• Duality Relations INFj and ESTj by Stratiyevskaya

    Duality Relations INFj and ESTj by Stratiyevskaya

    EII – INFj – Dostoyevsky (Fi-Ne)
    LSE – ESTj – Shtirlitz (Te-Si)

    See also:
    Type and Intertype Descriptions by Stratiyevskaya
    Duality observations
    Quick Intertype Chart
    Wikisocion - Vera Stratiyevskaya

    1. EII-LSE. The dyad of yielding, evolutionary types.

    Unlike in the involutionary dyad of ethical and pragmatic "reconstructors" ESI-LIE (-Fi and -Te), another direction of development predominates in the in EII-LSE dyad – an evolutionary one (+Fi and +Te), which is associated with the ethical and technical improvement, polishing and perfection of the existing conditions. Members of this dyad don't strive to change anything. They don't seek to uproot or break down anything or remake anyone. Reconstruction is not their calling. Instead they focus on improving and perfecting that which already exists. They accept the conditions and circumstances that have already folded around them, they take on the "material" that is already present, and then develop and polish it and take it further to the next level that seems realistic, desirable, and necessary for them to achieve. In this respect, both members of this dyad can be very assertive, stubborn, and uncompromising – they are very principled and do not back down from their demands (that may be quite high).

    Then why are members of this dyad considered to be "yielding" by Reinin dichotomies? "Yielding" types have the aspects of +Fe and +Te located in the inert mental block of their informational model (that is, in Program or Vulnerable functions). These are dyads ESI-LIE, EII-LSE, SEI-ILE, and IEI-SLE. "Yielding" Fi-dominant types ("moralizers") and Te-dominant types ("pragmatists") do not make excessive demands of a person initially. At the beginning, they can be quite tolerant and forgiving, and and try to avoid making "sharp" evaluations whenever possible. As the interpersonal distance shortens, they become more and more demanding and uncompromising – they "present a bill" for their previous concessions and additionally they "take revenge", trying to overtake everything that they have previously lost and given up (preferably with extras). This is one of the defining features of "yielding" types.

    If representatives of the previous dyad, ESI-LIE, taking note of a person see glaring deficiencies and weaknesses that require active intervention and efforts aimed at radically reshaping and "reconstructing" this person (changing his or her attitudes, fixing mistakes that were committed in previous years of life, eradicating detrimental habits, eliminating negative influences from his environment), then representatives of the dyad EII-LSE will consider any new individual as a potential student or apprentice who needs to be steered towards the right path, instructed about the "good works", directed towards the right attitudes, developed in his current skills and talents, and in general encouraged in the development of his potential. Their "apprentice" needs to acquire an interest in aesthetic, artistic, ethical, and creative self-development and strive to achieve higher standards in ethics and beauty.

    2. EII-LSE. Strengthening of bonds. Decreasing the distance.

    Evolutionary development of their program functions means that in the EII-LSE dyad, unlike in the previous one (ESI-LIE), partners are not interested in searching for alternatives and spare options. Evolutionary orientation encourages them to strengthen their existing bond. Their partnership is received by both of them as almost a predestined or predetermined event, as a kind of a starting point for sharing their life paths, in course of which both of them can positively influence each other's lives and their existing life conditions, which they create and improve for one another. From this originates their loyalty and dedication to their partnership, which form the foundation of their dual relations: "Here's your life companion (who may have been pre-chosen for you). Have a long and prosperous life together, be happy and seek to improve your relations with one another, and by this investigate and develop various methods of personal betterment and intervention, using punishments and rewards, concessions and demands, and so forth." In this dyad strict measures alternate with kind and rewarding ones. Under "strict" what is understood here is some kind of austere but still humane measure of influencing one's partner, required for his or her personal, ethical, or physical development.

    Representatives of this dyad enjoy discussions of everything that is positive and beneficial and try to steer the conversation away from anything that is viewed as negative or deleterious for themselves, to their relations, their success, and their well-being. Intuition of possibilities (Ne) predominates in this quadra. Here, it is understood not as missed opportunities, but as potential to ruin something that is good, something that has already been achieved, such as, for example, one's current reputation or measure of influence, or the current standards of living and level of prosperity. The other predominant aspect in this dyad is involutionary sensing of experiences (Si), which is the creative function of LSE – on this aspect the LSE strives to not let in anything that may destroy the already existing order, harmony, and way of life; he wishes to distance from physical and and psychological irritants, to preserve the wholesomeness and beauty of relations, of the person, of the world around him. If harmful elements are brought up for discussion, they are usually mentioned as something that needs to be eliminated from one's environment, from one's personality or personal relationships.

