DarkAngelFireWolf69saurus Rex
I was reading articles about type relations, and I stumbled upon some +/- stuff. I already know what's valued in the Ego block by each type as far as +/- types go:
.α. .1. .2. . .β. .1. .2. . .γ. .1. .2. . .δ. .1. .2
ILE +Ne -Ti . EIE +Fe -Ni . SEE +Se -Fi . LSE +Te -Si
SEI +Si -Fe . LSI +Ti -Se . ILI +Ni -Te . EII +Fi -Ne
ESE -Fe +Si . SLE -Se +Ti . LIE -Te +Ni . IEE -Ne +Fi
LII -Ti +Ne . IEI -Ni +Fe . ESI -Fi +Se . SLI -Si +Te
As I was reading, I noticed that the - functions were referred to as Involutionary, and that the + functions were referred to as Evolutionary. These are terms DarkAngelFireWolf69 uses that correspond to Result and Process respectively. I then noticed that all Result types lead with a - function, and all Process types lead with a + function. I later came across mentions of other functions that were outside of the Ego block in an SLE/IEI duality article. SLE was said to have -Ne and -Fe. -Ne would be the SLE's Role function. -Fe would be the SLE's Hidden Agenda. Let's plug those in:
typ .1. .2. .3. .4. .5. .6. .7. .8
SLE -Se +Ti -Ne xxx xxx -Fe
If the Base and Creative are to be of opposite polarity, and if the Role is to be the the same polarity as the Base, then it would be sensible to make the Fi in the Vulnerable position be of the + variety:
typ .1. .2. .3. .4. .5. .6. .7. .8
SLE -Se +Ti -Ne +Fi xxx -Fe
Making each block consist of a pair of + and - functions while going by the functional arrangement pointed at by Model A and keeping everything sensibly symmetrical results in this:
typ .1. .2. .3. .4. .5. .6. .7. .8
SLE -Se +Ti -Ne +Fi +Ni -Fe +Si -Te
Advancing through the entirety of the socion results in this:
.α. .1. .2. .3. .4. .5. .6. .7. .8. . .β. .1. .2. .3. .4. .5. .6. .7. .8
ILE +Ne -Ti +Se -Fi -Si +Fe -Ni +Te . EIE +Fe -Ni +Te -Si -Ti +Se -Fi +Ne
SEI +Si -Fe +Ni -Te -Ne +Ti -Se +Fi . LSI +Ti -Se +Fi -Ne -Fe +Ni -Te +Si
ESE -Fe +Si -Te +Ni +Ti -Ne +Fi -Se . SLE -Se +Ti -Ne +Fi +Ni -Fe +Si -Te
LII -Ti +Ne -Fi +Se +Fe -Si +Te -Ni . IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
.γ. .1. .2. .3. .4. .5. .6. .7. .8. . .δ. .1. .2. .3. .4. .5. .6. .7. .8
SEE +Se -Fi +Ne -Ti -Ni +Te -Si +Fe . LSE +Te -Si +Fe -Ni -Fi +Te -Ti +Se
ILI +Ni -Te +Si -Fe -Se +Fi -Ne +Ti . EII +Fi -Ne +Ti -Se -Te +Si -Fe +Ni
LIE -Te +Ni -Fe +Si +Fi -Se +Ti -Ne . IEE -Ne +Fi -Se +Ti +Si -Te +Ni -Fe
ESI -Fi +Se -Ti +Ne +Te -Ni +Fe -Si . SLI -Si +Te -Ni +Fe +Ne -Fi +Se -Ti
