No. In both of your examples you cited Ne-leading individuals who are prone to sharing information with everyone anyway.
Even Comparative partners can 'look alike' because of a shared leading function. It might just be WA is sharing more now with point out of 'testing' whether or not she is ILE. IIRC, she mentioned in the past 2-weeks to a month that she was still considering IEE.
Besides, assuming yours and Jimmers' thesis is true, that identicals 'share more info right off the bat', the fact that WA is sharing more now with point could easily be an example that they are NOT identicals, since they have already known each other for years. /logic
My understanding is that Identical partners tend to avoid each other in social situations, and tend to interact with one another less. I'm unsure of the dynamic short-term versus long-term, or private communication versus social setting. If @
Jimmers read that they do share more info, I would like to know the source of where he read that, for reference.
When you meet your identical...
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by William
in chat). So I wouldn't really say I've "known him for years". Some of my large amt of interaction with him has also been to redefine what i thought i understood of socionics, and to sort of pick his brain.
and I enjoy our heart-to-hearts. Even so, at times she is sometimes shocked by things i say. I remember a lot of the delta NFs reacting negatively to my stance on swearing, back in the day (not the only example though). I think it was more of a reaction to the way i expressed my view than my view itself. This was one of several situations where i felt like I dont feel bad about my view or how I expressed it, I dont feel like i should change that about myself or apologize for it, but I am made to feel like I should. That, to me, seems rooted in socionic origins; it's an info processing disconnect. Back then, ESE had been thrown on the table as a possible typing for me at the time because of all the disgruntlement, but studying the ILE type these days, I do think ILE fits me very well, in particular the Ne-subtype. I was always opposed to the ESE typing because I didn't resonate with it at all (I suck at Si and Fe), and noone really made a convincing enough argument for typing me that (other than just to say how different I am from them, which is sort of an insult in a way). Well, of course not, because I dont have much in common with that type, and all of the substantiations for ESE that were made were just silly and superficial.
I recently read that one's first love is often either a dual or identical. Not sure how accurate that is but you can just easily imagine what it would be like to meet another you. The appeals? Understanding, shared interests and maybe communication. 
I hear it's the best for teaching if one is more experienced or knowledgeable in something than the other since you perceive and judge information similarly and good for role models so it's great when you have an identical as a parent or teacher but, aside from that, it's easy to see how another 'you' can lose its appeal if you just imagine it. Not much surprises in the relations and it's harder to help the other sometimes in a significant way because you share the same blind spots and are capable in the same areas, more or less. You may eventually find the other unnecessary (or feel unnecessary to them) or get bored, whereas it's harder to get bored in a relationship with your dual plus you mutually support each other. 
), and our interaction was only occasional over the past few years. I was actually surprised that he had his own typing for me, since i wouldn't have thought he knew me well, but I have to say that when he explained, I could not disagree with his assessment.
type I figured even if I questioned your type, you wouldn't ever get mean or personal about it and take it in good humor. I wasn't really sure you would be persuaded either, since generally this sort of persuasion doesn't occur unless someone already is semi-persuaded in their head. 