who offer assistance, away from those who don't.

Ti:Si

Position reliant on health; governing principle of conserved relational constants; movement to equilibrium; being in position to help others, or to make war on them; position of capacity to aid or hinder; contingency of positon on living in harmony with others.

Se:Fe

Message conveying one's will; changes in message indicating changes in will; perception of strength or weakness in others; signaling vulnerabilty; contest of competing messages; confidence in the meaning of things; importance of expressing self-confidence to others.

Fi:Ni

attraction/repulsion due to the path one takes relative to one's own; attraction/repulsion due to changes in course; changing course to increase one's likability.

Ne:Te

observance of an object's potential for work; the capacity to obtain needed resources as a factor of one's potential; loss of potential due to loss of holdings; potential for wealth; dependence of potential upon equitable exchange; the capacity to act flexibly to satisfy changing needs; potential as a determinate of acention to wealth.

i've already pondered these such scenarios long ago. Metaphysics?? how do you label what they mean interpersonally vs globally....you almost need another dichotomy.

[Ali]

Without the dual-type context to your draft however, it's not bad the descriptions..

[tcaudilllg]

Dual-type is just a further specialization in the context of type. It describes how people use their energy and how people form ideas by observing relations between aspects. Dual-type exists because if you parse a persons' use of aspects, then you find that the aspects don't always follow the function order of a type. You can have Se in between Ne and Ti, for example, in the dialog of an ENTp. Jung says that's not allowed: N follows T or F, but never S. It makes sense, too, because the purpose of rationalization is to make judgements about irrational phenomena. Upon extremely close scrutiny of the relationship between those elements that shouldn't be there, I realized that the errant aspects were always describing something happening in the context of the elements used. That's what dual-type theory is about, and it has nothing at all to do with DID or XXXX "super personalities".

[Ali]

. Dual-type exists because if you parse a persons' use of aspects, then you find that the aspects don't always follow the function order of a type. You can have Se in between Ne and Ti, for example, in the dialog of an ENTp. Jung says that's not allowed: N follows T or F, but never S. It makes sense, too, because the purpose of rationalization is to make judgements about irrational phenomena.

I follow that, of course, its one method of explaining what happens when aspects don't follow the function order of a type. And you may have got it spot on.

it has nothing at all to do with DID

I was presenting that by way of analogy as an example

Upon extremely close scrutiny of the relationship between those elements that shouldn't be there, I realized that the errant aspects were always describing something happening in the context of the elements used. .

Now, I'm not criticising, here, im simply asking how much of the finding-persons-use-of-aspects-not-following-----and-subsequent-theory is based on observations of yourself .. and (if they were mostly, solely, or even no) under what conditions were they observed under extremely close scrutiny - ie, the manifestations of these in circumstances were there psychological circumstances (stress, depression, social setting etc) which could have caused them to occur (in such a way as shown by the dual-type theory). It really is thar simple. Can you please directly answer that?

[tcaudilllg]

I follow that, of course, its one method of explaining what happens when aspects don't follow the function order of a type. And you may have got it spot on.



Now, I'm not criticising, here, im simply asking how much of the finding-persons-use-of-aspects-not-following-----and-subsequent-theory is based on observations of yourself .. and (if they were mostly, solely, or even no) under what conditions were they observed under extremely close scrutiny - ie, the manifestations of these in circumstances were there psychological circumstances (stress, depression, social setting etc) which could have caused them to occur (in such a way as shown by the dual-type theory). It really is a simple. Can you please directly answer that?

Well then I leave you to peruse the forum archives for my posts from between 2006 to mid 2007. You will get your answer from there.

[Ali]

oky thus intj. gd enough for me. apologies if i have managed to irk you.