In the article, it's mentioned that the strong functions of a dual pair should predominate over the weak functions of the other member of the dual pair. The strong functions and the weak functions are of different polarities within a dual pair. Since strong functions are more effectively "there" than weak functions, let's streamline the charts in turn:
.α. .1. .2. .7. .8. . .β. .1. .2. .7. .8. . .γ. .1. .2. .7. .8. . .δ. .1. .2. .7. .8
ILE +Ne -Ti -Ni +Te . EIE +Fe -Ni -Fi +Ne . SEE +Se -Fi -Si +Fe . LSE +Te -Si -Ti +Se
SEI +Si -Fe -Se +Fi . LSI +Ti -Se -Te +Si . ILI +Ni -Te -Ne +Ti . EII +Fi -Ne -Fe +Ni
ESE -Fe +Si +Fi -Se . SLE -Se +Ti +Si -Te . LIE -Te +Ni +Ti -Ne . IEE -Ne +Fi +Ni -Fe
LII -Ti +Ne +Te -Ni . IEI -Ni +Fe +Ne -Fi . ESI -Fi +Se +Fe -Si . SLI -Si +Te +Se -Ti
Now let's bring the clubs together:
αNT .1. .2. .7. .8. . βNF .1. .2. .7. .8. . γSF .1. .2. .7. .8. . δST .1. .2. .7. .8
ILE +Ne -Ti -Ni +Te . EIE +Fe -Ni -Fi +Ne . SEE +Se -Fi -Si +Fe . LSE +Te -Si -Ti +Se
LII -Ti +Ne +Te -Ni . IEI -Ni +Fe +Ne -Fi . ESI -Fi +Se +Fe -Si . SLI -Si +Te +Se -Ti
γNT .1. .2. .7. .8. . δNF .1. .2. .7. .8. . αSF .1. .2. .7. .8. . βST .1. .2. .7. .8
ILI +Ni -Te -Ne +Ti . EII +Fi -Ne -Fe +Ni . SEI +Si -Fe -Se +Fi . LSI +Ti -Se -Te +Si
LIE -Te +Ni +Ti -Ne . IEE -Ne +Fi +Ni -Fe . ESE -Fe +Si +Fi -Se . SLE -Se +Ti +Si -Te
The polarities of the functions don't cleanly cross over across the socion; for example, ILE Id contains -Ni and +Te. Neither of which are found in the Ego of γNTs. Instead, they're found in the Ego blocks of βNFs and δSTs respectively. Notating the homes of these strong yet unvalued functions results in this:
.α. .1. .2. . 7 . . .8. . . .β. .1. .2. . 7 . . .8
ILE +Ne -Ti -Ni(β) +Te(δ) . EIE +Fe -Ni -Fi(γ) +Ne(α)
SEI +Si -Fe -Se(β) +Fi(δ) . LSI +Ti -Se -Te(γ) +Si(α)
ESE -Fe +Si +Fi(δ) -Se(β) . SLE -Se +Ti +Si(α) -Te(γ)
LII -Ti +Ne +Te(δ) -Ni(β) . IEI -Ni +Fe +Ne(α) -Fi(γ)
.γ. .1. .2. . 7 . . .8. . . .δ. .1. .2. . 7 . . .8
SEE +Se -Fi -Si(δ) +Fe(β) . LSE +Te -Si -Ti(α) +Se(γ)
ILI +Ni -Te -Ne(δ) +Ti(β) . EII +Fi -Ne -Fe(α) +Ni(γ)
LIE -Te +Ni +Ti(β) -Ne(δ) . IEE -Ne +Fi +Ni(γ) -Fe(α)
ESI -Fi +Se +Fe(β) -Si(δ) . SLI -Si +Te +Se(γ) -Ti(α)
Completing the model, with all functions being labeled in respects to their homes in the Ego block, results in this:
.α. .1. .2. . 3 . . .4. . . 5 . . .6. . . 7 . . .8
ILE +Ne -Ti +Se(γ) -Fi(γ) -Si(δ) +Fe(β) -Ni(β) +Te(δ)
SEI +Si -Fe +Ni(γ) -Te(γ) -Ne(δ) +Ti(β) -Se(β) +Fi(δ)
ESE -Fe +Si -Te(γ) +Ni(γ) +Ti(β) -Ne(δ) +Fi(δ) -Se(β)
LII -Ti +Ne -Fi(γ) +Se(γ) +Fe(β) -Si(δ) +Te(δ) -Ni(β)
.β. .1. .2. . 3 . . .4. . . 5 . . .6. . . 7 . . .8
EIE +Fe -Ni +Te(δ) -Si(δ) -Ti(α) +Se(γ) -Fi(γ) +Ne(α)
LSI +Ti -Se +Fi(δ) -Ne(δ) -Fe(α) +Ni(γ) -Te(γ) +Si(α)
