Instinct Variant Compatibility: Similar to Socionics Benefit Relations?

[07490]

Does Enneagram instinct attraction works like Socionic Benefit relationship?

I know most people here would agree that they pair well with the same instinct, but I speculate that it might have the same effect in identical relationship in socionics, which can be boring.


So/Sx/Sp >Sx/Sp/So > Sp/So/Sx > So/Sx/Sp

Sp/Sx/So > Sx/So/Sp > So/Sp/Sx > Sp/Sx/So

This ring might have the same reciprocated attraction pointing back, unlike the socionic rings of benefit, so

So/Sx/Sp > Sp/So/Sx >Sx/Sp/So > So/Sx/Sp


From my observation I see that the energy is somewhat conflicting with each other when it's switch between the first and the second instinct. for example:

So/Sx/Sp - Sx/So/Sp

Sp/Sx/Sp - Sx/Sp/So

The worse might be that you are pair with someone who has your last stacking as their dominant, and shared a middle identical stacking. For example:

Sx/Sp/So - So/Sp/Sx

Sp/So/Sx - Sx/So/Sp


This can all be bullshit but I want to throw it out there to those who has an opinion on this.

Regardless I strongly believe that Enneagram instinct has more to do with compatibility than the E-type itself. (E-type matching is a little vague In my opinion because so much Socionic types can fit into one Enneagram type. from all different Quadra and Conflictors to duals.)

[FDG]

Interesting. I can't say I've noticed anything like this happening, but I haven't paid attention to it either. But it's a nice synthesis, even if it was to end up being a strictly theorethical one.

[07490]

Interesting. I can't say I've noticed anything like this happening, but I haven't paid attention to it either. But it's a nice synthesis, even if it was to end up being a strictly theorethical one.

Yea I have looked on google "enneagram instinct compatibility" and found nothing much really. But if we check Enneagram type compatibility we can get tons of articles. but none stating specifically that this types work well with this type, because it really can't as we group socionic theory along with Enneagram theory, It proves that it indeed can't say E-2 are "dual" with E-5, they can be conflicts or duals in Socionics.

[ScarlettLux]

From my personal experience - the best stacking relations are when the first two are reversed but you share the same last instinct, ie: So/Sx/Sp + Sx/So/Sp = Most compatible. I say this because I think sharing the same last instinct is EXTREMELY important, otherwise you're gonna always have minor conflicts, even if your relationship is otherwise good. It's just a clash of priorities and you feel like they are not seeing what's really important in life.

I say to reverse the first two only because two Sx, two Sp, or two So might get boring. You need enough variety to keep things going, but enough similarity to stop too much conflict.

For sx people especially, I find that two sx is just a recipe for disaster after a while ... fireworks and all for sure at first... maybe even for a long time, but then it's just all too much.

I'm Sx/So/Sp and I have a Sp/Sx/So boyfriend and lemme tell yah, our MAJOR problems center completely around the differences in the last instinct.

[07490]

From my personal experience - the best stacking relations are when the first two are reversed but you share the same last instinct, ie: So/Sx/Sp + Sx/So/Sp = Most compatible. I say this because I think sharing the same last instinct is EXTREMELY important, otherwise you're gonna always have minor conflicts, even if your relationship is otherwise good. It's just a clash of priorities and you feel like they are not seeing what's really important in life.

I say to reverse the first two only because two Sx, two Sp, or two So might get boring. You need enough variety to keep things going, but enough similarity to stop too much conflict.

For sx people especially, I find that two sx is just a recipe for disaster after a while ... fireworks and all for sure at first... maybe even for a long time, but then it's just all too much.

I'm Sx/So/Sp and I have a Sp/Sx/So boyfriend and lemme tell yah, our MAJOR problems center completely around the differences in the last instinct.

Interesting post.

[Gilly]

Hmmm...I think it's ideal when partners share the first instinct but reverse the second; ie, so/sx + so/sp. All the bases are covered, but they share the same priorities; same ends, with complimentary means. Same concept as duality.

[Joy]

From my personal experience - the best stacking relations are when the first two are reversed but you share the same last instinct, ie: So/Sx/Sp + Sx/So/Sp = Most compatible.

Huh, I would have thought that the same all the way around would be best. Or at least the same first one.

[redbaron]

Hmmm...I think it's ideal when partners share the first instinct but reverse the second; ie, so/sx + so/sp. All the bases are covered, but they share the same priorities; same ends, with complimentary means. Same concept as duality.

oh. this explains a lot.

