Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Signs of Being (Non-) Dualized

  1. #1
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Berlin
    TIM
    LSI 5w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,421
    Mentioned
    144 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default Signs of Being (Non-) Dualized

    How do you think it's easiest to tell if someone has gone through some dualizing experiences or at least is attuned to their dual-seeking function?
    Personally I doubt it has to do with how functional someone is in society, as some Socionics texts go. People are adaptable, they manage to survive and do well even when they lack duals or direct support from others in the area of the suggestive. So far I've been trying to gauge people's reaction to information related to the inferior and I've seen some reject it outright and use only ego functions to form their convictions and their expectations in life, while others seem quite comfortable with info and energy from their suggestive and even actively seek it (often through personal means: e.g. Fi/Fe in music, literature ..). Any other ideas?

    I'm talking mainly of "real-life" people who most often than not have no clue about Socionics.

  2. #2
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Berlin
    TIM
    LSI 5w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,421
    Mentioned
    144 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ne overload ...

  3. #3
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,126
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is a trickier question than spotting someone who has been dualized. The person could be raised with parents that slant their line of reasoning towards the super-ego, the ID, the super-id, or reaffirm strongly what their ego functions tell them already. The amount of variations that large of a field can spawn is too much to make sense of. If anything it would resemble the variation thats inherent with people in general, as most people aren't dualized.

    I think this question would be better off if you narrowed it down, (Type mentored by their quasi-identical/conflictor/activity, etc...) or look for signs of being dualized, its a smaller pond to find that fish.
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If itís a disease, itís nobodyís fault. Yay empiricism.

  4. #4
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,126
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I re-read the post, the title confused me.

    Spotting a dualized person, i think as a general rule of thumb, you can see a measure of confidence/competency in their Super-ID functions as compared to their peers. It will still come through the lens or filter of that persons type, but they are using the super-id functions to fuel themselves forward. I mean, in a nutshell, isn't that what being dualized is: Having familiarity/control with the functions that fuel your ego?
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If itís a disease, itís nobodyís fault. Yay empiricism.

  5. #5
    The Soul Happy-er JWC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,808
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    All dualized individuals are, like myself, better than @William at most things.
    Easy Day

  6. #6
    suedehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    3,023
    Mentioned
    195 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Not sure what you mean by a 'dualization experience'. Can you elaborate? I've lived with an SEI for 20 years and I don't think I've ever been 'healthy' for a consistent period of time. Si is just Si. Am I confident in it? Somewhat, although it isn't something that I had to learn from her, nor do I see it as a solution to my problems.
    Last edited by suedehead; 05-05-2014 at 02:48 AM.

  7. #7
    Jesus is the cruel sausage consentingadult's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,782
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William View Post
    I would say you can identify non-dualized people by their lack of successful relationships with others. Usually people who are 'dualized' are more well-rounded, easygoing (not trying to hammer their perspective down others' throats), laid-back, and happier. They're able to get along with more people than someone non-dualized.
    This is right. To rephrase it into Socionics terminology: often non-dualized people use their Mobilizing function too much (hammering down their own perspective down people's throat), dualized people focus on their ego functions and are therefore much more agreeable.

    I wish I could think of good internatiol examples, but right now, only Dutch examples come to mind...
    The future of Socionics:
    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa View Post
    Many black Americans are SEE type.

  8. #8
    ■■■■■■ Radio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,574
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    duality isn't a cosmic equalizer that tunes your brain into the right frequency. duality could e.g. make your ego functions even more disproportionately pronounced, so that you end up repressing your unvalued functions even more strongly because your duals keep encouraging your bad habits. this wouldn't improve your relations with other people, or make you more well-rounded, this would only strengthen the one-sidedness of your psyche (which in itself isn't a bad thing but more on that later). duality doesn't necessarily complete you, nor make you a more balanced person; all of these things depend on the person, their circumstances and how they're motivated to adapt to them. these bullshit notions need to be eradicated because they are more COSMO find-your-true-love-compatibility quiz than Jungian in spirit.

    that said, how well your functions are developed depends on what is demanded of you both externally and internally. for some people, being highly differentiated (e.g. Aylen being a fuckton of NF with zero ST capabilities) is possibly more beneficial, while and for others being less differentiated (e.g. lungs, lecky, aquagraph, among others being ambiguously N/S) is more beneficial in adapting to external circumstances. type is psychological one-sidedness by definition, but people have varying levels of one-sidedness depending upon what kind of things they need to deal with, so none of it is inherently any better or worse than the other.

    tl;dr people are not as predictable as socionics claims.
    Last edited by Radio; 05-05-2014 at 09:26 AM.

