bring up the experiences ppl. Does dual couple fight? Conflict? There is definitiv a lack of duality stories!
Experiences with duality and conflict relations?
bring up the experiences ppl. Does dual couple fight? Conflict? There is definitiv a lack of duality stories!
The only thing I don't like about my male LSE friends is when they take an extremely stubborn, overly confident moral stance that is just impossible to argue with (I don't think I'm close enough to my female LSE friend for her to be comfortable showing her ugly side to me--or maybe she really doesn't have one). As an EII 9, I am just steamrolled by these things. It happens rarely enough that I still love them overall, but it's what I think of if you ask me about how I conflict with my dual.
For example, one of my LSE friends and I were recently devastated by the U.S. presidential election result. Though I suspected it might be naive, I found a sliver of hope in the idea of petitioning the electoral college to vote with the national popular vote instead of the candidates to which they are pledged. He said this idea was stupid and disgusting and refused to engage when I tried to understand why he thought so by asking him questions. This was unusual for us because he's usually always down to answer my silly political questions, and I was pretty hurt by his strong word choices. But, I figured he was just angry and sad overall, not at me in particular, so I figured it wouldn't do anyone any good if I pursued the topic, and I dropped it.
I met a few of my duals and the overall thing I can say is that this relation is coolish. The experience of interplay between the lead and suggestive is weird and a bit out of this world, but so can it be with the mirage. The creative and demonstrative does not clash. I think it can make judgements of the other which is unfair but it is even. In the IEI-SLE the IEI have the role of Si which go towards comfy and SLE have role Ne which want to lead life on intuition.
Conflict wise the SLE can Te judge the IEI and than make the appropriate steps from there. I have had times where I get boxed in and than not being sure how to deal with it since it is not obvious. The same goes other way around. I do not believe these can really damage each other.
Overall these relation is hard to close psychological distance, there is no great push towards the other person more then curiosity and mental attraction. There is probably no repulsion either but it is not enough. Duals usually have different interest at default.
I think Duality have no real conflict. If there is a conflict of interest it can be identified.
Theoretically it should almost always play out in such a way the conflict gets neutralize.
My experiences with my dual can be described as "weird".
Last edited by Tigerfadder; 11-29-2016 at 10:16 PM.
I have a few new experiences with the SLE since I started this thread. So one is male 50 years something which is a coworker and one is same age girl. Im not going to make a long post but when in communication the words or meaning of them goes deep and seem to have meaning but the interactions in themselves are very stiff, nothing alike what I find within my for example Keirsey temperament.
Once, this SLE said "Clean your fucking room bro" but I di'nt wanna.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
This other time, this SLE said, "what happened last night"? And I was like, you threw a fucking blender at Gage and broke his tooth. And he was like, "oh god im such a bad person" and I was like, dont jerk yourself off mentally to make yourself feel better, your feelings dont matter. And then he started crying.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
I hope we don't get into politics too much here, but wasn't the whole point of the electoral college to be a safeguard against the exact scenario that happened--the "popular vote" somehow going to an inexperienced demagogue? (Not to mention the aforementioned demagogue didn't even really get the popular vote, but that's not what we're debating.) The rules of the system are such that the popular vote happens in each state and then these electors vote. Some (but not even close to all) states have laws forcing electors to vote with the popular vote, but federally, it's completely legal for them to vote for someone else.Originally Posted by domr
I think that the possibility of violent riots/protests (caused by the electoral college electing someone else) is a valid reason for not wanting the EC to go against the vote. But supposedly that should be weighed against the dangers of a bad president. It's not a productive discussion to just call something stupid and disgusting without providing a valid reason.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote