On the loss of self-reliance in duality.

[ghost of forum past]

In the presence of a dual, a specific type will try and provoke its dual into assisting it with its own dual-seeking function, regardless of its own competence in the related area of information (T/F/N/S).

This could be interpreted as a type switching from the conscious, devalued, and somewhat understood role function to the unconscious, valued, and poorly understood dual-seeking function, because both the role function and the dual-seeking function deal with the same type of information.

When the dual inevitably provides assistance with the dual-seeking function of the specific type, the specific type discards the role function and begins to rely on the dual to deal with information related to the role and dual-seeking functions.

Let me use my own type, LII, and my dual's type, ESE, as examples.

Without external stimulus, the LII deals with the area of ethics through Fi, and remains somewhat confident in his/her ethics-related abilities. The behavior demonstrated in this mode of operation is rigid, cold, and polite behavior as defined by the surrounding society, without superfluous emotions.

Without external stimulus, the ESE deals with the area of logic through Te, and remains somewhat confident in his/her logic-related abilities. The behavior demonstrated in this mode of operation is the hasty manipulation of facts to achieve material goals, without taking the time to slow down and understand the process.

With external stimulus from a Fe-ego type, the LII, seeing an alternative approach to ethics, discards any previous notion about ethics-related information and tries to attract Fe towards him/herself in order to replace devalued Fi. This is exemplified by statements that draw attention to how lacking in Fe the LII is. These statements may be exaggerated to gain the sympathy of the dual.

With external stimulus from a Ti-ego type, the ESE, seeing an alternative approach to logic, discards any previous notion about logic-related information and tries to attract Ti towards him/herself in order to replace devalued Te. This is exemplified by statements that draw attention to how lacking in Ti the ESE is. These statements may be exaggerated to gain the sympathy of the dual.

This is the effect that I see as responsible for the gradual loss of self-reliance in dual relations and for the intentional adaptation of dual traits in dual relations.

Thoughts? If people request more concrete "for example" scenarios with actual types, I will post them. I plan to refine my views on Socionics over the summer when I have more free time.

[ouronis]

I agree with this although I do not think the attraction has to be so concrete(no need to explicitly state 'I am bad at Fe'). When someone is bad at something you are good at, you know, and in the case of the 'you' being an ESE especially, you will be able to easily make up for the difference.

I only say this because I think you rarely hear someone say "I am bad at x" unless they are simultaneously proud of being bad at it(aka they will say they are bad at something devalued), so you end up having to detect their disregard of it(and need for something else) intuitively. Could be a norm thing. I just don't see someone purposely announcing their weaknesses or failings(outside of actions, which are clear to see) unless they are already in very close contact with someone.

[QuickTwist]

I agree with this although I do not think the attraction has to be so concrete(no need to explicitly state 'I am bad at Fe'). When someone is bad at something you are good at, you know, and in the case of the 'you' being an ESE especially, you will be able to easily make up for the difference.

I only say this because I think you rarely hear someone say "I am bad at x" unless they are simultaneously proud of being bad at it(aka they will say they are bad at something devalued), so you end up having to detect their disregard of it(and need for something else) intuitively. Could be a norm thing. I just don't see someone purposely announcing their weaknesses or failings(outside of actions, which are clear to see) unless they are already in very close contact with someone.

I agree, however it very well could come into fruition in the same concept as "I am bad at X" but be much more subtle, and I think that is what OP is getting at. People that you encounter in your everyday life have no idea how socionics works (for most people that are into this stuff at least) but there are certain cues that people give off that are basically saying the same thing. Its not always explicitly stated through speech, but may be incorporated in any manner of communication, whether that be verbal, paraverbal or nonverbal. So take for instance when I have a conversation with my father. He might hold an opinion that I disagree with. He'll end up saying something like "I don't know about that." In the right context this could be understood to play on the same kind of idea that he is, although disagreeing, still saying it in a way that draws me into a certain frame of mind. Now I'm not sure my father is my dual, but I do know that people do kinda behave as OP describes and not always to their dual. It could be their benefactor, or really any other kind of interrelationship with a said type.

[ghost of forum past]

I agree, however it very well could come into fruition in the same concept as "I am bad at X" but be much more subtle, and I think that is what OP is getting at. People that you encounter in your everyday life have no idea how socionics works (for most people that are into this stuff at least) but there are certain cues that people give off that are basically saying the same thing. Its not always explicitly stated through speech, but may be incorporated in any manner of communication, whether that be verbal, paraverbal or nonverbal. So take for instance when I have a conversation with my father. He might hold an opinion that I disagree with. He'll end up saying something like "I don't know about that." In the right context this could be understood to play on the same kind of idea that he is, although disagreeing, still saying it in a way that draws me into a certain frame of mind. Now I'm not sure my father is my dual, but I do know that people do kinda behave as OP describes and not always to their dual. It could be their benefactor, or really any other kind of interrelationship with a said type.

Yes, that's what I was getting at. I did exaggerate in the original post to make a point, and I do understand that people are rarely so forthright in explaining their weaknesses to others. I would agree that in real life it would be subtle.

Incidentally, the original version of the post didn't focus on a type's dual, but any type that emphasizes the Super-Id functions of a specific type. I edited it to make the post clearer.

[Skepsis]

How does one define how "good" or how "bad" someone is at any particular function to begin with? It seems very subjective. It is possible that two people could be classified as LII, but due to individualization, one has a slightly better logical processing system than the other, while at the same time has a weaker ethical processing system. The one may perceive the other as not LII. They may also see signs of stronger extroverted ethics and mistake them for an Fe ego(resulting in some unethical socionics incest!). This is a major problem in socionics(and MBTI): The line of demarcation where on one side the function is considered "good" and hence "strong", while on the other is "bad" and "weak".

Anyways, when I read how something like a duality between LII and ESE is supposed to work, I ask myself what type of person would not be attracted, at least to some extent, of a person of the opposite sex that is genuinely warm, sincere, caring, fun, and emotionally responsive to one's needs. I think many males probably fantasize about such women. Humans are generally attracted to behaviors that are categorized as Fe, unless the emotions themselves are being used to deceive or manipulate. Rarely is one attracted to those traits that are often perceived as negative traits.

Of course, those who consider themselves self-reliant could still be attracted to the more positive traits attributed with sincere extroverted emotion, while still wanting to maintain their independence. Only if there is consensus between the two in the relationship as to how much is enough can the relationship succeed in the long term. As with any stable relationship, there must be some sort of consensus and balance.