    As a creative intuitive type and as a strategist, the EII doesn't miss an opportunity to become close with other people and quickly bridges interpersonal distances. As a declaring type, who is sure of his/her rightness and oriented at close spatial-temporal relationships, and as a positivist and an evolutionary type, the EII uses any opportunity to become close to others, to introduce positive notes into their relations, and to show him/herself off in the best possible light. Towards this goal, EII's creative manipulative intuition of possibilities comes up with a myriad of approaches and techniques, helping the EII to quickly become liked and gain positive consideration of others. In this respect, EII's creative Ne works as a "set of master keys" which allows him or her to find an individual approach to almost anyone. The EII is almost always able to spot something positive, interesting, and attractive in a new person and will use any occasion to say something pleasant and complementary, to show his/her own emotional sensitivity, judiciousness, and prudence, to receive and welcome the new person, to offer them help, services, or needed information. Sometimes the EII as a constructivist type may resort to logically framing his intentions in order to get close with someone.

    Quite frequently Dostoyevsky ends up imposing his/her friendly and welcoming attitude and services on other people in the process. And towards which purpose does the EII do this? As a positivist "program" ethical declarative type, the EII seeks to establish strong, long-lasting relations with those around him. Being surrounded by friends and people who hold him in positive regard elevates the EII's self-assessment on the aspect of +Fi – every new friendship, every new positive association the EII can view as something that is actively positive and beneficial for him/herself.* As a pragmatist-objectivist of Delta quadra, the EII doesn't miss out on opportunities to strike up and acquaintance and is potentially beneficial for him/herself. Towards this purpose, the EII aims to tell of something that is pleasant and agreeable, to reward others with a compliment or kind word seemingly out of nowhere and for not much at all, to be of service, to bestow a "generous" advance, for which, however, the EII will later expect reciprocity.
    *[translator's note: Hence the impression that EIIs often impart on others that they are as if trying become the most liked person in a group, to be favored by everyone, however, if they are directly asked about this they will say that this is an unrealistic thing to strive for.]

    This orientation at "imposing" gratification with the following expectation of reciprocal services, concessions, or compensation is a general feature of yielding types. It allows the EII to bridge the distance with the right persons, to earn their trust, to enter into their close circle, and to seek something from them later in return for his initial goodwill and accommodation. For example, he may ask for personal disclosures of information, for greater degree of trust, for care and protection from his partner, for reciprocation of positive feelings (which must be followed up by deeds). Initial kind assistance and accommodation are part of EII's strategy, his means of rooting his ethical guidance.

    The EII won't extend his services for nothing and considers him/herself in the right to later ask for a "moral account" from his partner. This "account" may be extensive, since the EII values his own concessions and acts of kindness very highly, and moreover, considers that his goodwill and loving, kind attitude towards another are beyond any price. Thus he may benevolently accept everything that his partner does for him, especially if this person is someone who is very close to him and receives most of his love. Someone close to him may be even in an irredeemable debt before Dostoyevsky by the sheer fact of their intimacy. The EII highly values his ethical sensitivity and guidance, as well as his concern for his partner's physical well-being.

    The EII also values and continuously monitors the state and future prospects of his partner's affairs. This gives the EII certain moral, social, and "informational" advantages and "assets", and allows him to ensure greater obedience from those under his watch and guidance. Thus, the EII is often very persistent in imposing his services and favors so that he can obtain the rights to ask for something in return. For this reason the EII feels offended if someone turns him down and refuses his service, or views his participation with suspicion and keeps him at a distance.

    3. EII-LSE. The dyad of pragmatic rationals.

    On the other hand, the EII cannot take initiative and be imposing for too long as this would be unethical. For him, as for an introvert, in general any kind of expansion is impermissible, but as a "strategist" he can extend his influence quite far. Presenting himself as demonstratively helpless and insufficient, a kind of unpretentious "Cinderella" resigned to his or her fate and waiting for her rescuer, the EII opens up before a person the "treasures" of his soul, captivates him with unusual notions, statemetns, and ideas. He guesses the person's moods, sympathizes just at the right time, patiently listens to his conversation partners, and even offers some kind of (even minor) help. With all of this the EII can very quickly "win over" people – positively predispose them towards himself, gain their trust and confidence, bind them to himself, submit them to his will, and eventually draw them into his game and make them his "moral debtors".