SLE -Se +Ti -Ne(δ) +Fi(δ) +Ni(γ) -Fe(α) +Si(α) -Te(γ)
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si(δ) +Te(δ) +Se(γ) -Ti(α) +Ne(α) -Fi(γ)
.γ. .1. .2. . 3 . . .4. . . 5 . . .6. . . 7 . . .8
SEE +Se -Fi +Ne(α) -Ti(α) -Ni(β) +Te(δ) -Si(δ) +Fe(β)
ILI +Ni -Te +Si(α) -Fe(α) -Se(β) +Fi(δ) -Ne(δ) +Ti(β)
LIE -Te +Ni -Fe(α) +Si(α) +Fi(δ) -Se(β) +Ti(β) -Ne(δ)
ESI -Fi +Se -Ti(α) +Ne(α) +Te(δ) -Ni(β) +Fe(β) -Si(δ)
.δ. .1. .2. . 3 . . .4. . . 5 . . .6. . . 7 . . .8
LSE +Te -Si +Fe(β) -Ni(β) -Fi(γ) +Te(α) -Ti(α) +Se(γ)
EII +Fi -Ne +Ti(β) -Se(β) -Te(γ) +Si(α) -Fe(α) +Ni(γ)
IEE -Ne +Fi -Se(β) +Ti(β) +Si(α) -Te(γ) +Ni(γ) -Fe(α)
SLI -Si +Te -Ni(β) +Fe(β) +Ne(α) -Fi(γ) +Se(γ) -Ti(α)
I found some interesting stuff show up in here in regards to Dual/Activity relations and Confictor/Superego relations, but I'm way too sleepy to get into any of that right now. Hope you find something awesome in here! :p
woofie's garage: building stuff with Model B, part II
Rearranging the IEs in descending potencies of dimensionality, starting with the Base function of every type, results in this:
.α . 1 4a . 8 4p . 7 3a . 2 3p . 3 2a . 6 2p . 5 1a . 4 1p
ILE +Ne(α) +Te(δ) -Ni(β) -Ti(α) +Se(γ) +Fe(β) -Si(δ) -Fi(γ)
SEI +Si(α) +Fi(δ) -Se(β) -Fe(α) +Ni(γ) +Ti(β) -Ne(δ) -Te(γ)
ESE -Fe(α) -Se(β) +Fi(δ) +Si(α) -Te(γ) -Ne(δ) +Ti(β) +Ni(γ)
LII -Ti(α) -Ni(β) +Te(δ) +Ne(α) -Fi(γ) -Si(δ) +Fe(β) +Se(γ)
.β . 1 4a . 8 4p . 7 3a . 2 3p . 3 2a . 6 2p . 5 1a . 4 1p
EIE +Fe(β) +Ne(α) -Fi(γ) -Ni(β) +Te(δ) +Se(γ) -Ti(α) -Si(δ)
LSI +Ti(β) +Si(α) -Te(γ) -Se(β) +Fi(δ) +Ni(γ) -Fe(α) -Ne(δ)
SLE -Se(β) -Te(γ) +Si(α) +Ti(β) -Ne(δ) -Fe(α) +Ni(γ) +Fi(δ)
IEI -Ni(β) -Fi(γ) +Ne(α) +Fe(β) -Si(δ) -Ti(α) +Se(γ) +Te(δ)
.γ . 1 4a . 8 4p . 7 3a . 2 3p . 3 2a . 6 2p . 5 1a . 4 1p
SEE +Se(γ) +Fe(β) -Si(δ) -Fi(γ) +Ne(α) +Te(δ) -Ni(β) -Ti(α)
ILI +Ni(γ) +Ti(β) -Ne(δ) -Te(γ) +Si(α) +Fi(δ) -Se(β) -Fe(α)
LIE -Te(γ) -Ne(δ) +Ti(β) +Ni(γ) -Fe(α) -Se(β) +Fi(δ) +Si(α)
ESI -Fi(γ) -Si(δ) +Fe(β) +Se(γ) -Ti(α) -Ni(β) +Te(δ) +Ne(α)
.δ . 1 4a . 8 4p . 7 3a . 2 3p . 3 2a . 6 2p . 5 1a . 4 1p
LSE +Te(δ) +Se(γ) -Ti(α) -Si(δ) +Fe(β) +Ne(α) -Fi(γ) -Ni(β)
EII +Fi(δ) +Ni(γ) -Fe(α) -Ne(δ) +Ti(β) +Si(α) -Te(γ) -Se(β)
IEE -Ne(δ) -Fe(α) +Ni(γ) +Fi(δ) -Se(β) -Te(γ) +Si(α) +Ti(β)
SLI -Si(δ) -Ti(α) +Se(γ) +Te(δ) -Ni(β) -Fi(γ) +Ne(α) +Fe(β)
Arranging the types themselves in accordance to dimensionality of functions, with Accepting functions on top and Producing functions on bottom, results in this:
4d -Ne +Ne -Se +Se -Fe +Fe -Te +Te -Ni +Ni -Si +Si -Fi +Fi -Ti +Ti
ac IEE ILE SLE SEE ESE EIE LIE LSE IEI ILI SLI SEI ESI EII LII LSI