[Gilly]

I think it's probably worst when each partner has the other's primary instinct as second, eg. sp/so and so/sp. The second function is used as a means to the first, so each is probably prone to seeing the other as fake, having their priorities wrong, etc. They probably see each other as similar and very attractive at first, but ultimately come to think of each other as threatening, manipulative and shallow when they realize each other's real investments.

With a combo where one has the other's first as second (and visa versa obviously), and the latter's first is the former's third (and visa versa), the dynamic may even be close to a supervision of sorts. Take sp/so with sx/sp: sx/sp is proficient and aware in areas pertaining to sp, but sees them as secondary, undermining the other's perspective, and will probably laugh at sp/so's attempts to appeal to broader context, sense of solidarity, or "common sense" to waylay the overriding prioritization of sx. In addition to having their goals undermined and typical methods dismissed or belittled, sp/so does not fully understand the focus on sx first or the motivations behind it, which basically means that they feel they cannot relate to the other's motivations, seeing them as strange or foreign.

In a relationship where both share the second function but differ in the first (ie sp/so and sx/so), there is probably an initial attraction or acknowledged commonality, but after spending some time together, partners would realize that their priorities are different and they don't fully understand each other. Depending on the context, the dynamic can probably range from mutual misunderstanding to harsh competition.

[ArchonAlarion]

From my personal experience - the best stacking relations are when the first two are reversed but you share the same last instinct, ie: So/Sx/Sp + Sx/So/Sp = Most compatible. I say this because I think sharing the same last instinct is EXTREMELY important, otherwise you're gonna always have minor conflicts, even if your relationship is otherwise good. It's just a clash of priorities and you feel like they are not seeing what's really important in life.

This was my thought as well, cool.

[Joy]

I like the idea of being with someone with the same stacking as mine.

[Gilly]

I like the idea of being with someone with the same stacking as mine.

Probably not a bad pairing at all. Maybe a little unbalanced in practical terms, but subjectively I'm sure it's great.

[Joy]

Yeah, the idea of two types with sp last... hmmm.

I don't care though. Whatever. sx/so sounds like an awesome potential pairing for me. so/sx sounds like someone who would be inattentive. sp/sx sounds like someone I couldn't properly enjoy social stuff with. sx/sp, too. And any sx last type sounds like someone I might as well not even be involved with at all.

[Gilly]

What about sx/sp?

[Joy]

What about sx/sp?

I'm not so sure about the so last thing. That's nowhere near as bad as the sx last thing though.

Not that it matters anyways. This is all hypothetical.

And reality is what it is.

[FDG]

I think that it's probably best that no-one's first instinct is the other's last if you want to minimize conflict (eg. don't mix sx/sp/so with so/sp/sx, or sp/so/sx). Aside from that, you could probably find value in any of the remaining combinations.

Yeah, that's the only rule, imo. Which is in many ways similar to what Scarlettlux said.

[Gilly]

I think that it's probably best that no-one's first instinct is the other's last if you want to minimize conflict (eg. don't mix sx/sp/so with so/sp/sx, or sp/so/sx). Aside from that, you could probably find value in any of the remaining combinations.

I see problems happening with partner's having each other's first instinct second: I think it could make them view each other as superficial, disingenuous, and manipulative. I know that's how I think of my sp/sx roommate's attitude towards sx-related things.

[strrrng]

It's probably also specific to the "personalities" of specific stackings. An sx/sp might be more inclined to be with a pure identical (sx/sp), due to the contained search for intimacy; once an outlet is found, all boundaries are sealed off around it, and energy concentration is maximized. I could see an sx/so being a bit more open than this, given that they operate in a broader context, and thus tend to seek more variety in connections.

I agree re: last instinct pairings = definite conflict

I disagree that second/first switch is the most complementary, but it's most likely specific to the stacking. sp/so and so/sp could probably establish greater rapport and work more effectively than, say, sx/sp and sp/sx: the former's goals center around security spread throughout a social context, whereas the latter is the most personally-bent, in terms of pursuits (thus conflict would be more pronounced).

[redbaron]

It's probably also specific to the "personalities" of specific stackings. An sx/sp might be more inclined to be with a pure identical (sx/sp), due to the contained search for intimacy; once an outlet is found, all boundaries are sealed off around it, and energy concentration is maximized. I could see an sx/so being a bit more open than this, given that they operate in a broader context, and thus tend to seek more variety in connections.

I agree re: last instinct pairings = definite conflict

I disagree that second/first switch is the most complementary, but it's most likely specific to the stacking. sp/so and so/sp could probably establish greater rapport and work more effectively than, say, sx/sp and sp/sx: the former's goals center around security spread throughout a social context, whereas the latter is the most personally-bent, in terms of pursuits (thus conflict would be more pronounced).