    The rate of this strategic take over and capture of a person will be monitored by the EII subconsciously and conducted on all of the aspects of his informational model: monitoring the way a person reacts to his participation and goodwill on ethical aspects, meticulously and accurately tracking compliance over time and registering any deviations on intuitive aspects, directly and indirectly receiving care and protection thereby gathering the "harvest" of his services on sensing aspects, and monitoring the quality of methods, services, and advice that have been supplied to him on logical aspects.

    Of course, any resistance to this "capture" will be met with resentment and annoyance because for the EII this means that a person doesn't trust him or her, and "pushes" him away, possibly because such person doesn't want to provide and give anything in return.

    Perhaps the person actually doesn't have anything to give? Perhaps. Then it's even more imprudent to seek his company. As a strategic type, setting a goal, the EII always sees the end point of his "conquest". He sees something positive and attractive in any person, something that may be of benefit and advantage to himself. He sufficiently highly values his time, effort, and capabilities (and most importantly – his feelings and attitudes). He won't exchange them for "unnecessary" people and won't burden himself with any ties and undertakings that are undesirable and lacking in potential, since subconsciously the EII is a rational, pragmatic type, oriented at uniting with a "program" pragmatist-maximalist the LSE. Let us not forget that the aspect of logic of actions, Te, which includes pragmatic acumen, skill, and ingenuity, is a priority value of this dyad. Even though it is a passive, unconscious value of the EII, he will not concede his positions over this aspect. This is especially so since EII's current position over this aspect never seems to be solid enough, his provisions never seem fully sufficient.

    In this dyad, everything is very rational and pragmatic, even more so than in the previous dyad (ESI-LIE), because this is a dyad of evolutionary, aristocratic types who are able to observe, evaluate, and accrue advantages over rational aspects. These advantages are accumulated on the aspect of logic of actions, Te, for the LSE and ethics of relations, Fi, for the EII.

    4. Altruism as an ideological component of the EGO program of Dostoevsky.

    Thus, the EII's goodwill and niceness are not unlimited. Altruism, as any other psychological function, has a certain purpose and limits (its own limit of environmental expediency and viability). It cannot be directed against the carrier of this program and threaten his own survival or undermine his own well-being. An "altruist" won't give up the last crumbs of sustenance; he won't share something of which he has very little because this will make him vulnerable and nonviable. There is a limit to self-sacrifice for any person. This limit is regulated not only on conscious level but subconscious level as well, on the level of the most basic instinctive and psychological programs. Thus an altruist can share only that which he has in excess, or that which he is able to acquire in excess from others, making them work towards some output and then stimulating them towards unlimited self-sacrifice.

    Altruism, as the ideological component of the evolutionary ethics of relations of Dostoevsky (+Fi), is quite rational and does not contradict the pragmatism of these types, but to the contrary makes it even easier to accept and partake in it. It is a popular role model for imitation: representatives of this dyad readily get involved in various charitable activities, in organization of which the EII has no equal among other types. The EII, like no one else, knows how to entice people to the most extreme (and transcendent) concessions, motivating them to give up the most needed and necessary, especially if he has promised such concessions to someone else on their behalf. Those who agree to make a contribution will comply and obey their "guarantor" not wanting to disappoint him and put him in an "awkward position." And this is one of the reasons why Dostoevsky is considered to be the Auditor/Supervisor of the entire Socion: he can allow himself any sort of coercion against anyone, he can control and direct of actions of others against their will ("work over their head"), meanwhile positively framing his intents thereby safeguarding himself from criticism and being completely convinced of his own infallibility and rightness.

    The LSE, of course, is not put off by all these "ethical capabilities" of Dostoyevsky. In everyday matters, the altruistic program of EII (+Fi) very adequately combines with the program of "heightened pragmatism" of LSE (+Te) – with his aspirations to constantly increase the technical potential, to improve the process of production, to perform the job with maximum output, methodically and with high quality (+Te) in critically short periods of time (-Ni).

    5. EII-LSE. The ethical-intuitive complementation in the dyad.

    This dyad has sufficient work loads for everyone. This is a result not only of LSE's tendency to present himself and others with increased demands, but also from his habit to come up with an exorbitant work load himself and his subordinates or work group (his "team"). The LSE agrees with the statement "all the work in the world cannot be done" only when he has no more energy nor time to do everything that was scheduled and planned. What is there to say about his team or employees on which he usually imposes unreasonably excessive requirements?

    Since heightened moral and physical demands in this dyad are considered to be the norm of professional and personal relationships, the presence of a person capable of smoothing out conflicts, defusing tension in any situation, and reconciling the interests of management and employees by predisposing them to mutual concessions, is highly important. It is exactly this function that LSE's dual, the EII, performs. And he performs it very well.

    Dostoevsky is not only capable of persuading others to go for exorbitant, sometimes inappropriate and even harmful to them concessions, but he is also able to hold the person in this position indefinitely. By this he can be very useful for Shtirlitz, who is not always also to stimulate work that is financially profitable and beneficial. In many cases he prefers not to do it at all – why waste material resources on that, which if handled ably can be obtained for free? Thus the LSE may for a long enough time drain people of their efforts and abuse their patience and enthusiasm. In this context, and the presence of sa person who can persuade them to yield, to accept and endure a little longer, and even show a personal example of this endurance, is extremely valuable for the LSE.

    In general, such ethical-intuitive complementation is necessary for the LSE in all aspects of his or her life. It provides not only the normalization of his or her personal relationships with others, but a highly important and necessary for the LSE personally optimized for him or her intuitive regime: an optimal distribution of time and efforts that is based on LSE's individual capabilities and priorities.

    In presence of the EII, this work regime is also complemented by psychological comfort – by an environment of trust, stability, mutual understanding and mutual accommodation. The main ethical impact of the EII consists of helping the LSE soften his relationships with other people, to become kinder and more tolerant of them, to be more yielding, to not feel angry and take hostile actions, do not nurture vengeful plans, to not hide the evil in his heart, and try to forgive and be above any grievances and offenses. The ideas of Universal Love, Atonement and the Highest (Ethical) Justice are all delivered by the EII's program function (1st function +Fi) and accepted by suggestive function of the LSE (5th function -Fi).

    6. LSE. Caution in approaching his dual.

    It might seem apparent then that the LSE should do everything within his capabilities to be with his dual and listen to his advice. Imagine! He is in no hurry to do so! LSE is a negativist type, and negativist types bridge the distance with other people very carefully and view each new acquaintance with caution and apprehension. As a negativist, tactical type, the LSE may be on blind defensive continuously and see a potential trap in any attempts of his partner to take initiative to becoming closer to him. As a yielding, "program" pragmatist (1st function +Te), the LSE is also reluctant to accept generous offers of services from a person who is unfamiliar to him, knowing well that free cheese comes only from mousetraps.

    LSE is usually careful in choosing his friends. He highly appreciates the services that he has extended for others and the efforts that were required of him (both physical and emotional). The LSE usually extends himself towards maximum output, applying all his forces and strength, and thus he doesn't particularly like it when some extra commitments are being imposed on him, when he is being signed up for something against his will, when initiative is imposed from the outside and when he's being "hyped up" for some kind of generous pledges and promises. The LSE is careful with giving promises even more so than the LIE, because unlike the LIE he actually fulfills them. Thus the LSE prefers to dispose of his own actions on his own accord and doesn't yield initiative and control to anyone else when it concerns pragmatic undertakings (1st function +Te).

    But as a creative sensing type and an emotivist the LSE can allow himself to spend some time with a person who is simply pleasant to him, a person who seems so nice, kind, and harmless, who knows how to be interesting and how to evoke positive feelings in people in his own address and to come into their good favor. And the EII won't miss an opportunity to win over LSE's consideration. Both the EII's creative intuition of possibilities and demonstrative intuition of time will come to aid here. Since the LSE values his time like no one else, the EII will have little of it for his "operation", but as a creative intuitive type he is able to make the time. The EII can find a way to capture and hold Shtirlitz's interest if he notices that the later seeks to cut their communication short. Thus, at initial stages, the LSE who isn't interested in close contact with his dual will have to spend a lot of effort on setting some distance, as the EII is very persistent in getting close to people, thus the LSE will have to find means and methods to counter EII's persistence (as well as many other EII's qualities).

    Getting closer and closer to a person, the EII does not surrender the positions and privileges that he has already obtained. He will fight for them to the extent of his his capabilities and opportunities and in accordance to how appropriate this would be. As a strategist, and as a "program" ethical type, aiming to conquer and positively predispose each person towards himself, the EII will become offended each time he encounters distancing or alienation from his partner, an attempt to "push" him away, to distance, to conceal something from him, or do without his kind participation. Moreover, the EII won't forgive this to a person whom he was counting on making a close friend. He won't forgive detachment, distancing, absence of attention and care, and participation in his troubles. The EII may go as far as breaking off all relations with such a person to "punish" him for lack of attention and interest towards his person. For example, a nice girl EII felt offended by lack of interest from a young man of type LIE: "He hasn't called me, hasn't shown that he is concerned for me. He doesn't inquire me how I feel, doesn't congratulate me over the holidays – so why should I consider him to be my friend?

    7. EII. Realizing his "right to correction".

    As part of his widely reaching and mass-imposed "program" of ethics of relations +Fi, the EII as any ethical aristocrat attributes meaning to the rituals and outward manifestations of what is appropriate in his circle, and proceeds to direct his partner to comply with them. He may ask questions of the type: "Have you replied to his email/letter? Have you called her and asked her if we could come visit?" – and make other statements, depending on his personal ethical program. The age of his partner and his level of education here are not important. What is significant for the EII is the level of deviation from his own ethical program and the opportunity opening up before himself to raise it, to elevate the ethical demands and norms, to "whip" the person into rising up to meet them. The EII's own ethical "program" function +Fi impels him or her towards this – it is a program of unlimited ethical evolution and improvement.

    There is another motive that urges the EII to correct the behavior of people around him: for the EII as for any ethical-aristocratic type, it is imperative to exercise his "right to correction". And who grants him this right? As any "aristocrat", the EII assumes that he has such a right intrinsically. The "right to ethical correction" is an instinctive program of all aristocratic types which allows them to build relations of subordination, to psychologically dominate their partners, to willfully assert their superiority over a person or group of people, and if necessity arises to terrorize their partner with constant supervision and control of how well he complies with the mien of their circle.

    Therefore, even if the partner tries to behave impeccably, the EII won't miss a chance to find fault with something and start to hassle him with his accusations and reprimands. He will fault him in having too mean or too loud a tone - or vice versa, speaking too quietly, such that the neighbors "can't hear his greetings". EII might find fault with the lexicon of his partner and will correct and straighten him on every occasion that presents itself: "Don't say this, this isn't the right expression or word, or this is too mean-spirited or unfitting to say."

    The EII makes such amendments in order to realize his EGO - program: to push his partner towards higher ethical requirements, to continually assert his own superiority over his partner and dominate him, and to retain advantageous positions to himself.

    8. EII. The need to dominate.

    For Dostoevsky it is important to be the one who directs, teaches, and instructs.

    The instinctive "right to correction" for the EII is not only a psychological defense, allowing him or her to be above criticism and thus feeling free from it. It is also a method to obtain compensation on reconstructive, corrective, involutionary aspects of -Ne, -Fe, -Se and -Te, and a program of full-fledged expansion, and planned, natural "conquest" via step-wise broadening of his sphere of opportunities and privileges on the evolutionary, constructivist aspects: +Fi, +Ti, +Si, +Ni. With his remarks, statements, and criticisms, the EII tries to make up for the lack of attention, care and beneficial services coming from his partner. This essentially constitutes EII's way of pulling the privileges over to his side.

    The more the EII taken care of, the more attention she or he requires. From his side, the EII pays a lot of attention to his new acquaintances and friends. The closer the EII becoming to a person, the more he thinks of them. And therefore he demands a "report" from them: "Where were you and what were you doing? Were you thinking of me? I was thinking of you. When were you thinking of me? Me too! I could feel that you were thinking of me, this is why I'm calling you...". For the EII it is very important to be the "possessor" of the mind of his partner, to enter into close personal contact with this person, to build a close soulful connection with him at close distance, and then proceed to keep the person at this distance and not lose ground.

    As a result a particular model of relations is built with which the EII can effortlessly manipulate his partner, keep him under constant moral and psychological dependence, entangle him with various requests and obligations, requiring attention to his persona and ever-increasing amount of care, and know of all his partner's plans, intentions, and actions, thus obtaining all the necessary information about him or her.