pr LIE EIE ESE LSE IEE SEE SLE ILE LII EII ESI LSI IEI SEI SLI ILI
3d -Ne +Ne -Se +Se -Fe +Fe -Te +Te -Ni +Ni -Si +Si -Fi +Fi -Ti +Ti
ac ILI IEI SEI SLI EII ESI LSI LII ILE IEE SEE SLE EIE ESE LSE LIE
pr EII LII LSI ESI SEI IEI ILI SLI EIE LIE LSE ESE SEE IEE ILE SLE
2d -Ne +Ne -Se +Se -Fe +Fe -Te +Te -Ni +Ni -Si +Si -Fi +Fi -Ti +Ti
ac SLE SEE IEE ILE LIE LSE ESE EIE SLI SEI IEI ILI LII LSI ESI EII
pr ESE LSE LIE EIE SLE ILE IEE SEE ESI LSI LII EII SLI ILI IEI SEI
1d -Ne +Ne -Se +Se -Fe +Fe -Te +Te -Ni +Ni -Si +Si -Fi +Fi -Ti +Ti
ac SEI SLI ILI IEI LSI LII EII ESI SEE SLE ILE IEE LSE LIE EIE ESE
pr LSI ESI EII LII ILI SLI SEI IEI LSE ESE EIE LIE ILE SLE SEE IEE
Condensing the table up top to contain the strongest functions of all types results in this:
.α . 1 4a . 8 4p . 7 3a . 2 3p
ILE +Ne(α) +Te(δ) -Ni(β) -Ti(α)
SEI +Si(α) +Fi(δ) -Se(β) -Fe(α)
ESE -Fe(α) -Se(β) +Fi(δ) +Si(α)
LII -Ti(α) -Ni(β) +Te(δ) +Ne(α)
.β . 1 4a . 8 4p . 7 3a . 2 3p
EIE +Fe(β) +Ne(α) -Fi(γ) -Ni(β)
LSI +Ti(β) +Si(α) -Te(γ) -Se(β)
SLE -Se(β) -Te(γ) +Si(α) +Ti(β)
IEI -Ni(β) -Fi(γ) +Ne(α) +Fe(β)
.γ . 1 4a . 8 4p . 7 3a . 2 3p
SEE +Se(γ) +Fe(β) -Si(δ) -Fi(γ)
ILI +Ni(γ) +Ti(β) -Ne(δ) -Te(γ)
LIE -Te(γ) -Ne(δ) +Ti(β) +Ni(γ)
ESI -Fi(γ) -Si(δ) +Fe(β) +Se(γ)
.δ . 1 4a . 8 4p . 7 3a . 2 3p
LSE +Te(δ) +Se(γ) -Ti(α) -Si(δ)
EII +Fi(δ) +Ni(γ) -Fe(α) -Ne(δ)
IEE -Ne(δ) -Fe(α) +Ni(γ) +Fi(δ)
SLI -Si(δ) -Ti(α) +Se(γ) +Te(δ)
As was outlined in the IEI/SLE Duality article, the weak functions of one member of a Dual/Activity pair should be overridden by the strong functions of the other. With the weak functions out of the way in the chart, it'll be easy to go function by function and put each quadra's best and most defining stuff forward:
. strongest functions of quadras . . . .process. . . .result
α +Ne -Se -Fe +Te -Ni +Si +Fi -Ti . . Se Fe Ni Ti . Ne Te Si Fi
β +Ne -Se +Fe -Te -Ni +Si -Fi +Ti . . Se Te Ni Fi . Ne Fe Si Ti
γ -Ne +Se +Fe -Te +Ni -Si -Fi +Ti . . Ne Te Si Fi . Se Fe Ni Ti
δ -Ne +Se -Fe +Te +Ni -Si +Fi -Ti . . Ne Fe Si Ti . Se Te Ni Fi
Shit's about to get crazy in the next post, so hit the deck. :p
woofie's garage: this is madness, this is Model B
As in the current world of recorded music, what is effectively taking place in typology is a sort of analog to digital transformation. Upon fundamental binary dichotomizations, a clearer and clearer picture gets built as the complexity of the system rises, and conversely, a downscaling of the complexity results in more portability. There are a multitude of approaches to the whole Socionics thing here, and I'm looking forward to seeing more and more.
A simultaneous downscaling and upscaling are about to take place here. Quadra boundaries are drawn across any two of the following three Reinin dichotomies; Merry/Serious, Judicious/Decisive, and Democratic/Aristocratic. Using the first as a Y axis and the second as an X axis, each quadra would have a quadrant; Alpha in the top-left, Beta in the top-right, Gamma in the bottom-right, and Delta in the bottom-left. Any clockwise movement from any given point in this field, aside from the dead center, would result in a forward movement through the socion itself.
All of Alpha and Beta would exclusively inhabit the Merry side of that particular dichotomy, and all of Gamma and Delta would consequentially inhabit all of the Serious side of that dichotomy exclusively. The same can be said about Alpha/Delta and Judicious, and Beta/Gamma and Decisive. Let's work that stuff into the charts:
. . . polarities of quadral IEs . . . . . . process. . . .result
alpha +Ne -Se -Fe +Te -Ni +Si +Fi -Ti . . Se Fe Ni Ti . Ne Te Si Fi
merry +Ne -Se . . . . -Ni +Si . . . . . . Se . .Ni . . .Ne . .Si
beta .+Ne -Se +Fe -Te -Ni +Si -Fi +Ti . . Se Te Ni Fi . Ne Fe Si Ti
decis . . . . +Fe -Te . . . . -Fi +Ti . . . .Te . .Fi . . .Fe . .Ti
gamma -Ne +Se +Fe -Te +Ni -Si -Fi +Ti . . Ne Te Si Fi . Se Fe Ni Ti
serio -Ne +Se . . . . +Ni -Si . . . . . . Ne . .Si . . .Se . .Ni
delta -Ne +Se -Fe +Te +Ni -Si +Fi -Ti . . Ne Fe Si Ti . Se Te Ni Fi
judic . . . . -Fe +Te . . . . +Fi -Ti . . . .Fe . .Ti . . .Te . .Fi
From here, there are two ways to go. Let's do both! Simplification first:
. polarities of IEs . . .process .result
merry +Ne -Se -Ni +Si . . Se Ni . Ne Si
serio -Ne +Se +Ni -Si . . Ne Si . Se Ni
. polarities of IEs . . .process .result
judic -Fe +Te +Fi -Ti . . Fe Ti . Te Fi
decis +Fe -Te -Fi +Ti . . Te Fi . Fe Ti
And now let's fill in the blanks for the first chart:
http://s9.postimg.org/8k9ei7o73/plusminus.png
The plus-minus and minus-plus signs were the most sensible thing to fill the gaps in with. Plus-minus signs and minus-plus signs are diametrically opposed to each other in such a way that a "charge" in one polarity in a plus-minus sign necessitates an equal and opposite "charge" in the other. These quadra-drawing Reinin dichotomies can serve as midpoints between two quadras.
Bringing all of this to the level of human individuals again, let's get into the type relations. Since I saw two DarkAngelFireWolf69 articles about IEI interactions that were full of Model B stuff, let's go with IEI. For all of these, the positions of the IEs for each type will be color coded, and the second type will have their IEs rearranged to line up with the IEI's positions:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
What we have up above is an Identical relation. Here's a Mirror relation:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
EIE -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
Not too much dissonance here. Here's a Dual relation:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
SLE +Ni -Fe +Si -Te -Se +Ti -Ne +Fi
Every -/result function is matched with a +/process function, every Ego function is matched with a Super-Id function, every Super-Ego function is relieved by an Id function, every 4d function is matched with a 1d function, every 3d function is matched with a 2d function. Everything meshes together. From a structural standpoint, an Activity relation would be a synthesis of a Dual relation and a Mirror relation. Let's take a look at that:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
LSI +Ni -Fe +Si -Te -Se +Ti -Ne +Fi
All of the aforementioned holds true, except for the dimensionality part; 4d functions are now matched with 2d functions, and 3d functions are now matched with 1d functions. Now that everything from within Beta quadra has been handled, let's cross the pond over to Delta, bite the bullet, and get to that Conflict relation:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
LSE -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
As with the Dual relation, every 4d function is paired with a 1d function, and every 3d function is paired with a 2d function, but instead of a maximum amount of relief, there is a maximum amount of irritation. All of the polarities of all of the functions are the same. A de-mirrored take on a cross-quadra, cross-club relation would be a Super-Ego relation:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
SLI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
If a Mirror relation is like two people harmlessly bumping into each other occasionally and stepping on each others' feet, and a Conflict relation is like two people periodically flinging knives at each others' vital organs, then a Super-Ego relation would be like two people periodically juggling knives with each other. The temperament match brings some much-needed stability, consonance, and grace. As with the Activity relations, the 4d functions are with the 2d functions, and the 3d functions are with the 1d functions. On to Quasi-Identical relations then:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
EII +Ni -Fe +Si -Te -Se +Ti -Ne -Fi
Here is where there are simultaneously a tremendous amount of shared strengths and entirely different sets of values and methodologies. Every function is matched with a function with the same degree of dimensionality, but with a different polarity. Unlike in Duality and Activity, this doesn't result in relief as much as it results in a sort of mutual confusion. This sort of thing also happens in this relation's "mirrored" counterpart, which would be Contrary relations, or Extinguishment, if you wanna go with that:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
IEE +Ni -Fe +Si -Te -Se +Ti -Ne -Fi
Same deal as Quasi-Identicals almost, but supposedly more dissonant. Hold onto your asses, because shit's about to get crazy in the next mega-post...
woofie's garage: running the Model B machine into the fucking wilderness!
If the IE is the "what", then the charge is the "how". Let's take a look at Kindred relations:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
ILI +Ni -Fe +Si -Te -Se +Ti -Ne +Fi
The Accepting functions share the "what", but not the "how". The remaining IEs are placed in positions that are far from optimal, but the polarity difference points to the effects of the positioning being more deadening than actively agitating. Going from Gamma to Alpha while keeping the temperament constant, let's check out Business relations:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
SEI +Ni -Fe +Si -Te -Se +Ti -Ne +Fi
This time, the "what" is shared by the Producing functions, and the situation is definitely better as far as the PolRs are concerned. Moving on to Semi-Duality:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
SEE -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
The Accepting functions have the same "what" as they would in a Duality relation, but the charges are identical. The IEs themselves are arranged in a consonant manner, yet the charges being identical instead of complementary suggests that the weak spots are painlessly overridden moreso than wholly relieved. Here comes Illusionary relations:
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
ILE -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
The Producing functions now share the same "what" as they would share in Duality. In the previous case, the 4d Base functions overrode their partners' 1d Dual-Seeking functions. In this case, a 3d Creative function is to override a 2d Hidden agenda, and it's easier to drive a tank through a sheet of wax paper than it is to drive a car through a brick wall. Up next are Supervision relations, in which yet another sense of symmetry is obliterated:
LIE +Ni -Fe +Si -Te -Se +Ti -Ne +Fi
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
ESE +Ni -Fe +Si -Te -Se +Ti -Ne +Fi
The "deadening" aspect of the clashing IEs is at its absolute maximum with the 4d Base of the Supervisor up against the 1d PolR of the Supervisee. Everything else is subtly oppressive and obstructive, including the mutual sharing of the cognitive styles themselves. Next up is Benefit relations:
ESI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
IEI -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
LII -Ni +Fe -Si +Te +Se -Ti +Ne -Fi
A sort of asymmetrical synthesis of Activity and Quasi-Identical relations is taking place here. All of the polarities match, so the effect is overall more propulsive. The cognitive style of your Benefactor and/or Beneficiary will be the same cognitive style of your Dual. If a complete Supervision ring would be like four arms simultaneously crushing each other into the ground, then a Benefit ring would be like four arms infinitely lifting each other up.
Holy crap, I feel like my brain's gonna melt. That should cover all the type interactions! :p