I've found that I'm often attracted to sp/so stacking. sx/sp is too much intensity for me, I think.

[Amber]

I have no idea about theoretical compatibility. My best matches so far have been LSI sx/sp, EII sx/sp, SLE sx/so (only in a way -- along the Se channel, as one might say, but intensity was there). I admire sp/so people (usually from a distance) and they sometimes feel a protective urge towards me, but we kind of live in different worlds. My family was a combo of sp/so and sp/sx. They have tried to cultivate essential sp values in me ..which look very healthy and grounding, but ultimately don't meet my deeper needs. I'm commonly quite the stranger to other stacks. Weirdly I've never been involved with any sp/sx, for I feel they're kind of drawn to me and we could get some hands dirty doing some mud work together.

Abstractly I could see why I would get along better with folks in the same flow. Otherwise I'm afraid a common first instinct is the key to happiness and peace on earth.

[Aylen]

I was raised by an so/sp mom (LSI) and sp/so stepdad (ILI). The sisters (I know well) are sp/sx (EII) and so/sx (ESE). The brother (I know well) is probably sp/sx (IEI). None of the aunts, uncles or cousins I grew up around were sx-first. The term "black sheep" was actually used at family gatherings to describe me. I am pretty sure if my family knew about instinct stackings, when I was a child and teen, I probably would have been labeled sx/so just because of a lack of understanding.

I have been in longterm relationships with a couple of sp/sx (ILI and SLE) and I found them pretty grounding. They helped me maintain more balance in my life. When in relationships with other sx first it has gotten out of control and there was more drama. I have never been in a relationship with sx-last. I don't think they are drawn to me in any way, unless it is from a distance. I think they find me kind of scary up close and personal. There is only one other sx/sp (IEI) in my family (that I know of) and we get along and understand each other better than we do any other family members even though we are not close in age. My bio-dad is probably sx/so (EIE) but we don't even speak the same language so I avoid talking to him when he calls. Maybe if he spoke english, and we lived in the same country, I would get along with him but the last time I saw him face to face I was like 4.

[lynn]

i generally get along better with syn-flow. sx/so is fine, and i don't perceive any obvious conflict with them (however, no particular attraction either). sp/sx can make me sometimes really uncomfortable, but at the end i somehow appreciate them from afar. so/sp is by far the worst. we should get along better because of shared first instinct, i guess. i think, i should feel much more threatened by sp/sx (sometimes i do) but so/sp doesn't work for me at all. there's something hollow about it which feels alienating to me. like you slowly want to get closer and tear down the wall they put between themselves and the world, and then find there's nothing behind .. things like this trigger my neurosis of not really feeling connected (enough) to people on a personal level. in so/sp environments i feel lost and lonely.

[Pookie]

As an So/Sx (imo)
I think I've gotten along best with Sx seconds, moreso than any other grouping.

[Olimpia]

Regardless I strongly believe that Enneagram instinct has more to do with compatibility than the E-type itself.

I agree with that sentiment.

Regarding what stackings work better and worse together, I follow what is described in the Flow theory.

Personally, I'd prefer being with someone who does not share my own instinctual stacking. Mostly because we would have the same strengths and weaknesses, similar to Identicals. When it came to SP matters, we'd both have to work really hard and have difficulties helping the other. An identical stacking relation could probably work best if both people were already well-balanced, stable, grounded etc. Similar problems would apply to SX/SO (in my case, as SO/SX), just add to that different flows, which can hinder arriving at agreements concerning certain issues.

I actually find SP/SO pretty attractive, because they are good at my weaknesses, and due to our shared flow and SO instinct, SP/SO is likely open to helping me out with SP. My aunt is SP/SO, and when we were travelling together she was providing us with all the necessary snacks and nourishment. We would visit an art museum and could both converse about social topics easily. The only problem I see with that stacking and mine is the fact they have an SX blindspot, which results in a certain emotional distance and lack of SX energy. Generally I do not mind this when it comes to friendships, but in the context of a romantic relationship this fact could be frustrating.

Finally, SX/SP can be intriguing for other reasons. Mostly because of their intensity. Their lack of social awareness can be endearing, entertaining or grossly embarrassing, no in-between. Also, I have noticed that most SX/SP people seem to be preoccupied, which is a shame. All in all, I think my best bet would be pairing up with a healthy secure SX/SP, actually. Because this stacking combines the same flow + balancing of weaknesses + SX intensity. But healthy SX/SP people seem to be so rare... probably because they are usually unhealthy when single. :/