    Isn't this a little too much to ask for? These are only the starting requirements.

    9. EII. The system of restrictions and prohibitions.

    Dostoevsky is not always willing to take on responsibility for the decisions that he or his partner has undertaken. On this trait, he may not do anything himself and won't let his partner to take any decisive actions. However, neither will he allow his partner to "bypass" him and decide something on his own to ensure that his partner won't commit any actions that may be harmful to the EII or to himself. To deter his partner, the EII employs a variety of approaches on his creative intuition: requests, persuasions, suggestion, direct prohibitions, tantrums, scandals, exaggerated fears, intimidation, associations to all kind of negative examples, accusations, allegations: "You want to destroy us! Do you know what happened to the people who used to live across the street? Do you want the same to happen to you and me?" The EII is well capable of intimidating his partner by contrived and exaggerated fears. He can also limit and bind him by promises: "Promise me that you won't do this. I am not leaving here until you promise!" But if a person has had the imprudence to make such a promise to him, the EII will hold him to it and will make reminders.

    Thus the EII builds a rather stringent network of restraints and deterrents which shuts off all the outlets of which he's mindful via his creative function of intuition of possibilities: don't go there, don't set foot here, that door is closed, this is impossible or off limits. The scope and sphere of these restrictions can be broadened and extended indefinitely. This will depend on the nature of EII's personal fears and apprehensions, to which he also subjects others.

    The EII dislikes making enemies or incurring troubles and negativity for himself or people who are close to him. His ever vigilant creative intuition of possibilities -Ne will be working in this direction, tracing all the potential problems and dangers, and widening the extent of restriction from fear and apprehension "what if something happens". EII's +Ni will be working in the same direction, trying to run ahead and prudently avoid or circumvent all the possible troubles and adversities.

    10. The intuitive custody of Dostoevsky.

    The EII is prudent as a farsighted type. He is able to anticipate possible dangers (-Ne), and by this take care of his partner in intuitive sense. Therefore, he tries to develop in his partner a habit of unquestioning obedience to his advice, recommendations, and decisions made on ethical and intuitive aspects, which are usually stringent and not subject to appeals.

    Does this mean that the EII is able to prohibit his LSE partner from something? Yes, he very well can! But then again, only when it comes to intuition and ethics. What is allowable and possible and what isn't is forethought and decided on by the EII in this dual dyad. When one sees a five year old child saying "I won't allow this" to his mother, one may think that representatives of this type are born with this kind of aptitude.

    Falling into moral dependence of EII's system of restrictions is dangerous. If the EII has already disallowed something, then you may grovel on your knees in front of him but he won't back down - he will feel himself as the dominant one in this situation until he gets tired of his own stubbornness (or until his own unbridled expansionism and assertion lead him to a dead end). The only way to get around these restrictions is either to ignore them or to challenge the EII's rights on logical grounds, and preferably via white logic (!), because this aspect is located in EII's superego block, and thus he is not always sure of his rights and authority on this aspect, and therefore dependent on the opinions of others. And what if one tries to evoke sympathy and "cry on his shoulder"? This may be effective but it will require considerable emotional efforts. It is easier to challenge his "right to impose constraints" logically - it will be received quicker since it will fall on the mental block and not the vital one.

    The EII often puts himself or herself into an awkward position, extending his disallowances to people who are equal to him in rank (especially so if they are representatives of other quadra). For example, a technician-operator EII told to her LIE co-worker: "I won't allow you to move to another shift!" To which her partner immediately responded, "And who are you to allow or prohibit me from anything?"

    Does the LSE abide by these prohibitions and limitations? He does for as long as it doesn't concern the scope of his EGO priorities - professional, business, creative interests and activities in areas of +Te and -Si where he makes decisions for himself and won't cede to anyone else.

    The right to exercise moral and ethical superiority of course remains with Dostoevsky as a "program" ethical evolutionary type who accumulates benefits and advantages over this aspect. To ensure that this gap isn't significant, the LSE feels obliged to meet some of the ethical evaluations and requirements of the EII.

    The same thing happens with the "right to correction" (which is the cause of the most heated "battles" in aristocratic quadra). This right the LSE leaves to the EII, being highly suggestible by EII's remarks over aspect of ethics of relations (+Fi), while the right for "logical" correction the LSE reserves for himself (+Te).