  9. #9
    The Soul Happy-er JWC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,808
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William View Post
    No way, Jose! Maybe in the land where you count sheep.
    Alright, you're on! Sheep counting contest, let's go!

    http://gph.is/15zACDA
    Easy Day

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    861
    Mentioned
    99 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree with @Radio to some extent. Basically imo it boils down to circumstance, a particular person and what one wants to focus on/what one's goals are.
    Duality might mean you meet smn you have a connection with and you both encourage each other to grow and develop and help each other fight your weaknesses and become more well-rounded... but it can also mean two people meeting and saying "ok, you do this and I do that, end of story" and then while they may be a functional tandem, this doesn't make them more well-rounded as separate human beings.

  11. #11
    Nevero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    427
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio View Post
    duality could e.g. make your ego functions even more disproportionately pronounced, so that you end up repressing your unvalued functions even more strongly because your duals keep encouraging your bad habits.
    this is misconstrued. dual's strong functions are opposite to each other. they dampen and balance each other's ego. at least that's what i've read on this theory of dualization. but it made a lot of sense when i read it, take a look at this:

    ILE's all prevalent all encompassing base intuition is opposed by SEIs strong base sensing.
    LIE's all strong logic is opposed by ESI's strength in ethics.
    SLE's strong sensing is opposed by IEI's strong intuition. etc.

    the effect is achievement of balance between two opposite poles. duals make you less preoccupied with your ego functions, while alone each persists in their "bad ego habits".

  12. #12
    Contra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    1,405
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio View Post
    duality isn't a cosmic equalizer that tunes your brain into the right frequency. duality could e.g. make your ego functions even more disproportionately pronounced, so that you end up repressing your unvalued functions even more strongly because your duals keep encouraging your bad habits. this wouldn't improve your relations with other people, or make you more well-rounded, this would only strengthen the one-sidedness of your psyche (which in itself isn't a bad thing but more on that later). duality doesn't necessarily complete you, nor make you a more balanced person; all of these things depend on the person, their circumstances and how they're motivated to adapt to them. these bullshit notions need to be eradicated because they are more COSMO find-your-true-love-compatibility quiz than Jungian in spirit.

    tl;dr people are not as predictable as socionics claims.
    Under this case, wouldn't it just be better for Socionics to either: A. throw out dualization or B. create an extension that shows the long term effects of any intertype relation? Because, theoretically, there would be long term effects to any inter type relation, and the long term effects of duality wouldn't be really any more special compared to the long term effects of any other inter type relation (other than the fact that it's duality).

  13. #13
    ■■■■■■ Radio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,574
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nevero View Post
    this is misconstrued. dual's strong functions are opposite to each other. they dampen and balance each other's ego. at least that's what i've read on this theory of dualization. but it made a lot of sense when i read it, take a look at this:

    ILE's all prevalent all encompassing base intuition is opposed by SEIs strong base sensing.
    LIE's all strong logic is opposed by ESI's strength in ethics.
    SLE's strong sensing is opposed by IEI's strong intuition. etc.

    the effect is achievement of balance between two opposite poles. duals make you less preoccupied with your ego functions, while alone each persists in their "bad ego habits".
    in theory, yes. but not necessarily in practice. people are inherently random and model A doesn't take into account randomness whatsoever, which is why you get this discrepancy between what the theory claims and reality, and i don't see the point in a theory that doesn't accurately represent reality anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neuralia View Post
    Under this case, wouldn't it just be better for Socionics to either: A. throw out dualization
    just to be clear, i do agree that duality is the most comfortable of intertype relationships and i do think people on average tend to end up with their own quadra/duals more frequently than others. i just don't agree that 1). duality is always a positive experience 2). duality makes you a more well-rounded person or somehow better at your life than you were before (it makes you more comfortable being yourself, maybe, but functions aren't that simplistic). 3). duality makes you "laid-back, easy-going and happier" as William said. i've been surrounded by duals all my life, and while it's good to have the other person be on a similar wavelength, it doesn't transform you from a troglodyte into a civilized human being. even among duals you probably need to have some other things in common for it to work, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neuralia View Post
    B. create an extension that shows the long term effects of any intertype relation? Because, theoretically, there would be long term effects to any inter type relation, and the long term effects of duality wouldn't be really any more special compared to the long term effects of any other inter type relation (other than the fact that it's duality).
    i agree, and this is an interesting idea. i'll have to mull over this a bit.

  14. #14
    Nevero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    427
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radio View Post
    in theory, yes. but not necessarily in practice. people are inherently random and model A doesn't take into account randomness whatsoever, which is why you get this discrepancy between what the theory claims and reality, and i don't see the point in a theory that doesn't accurately represent reality anyway.
    gotcha. i take part in these discussions premising ceteris paribus, which makes all such extraneous and random random influences of no implication or relevance. otherwise it becomes impossible to discuss socionics (else any socionics discussions could be concluded with "but other extra-model A factors ..."). this seems to be the main difference in our approaches.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •