Enneagram Opposing/Complementary types (e-duality)

[Airman]

so far I've come to this:

E2 goes along with E5 - the Giver and the Accumulator. Opposing/complementary.
E4 goes along with E8 - The Sensitive Soul and the Brute.
E7 goes with E1 and vice-versa - not sure of this one.
E9 goes with E6 and vice-versa - also not sure.
E3 goes with E2 and vice-versa - maybe.

Only the first two pairs of complement relations I've been able to see in real life so more research must be conducted before I have a final table of Enneagram Duality but the first two pairs are correct.

[Muddy]

E2 is strongly correlated with Fe and E5 is strongly correlated with Ti so it makes they would go together. Same goes for E4 and E8, in which E4 is tied to Ni most of the time and E8 with Se. The rest the enneagrams and IEs are a little more scattered then those ones are in terms of direct correlations although I still think there a more inferences that can be made. I think E7 (tied to Ne) would go best with E9 (tied to Si). E1 probably goes best with other E1s since it seems to be made up mostly of a mix of Fi and Te bases. IDK what E3 would go with, maybe 6 whom can provide security for them.

Obviously there will be plenty of exceptions to these but here are some generalizations:

E7 with E9= ENxp and ISxp
E2 with E5= ESFj and INTj
E3 with E6= ENxj and ISxj
E4 with E8= INxp and ESxp
E1 with E1= ESTj and INFj

[ashlesha]

I've wondered about the e5+e2 thing bcuz it seems to fit well with IxTx+ExFx duality, & i wonder how that works when 5s need a lot of space and 2s can be interpersonally invasive.

[Muddy]

I've wondered about the e5+e2 thing bcuz it seems to fit well with IxTx+ExFx duality, & i wonder how that works when 5s need a lot of space and 2s can be interpersonally invasive.

The way I imagine how e2 + e5 works is that the e2 probably just goes out and spends time with other people once the e5 has had too much of e2. They use each other as a source of home base where they can get replenishment from each other then move on. The e5 gets his fix of love and care from the e2 and the e2 gets his fix of new information from the e5 and then they resume their usual activities.

If its a romantic relationship it becomes even clearer how these enneagrams work out with each other. Other enneagram types might become jealous and paranoid of how the enneagram 2 always hangs out with all these other people in a semi-flirty manner and try to control the e2 as a result, leading to bad relationship. Enneagram 5s wouldn't be bothered by this as much as other enneagram types, since they are just happy to at least have someone that cares about them and they wouldn't want to waste time trying to control someone anyway.

[Airman]

Yeah @Muddytextures , the E2 and E5 relationship goes very much like that. Sometimes the E2 is a caregiver and the E5 an infantile, or E2 aggressor and E5 victim.

But just to keep this strictly along Enneagram lines, let's please stick to Enneagram and not superimpose or mix Socionics with it (though it'd make sense at a deeper analysis, what I'm trying to find out here is strictly Enneagram-related). Thanks for your input.

I've seen E9s with E6s a lot, but also E3s with E6s... so this is a doubt here...Perhaps the most beneficient relationship for both would be E3 + E6 . Usually 6s lack initiative (which the 3 has a lot) and the 3 are reckless and/or unaware of possible bad outcomes (which the 6 is too aware of). So I can add with almost certainty that E3 dualises with E6.

Let's keep it strictly enneagram talk here, otherwise we'll be lost in a myriad of possibilities and assumptions mixing the two systems.

It's also interesting to notice that, because of having 9 types in it, not an even number, Enneagram is not going to provide an easy dualisation. One type is going to be left to dualise with either its own or with all other types (that'd be E9 according to Enneagram knowledge because 9 is at the top of triangle and from where all types are said to emanate).

[Muddy]

Yeah @Muddytextures , the E2 and E5 relationship goes very much like that. Sometimes the E2 is a caregiver and the E5 an infantile, or E2 aggressor and E5 victim.

But just to keep this strictly along Enneagram lines, let's please stick to Enneagram and not superimpose or mix Socionics with it (though it'd make sense at a deeper analysis, what I'm trying to find out here is strictly Enneagram-related). Thanks for your input.

I've seen E9s with E6s a lot, but also E3s with E6s... so this is a doubt here...Perhaps the most beneficient relationship for both would be E3 + E6 . Usually 6s lack initiative (which the 3 has a lot) and the 3 are reckless and/or unaware of possible bad outcomes (which the 6 is too aware of). So I can add with almost certainty that E3 dualises with E6.

Let's keep it strictly enneagram talk here, otherwise we'll be lost in a myriad of possibilities and assumptions mixing the two systems.

It's also interesting to notice that, because of having 9 types in it, not an even number, Enneagram is not going to provide an easy dualisation. One type is going to be left to dualise with either its own or with all other types (that'd be E9 according to Enneagram knowledge because 9 is at the top of triangle and from where all types are said to emanate).

It sounds like you are not Ne valuing. LSI maybe? I'm probably doing more divergent speculation again so I guess I'll have to contain my urges to further elaborate about your type.



I brought up socionics since duality is socionics concept, not an enneagram one. Enneagram types simply don't inherently mix and match with each other in a nice neat perfect way. Therefore the best option is to see what parallels we can draw between enneagram and socionics, where types DO interact with each other in a nice neat systematic way.

[Airman]

It sounds like you are not Ne valuing. LSI maybe? I'm probably doing more divergent speculation again so I guess I'll have to contain my urges to further elaborate about your type.



I brought up socionics since duality is socionics concept, not an enneagram one. Enneagram types simply don't inherently mix and match with each other in a nice neat perfect way. Therefore the best option is to see what parallels we can draw between enneagram and socionics, where types DO interact with each other in a nice neat systematic way.

About my type, it's okay for you to question and give your opinion. I am very much Ne-valuing myself, doesn't mean that just because I don't want to mix enneagram and socionics typology I'm not Ne-valuing but I still consider LSI possible.

About your statement about Enneagram having no duality, no, in reality there is a tendency for 2s and 5s to be couples. From this tendency I observed, I wanted to see if there are other duality types and I came to E8 and E4 very drawn to each other and forming couples too. From this I concluded that there is a kind of duality in Enneagram, not like the duality in Socionics which seems to be much more concrete or immediate, but there is a pattern in Enneagram type forming couples and from this I came to conclude there is this kind of duality that I really wouldn't call duality but perhaps Complementary types.

They can also become very good friends, so it's not that much sex-love oriented, so I prefer Complement. But yea any input that doesn't involve Socionics is welcome. After we come to a consensus on Enneagram Complementing Types then you can go on to involve Socionics that's why I said it'd make sense in a deeper analysis. Your observations about E2 and E5 relationships are excellent by the way, and I really mean it.

[Muddy]

About your statement about Enneagram having no duality, no, in reality there is a tendency for 2s and 5s to be couples. From this tendency I observed, I wanted to see if there are other duality types and I came to E8 and E4 very drawn to each other and forming couples too. From this I concluded that there is a kind of duality in Enneagram, not like the duality in Socionics which seems to be much more concrete or immediate, but there is a pattern in Enneagram type forming couples and from this I came to conclude there is this kind of duality that I really wouldn't call duality but perhaps Complementary types.

It is possible some enneagram types might complement some better then others, but you would need the make sure it is actually the enneagrams types themselves that are complementing each other without regards to socionics types or any other external factors. As I stated before, the E2-E5 duality you think you see might just an Illusion created by E2s tending to be ESEs and E5s tending to be LIIs. Same goes for E4-E8 duality which may just be the result of E4s being mostly IEIs and E8s being mostly SLEs. To see if E2s really do get along best with E5s you would have to make sure there are no factors outside of enneagram responsible for these types complementing each other. This would mean testing to see if ALL E2s actually do get along better with ALL E5s without over-representation of ESEs and LIIs. Would an E2 ESE really get along better with an ILI (ESE's conflictor) who is enneagram 5 rather then an ILI who is 1, 4, 6, or 9 ? Would an E8 SLE really get along better with ALL E4s rather then just E4 IEIs? If you could figure that out then you might be on to something.

[Airman]

It is possible some enneagram types might complement some better then others, but you would need the make sure it is actually the enneagrams types themselves that are complementing each other without regards to socionics types or any other external factors. As I stated before, the E2-E5 duality you think you see might just an Illusion created by E2s tending to be ESEs and E5s tending to be LIIs. Same goes for E4-E8 duality which may just be the result of E4s being mostly IEIs and E8s being mostly SLEs. To see if E2s really do get along best with E5s you would have to make sure there are no factors outside of enneagram responsible for these types complementing each other. This would mean testing to see if ALL E2s actually do get along better with ALL E5s without over-representation of ESEs and LIIs. Would an E2 ESE really get along better with an ILI (ESE's conflictor) who is enneagram 5 rather then an ILI who is 1, 4, 6, or 9 ? Would an E8 SLE really get along better with ALL E4s rather then just E4 IEIs? If you could figure that out then you might be on to something.

I'm aware of that. In what I've been seeing irl the E2s are going to be attracted to E5s and E4s to E8s dependently on socionics types, but not at all necessarily dual types. I've also seen people of the same enneagram type tend to be attracted to each other on an unconscious or conscious level. I've had two friends who were in a relationship of 8 months and got engaged, and they were conflictors in Socionics (both E6s, he was SLE she was EII) but their disagreements and his 'violent and insensitive' behaviour (in her own words) put an end to that. So yes there is socionically-related thing but I observe that at first sight, especially when people do not have to live together, they may be attracted to their conflictor mistaking them for their dual. These two people I'm talking about don't even know socionics. Another example of a more lasting relationship happened between my father (E5 ILI) and my mother (E2 ESI). They've been married for 38 years now. Okay you may say, they're activation partners then this explains the relationship going on well and for so long. But it doesn't without enneagram.
I started to see this in E2s and E5s since I started being more observing of people's enneagram type. So I've seen ridiculous things also happen, which would seem unlikely from a socionics pov, like EII E2 being attracted to LIE E5. Of course these 'ridiculous' relations tend to be short-lived.
I've had really bad experiences with Delta and Beta E4 women of differing socionics types. Anyway to sum up:
I wanted trying to avoid mixing the two systems but if you cannot think only Enneagram or at least write here only Enneagram ideas, then I think you may have a problem with Socionics addiction and a mutual help group and medication would work well for you (joking but somewhat true).
This is not an Enneagram forum, but this section is supposed to be, so if you have things to share Enneagram 'duality' please do share even if you can't keep Socionics types out from it. Thanks.

[Muddy]

This is not an Enneagram forum, but this section is supposed to be, so if you have things to share Enneagram 'duality' please do share even if you can't keep Socionics types out from it. Thanks.

Actually that's what I'm trying to do by bringing socionics is to make way for pure enneagram discussion later. Before you can focus purely on one thing you must first address the externals in order to keep conclusions free of bias. It seems you are aware of the connections between socionics and enneagram but I felt that needed to be pointed out before we could get to the main point.

So on to the main point, yes I would agree 2s tend to get along best 5s. You can see my earlier reply to lungs for my reasoning behind why I think they work well together. I'm not so sure though that any of the other enneagrams synergize the same way 2 and 5s do. That however my just be because the nature of the other enneagrams are outside of my full understanding a since I am a 5 and don't know other enneagrams as much as my own. We would obviously need more input from wider variety of people to see if there is any weight behind enneagram types complementing each other.

[ghost of forum past]

It is possible some enneagram types might complement some better then others, but you would need the make sure it is actually the enneagrams types themselves that are complementing each other without regards to socionics types or any other external factors. As I stated before, the E2-E5 duality you think you see might just an Illusion created by E2s tending to be ESEs and E5s tending to be LIIs. Same goes for E4-E8 duality which may just be the result of E4s being mostly IEIs and E8s being mostly SLEs. To see if E2s really do get along best with E5s you would have to make sure there are no factors outside of enneagram responsible for these types complementing each other. This would mean testing to see if ALL E2s actually do get along better with ALL E5s without over-representation of ESEs and LIIs. Would an E2 ESE really get along better with an ILI (ESE's conflictor) who is enneagram 5 rather then an ILI who is 1, 4, 6, or 9 ? Would an E8 SLE really get along better with ALL E4s rather then just E4 IEIs? If you could figure that out then you might be on to something.

I actually know an E2 ESE and an E5 ILI that get along fine superficially. The characteristic Alpha/Gamma split happens between them only at closer distances.

At the above posts, I would have a hard time seeing an E4 ILI, but for speculative correlation purposes it's fine.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Based on forum data (utilizing Socionics and enneagram self-typings):

3w4 and 6w5 (possibly equivalent to EIE and LSI)
7w6 and 5w6 (possibly equivalent to IEE and SLI)
(those parts in black are from weak correlations or limited data)

Inferences based on limited data:
2 and 5w4 (possibly equivalent to ESE and LII)

Based on limited data, SEE was associated with 6w7 but I imagine could have 7w6 as a good alternative. 5w6 was the e-type most ILIs identified with (as with SLI: both strong correlations)

The best correlation for LIEs was 8w9, but there was only limited\weak data for ESIs, which suggested 6w5 (as with LSIs)

The most frequent e-type for SEIs was 9 (the second most frequent, based on two individuals, was 4w5, as with IEIs). ILE was best correlated to 7 (but only four out of 10 individuals!)

[Airman]

Based on forum data (utilizing Socionics and enneagram self-typings):

3w4 and 6w5 (possibly equivalent to EIE and LSI)
7w6 and 5w6 (possibly equivalent to IEE and SLI)
(those parts in black are from weak correlations or limited data)

Inferences based on limited data:
2 and 5w4 (possibly equivalent to ESE and LII)

Based on limited data, SEE was associated with 6w7 but I imagine could have 7w6 as a good alternative. 5w6 was the e-type most ILIs identified with (as with SLI: both strong correlations)

The best correlation for LIEs was 8w9, but there was only limited\weak data for ESIs, which suggested 6w5 (as with LSIs)

The most frequent e-type for SEIs was 9 (the second most frequent, based on two individuals, was 4w5, as with IEIs). ILE was best correlated to 7 (but only four out of 10 individuals!)

I'd add my list then based on live observation of acquaintances, friends and also people who I'm just forced into polite or harsh interaction because of life:

E1: LSI, LSE, ESI, LII
E2: IEE, EII, ESI, ESE
E3: LIE, LSE, EIE, IEI, SEE
E4: EIE, IEI, EII, IEE, ESI, SEE
E5: ILI, LII, LSI, SLI
E6: LSI, LII, LSE, SEI, ESI, IEE, EII, EIE, IEI, SLE
E7: ESE, SEE, LII
E8: SLE, LSE, EIE, LIE
E9: SLI, IEE, EII, ESI, IEI

This is far from perfect but it tells more likely or if you prefer more unlikely types for each Enneagram type. For example I couldn't even imagine an LSI E4, but such a creature might exist, like an E3 SLI, but again nothing is impossible.

I think from observation that the connection betweeen Enneagram types in terms of a duality goes more or less like this:
E3 AND E6
E2 AND E5
E4 AND E8
E1 AND E7
Then 9 would get along well for an intimate relationship with any other type.