    11. EII-LSE. Distribution of priorities.

    Distribution of personal and professional priorities is one of the most touchy and painful subjects in this dyad (as in any aristocratic one). This is because rank relations between the partners will be established in accordance to this distribution. Relations of subordination or equality will arise depending on how they will promote themselves, demonstrate themselves, position themselves, and how they will recognize one another.

    The right to priority in business or ethical initiative does not extend to suggestive function. The LSE does not allow himself to make bold statements on his suggestive aspect, but delivers his opinion in manner of careful observations, warnings, and recommendations. For example, when one family was discussing early pregnancy of their teenage daughter, her father LSE in a very cautious manner expressed to his wife (LIE) the following remark: "If you didn't allow her to use your wardrobe, wear your dress without control, and go in them wherever she wanted, this wouldn't have happened ... " - he accused her of excessive democratism, carelessness, and all-allowance, that is, all those qualities which the LSE considers as harmful and which are not found in the EII.

    The EII also doesn't directly point out what is needed to be done. Recommendations for his suggestive aspect of logic of action he gives very carefully, with uncertainty, and in the form of hints. If the EII doesn't like or agree with what his partner is doing, he will complain, blame him, tell of it to his friends and neighbors, he will become "offended" and ignore LSE's instructions, but what he won't do is tell him directly what to do (unless the LSE is in position of assistant or servant, "Honey, make sure that they serve the dinner!")

    Everything is so complicated in aristocratic quadra ... It's not as difficult as it seems at the first glance. They have their own rituals, as any aristocratic dyad, which it is customary to recognize by certain signs and signals and observe or react appropriately (to respond "correctly") because these are the "key" to the "lock", the "source code" to the "encryption", without which mutual understanding between the partners is not possible.

    12. EII-LSE. Aristocratic observances and rituals.

    Are there any rituals and manners of behavior specific to this dyad? As in any quadra of aristocratic types, and moreover a rational dyad, it is customary to court in a beautiful manner, to give proper respect to the lady, especially so if she is of an ethical-intuitive type. If she is a logical-sensing type, the alongside "nice gestures" her partner must as soon as possible show himself capable in work, in good deeds and intentions.

    The right to an ethical initiative in this dyad remains with Dostoevsky. In framework of this program, he must present himself as a corporate ethical type, that is, to offer his shoulder such that it could be leaned on, to offer his help, to be of service. This is indeed how the EII begins winning over new acquaintances. With this he wins over the favor of his dual the LSE. After all, it is so nice when one meets a person who offers help from the very first meeting!

    With this, for example, began the acquaintance of one dual pair: a young man of type LSE went on a business trip to the southern provincial city and paid a visit to one family to fulfill a request (drop a letter with them), and there he saw a girl from the neighborhood who accidentally stopped by at the same time. They started talking and he (again by accident) lamented about a difficulty he was having: he needed to get a medicine for his cousin that was in deficit. The girl immediately offered her assistance: she gave him an address to a pharmacy, wrote a note, and the drug was obtained. The guy was so appeased by her participation (and so fascinated) that all the remaining free time from his business trip he spent with her. And then later the girl, on her own initiative, came to visit him in Leningrad (a return visit). He introduced her to his relatives, showed her the town, talked about many interesting things, drove her to the theater and a cafe, presented her flowers - beautifully looked after her. Then she returned back home and they corresponded for some time. Then he asked her to go on holiday together and she unexpectedly agreed. And then they returned to Leningrad and submitted an application to the registrar. Now they have two children and four grandchildren.

    That is, the EII takes the initiative. As a declaring strategist, he outlines a goal for himself and aims to achieve it without doubting his own right to obtaining it. Being convinced in the rightness of his actions and certain of his intentions, the EII will make offers that others find hard to resist. If the EII has set a goal to "win over" someone, he will find opportunities to become needed and even indispensable, to be pleasant and to come into favor.

    The EII makes many "strategic" concessions during the period of "conquest" of a person. Once he has established himself in a relationship, he starts trying to regain what was "lost", to "win back" lost grounds with unlimited expansionism. This is what followed within this family. The heroine of our story for thirty years fought for the title of the "model wife and mother". Her house and family were exemplary. Almost every holiday there was a demonstrative-exemplary celebration hosted at their house - perfectly decorated table, plenty of delicious food prepared by the mistress of the house, a "cultural program" held before and after the meal with the participation of her husband and children. Everything was well, but over time the EII wife began to feel tired from this work load. She wanted to switch roles, to shift the load elsewhere - she wanted her husband to vie for the role of "exemplary husband and father". Thus she began educating him in this direction. This didn't occur, of course, without reproaches: "This is the only day off, and he either leaves or takes a book and this is the end of everything! He doesn't care for anything else! Well? Do I have to pull everything on my own shoulders? I also want to take a rest, but our apartment needs to be cleaned, dinner needs to be cooked. I also work the entire week and also get tired." Other people give her advice: "Go out together with him then." She retorts: "I offered this to him, but afterwards we are both still tired. Then I have to sacrifice in something..."

    Is the EII is afraid of physical over-exertion? As an intuitive type, the EII is not inclined to overestimate her capabilities. She is afraid that she won't be able to physically handle her assignments and duties. She is also afraid that she will be put in position of owning something to another person. She fears excessive work loads, fears that she won't finish her work, that she won't fulfill her assignments and responsibilities due to physical or material deficits. She fears that her children won't be fed and taken care of, that her husband will be offended, that she will have to go work the next day feeling exhausted and anxious. These fears are prompted by the positioning of EII's sensing aspects in weak positions.

    Up to date, there have been successes in what the heroine of our story has outlined as her goal. She still doesn't consider her husband to be "exemplary" or "ideal" and she no longer wants to be in every way worthy of him, but sees him as a man who is "already changing for the good", who is "willing to be corrected". From this point of view, she is willing to consider him further: "He has already changed for the better. He runs errands and does chores if I request it, goes to the store, vacuums, takes walks with grandchildren. Sometimes he still devotes himself to reading, but half of the library we left at our old house, and half we gave out as gifts. He has also stopped working on his collection and now devotes more time to the family. All of the money he earns now go to the family."

    Numerous, plentiful parties and gatherings are no longer popular in this house - they were only left in memories! She has taken up self-education, attends lectures, travels a lot (to catch up). If funds permit, she sometimes brings her husband along with her.

    13. EII-LSE. Romanticism and spiritual community in relations.

    Another example comes from F. M. Dostoevsky's story "White Nights": the heroine of the story rented one of the rooms of her small, cozy apartment to a lonely lodger - a respectable man serving in the military (young, but already in high ranks). It was wartime, thus her guest seldom stopped by. He had to travel for various assignments, but when he returned it was happy time for the young "lady" - he took her to the theater and restaurants (which have re-opened), made expensive (for that time) gifts, brought flowers, which was also a rarity. At the end of the war he departed for three years.

    They corresponded during this time. She had waited patiently and did not consider other suitors (even though there were very few grooms back in those times). He returned back from the war. They immediately got married, but their happiness was short-lived and unstable: he had to leave for duty again, they faced more separations. When they were able to spend a few months together, for her it was the happiest time: she could delegate to him some household maintenance tasks, play the role of a "little girl" who so desperately needs his care and custody:

    "I would be sitting alone at home. The baby needs food, meanwhile everything is falling from my hands - the milk runs over, the porridge is burnt, the baby is crying. Then I hear the sound of the doorbell and I come out to meet him all in tears. And he sees me and immediately smiles - and I feel so good, so calm and reassured. I calm down and soon everything is running smoothly again.

    He never yelled at me. A few times he raised his voice talking to our daughter, but more often he brought her gifts. And me too.

    We didn't live together for long. At work he was infected with tuberculosis - one of the employees forged a certificate, and their whole department caught this sickness. He sought treatment for a long time, traveled to various hospitals and sanatoriums. I would go with him everything, take care of him and not let him out of my sight. They released him to go back home when he was close to death. But I didn't believe it - I kept thinking I will nurture him back to health, we will overcome his sickness. I kept thinking that love can overcome death. It couldn't be that death wouldn't release him from its grip. When he died, my life stopped - it was an enormous shock for me. All the clocks in our home stopped at this moment - at exactly two o'clock at night. All the clocks that we had, the ones hanging on the wall, and wrist watches, all of them kept showing exactly the same time ..."

    Source blog entry - http://socionika-forever.blogspot.co...03/4_5478.html
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Discussion of ESTj-INFj duality descriptions - Meged, Gulenko, Agusta started by Joy View original post