Duals dislike eachother more often than expected

[Nexus]

There is a probably a strong subconscious bond between duals that makes them feel emotionally or ethically invested in each other without regard to context; however, the polarity of how they feel about each other consciously can fluctuate wildly depending on the circumstances; for instance, children will often tease and pick on their crushes. I believe that is possibly due to the ego and superid interference that occurs when duals are present. Though duals do not share ideological optimism or consciousness of temperament, they both are either process or result, meaning that they will behave similarly over a long interval of time due to the the direction of phenomenal response as though intertwined by fate; since they share quadra values, they will also respond at nearly the same time, and because they share rationality, they will have complementing accepting and creative ego functions that constitute a shared channel in which specific information produced by one may interefere contextually with the other's unconscious IM. In duals, the temperament switch causes the vital functions of one to be aligned to the mental functions of the other, so one is potentially subconsciously manifesting simultaneously what the other is manifesting consciously, often giving the effect of finishing each other's sentences. The opposing optimistisms will keep the relationship from becoming stale or stagnant, and the temperament switch will keep one dual from continuously irritating the ego IM of the other. Because the superego of one reflects the id of the other, accumulated habits and biases will also complement and reinforce each other's driving impulses; for instance, superid IM which supports feedback for the id will be supported naturally and excessively by the conscious functions of the dual, creating mutual benefit, reinforcement, and interest. Because the conscious functions mainly produce denial of the unconscious by changing the direction of the IM of the subconscious functions, one may feel as though they are understood best by their dual, to whom nearly exclusively the denial is far less consciously apparent than the motive, and who is always consciously supporting that subconscious IM of the first which is most secretly yearned but least realized. For this reason, socially blind emotional (id) and ethical (superego) responses may override the common courtesy, etiquette, and other civilities normally processed (and more highly socially valued within the quadra) by the ego and superid.

Wow, looking back at this really makes me feel IEI...

[redbaron]

There is a probably a strong subconscious bond between duals that makes them feel emotionally or ethically invested in each other without regard to context; however, the polarity of how they feel about each other consciously can fluctuate wildly depending on the circumstances; for instance, children will often tease and pick on their crushes. I believe that is possibly due to the ego and superid interference that occurs when duals are present. Though duals do not share ideological optimism or consciousness of temperament, they both are either process or result, meaning that they will behave similarly over a long interval of time due to the the direction of phenomenal response as though intertwined by fate; since they share quadra values, they will also respond at nearly the same time, and because they share rationality, they will have complementing accepting and creative ego functions that constitute a shared channel in which specific information produced by one may interefere contextually with the other's unconscious IM. In duals, the temperament switch causes the vital functions of one to be aligned to the mental functions of the other, so one is potentially subconsciously manifesting simultaneously what the other is manifesting consciously, often giving the effect of finishing each other's sentences. The opposing optimistisms will keep the relationship from becoming stale or stagnant, and the temperament switch will keep one dual from continuously irritating the ego IM of the other. Because the superego of one reflects the id of the other, accumulated habits and biases will also complement and reinforce each other's driving impulses; for instance, superid IM which supports feedback for the id will be supported naturally and excessively by the conscious functions of the dual, creating mutual benefit, reinforcement, and interest. Because the conscious functions mainly produce denial of the unconscious by changing the direction of the IM of the subconscious functions, one may feel as though they are understood best by their dual, to whom nearly exclusively the denial is far less consciously apparent than the motive, and who is always consciously supporting that subconscious IM of the first which is most secretly yearned but least realized. For this reason, socially blind emotional (id) and ethical (superego) responses may override the common courtesy, etiquette, and other civilities normally processed (and more highly socially valued within the quadra) by the ego and superid.

Wow, looking back at this really makes me feel IEI...

this is great. wow.

and despite the cold analytical feel to this post, it makes me want to cry.

[Danielle]

I was thinking about this over the weekend, while I was out of town at an extended family gathering. It struck me that duality may be more beneficial the closer the psychological distance between the parties, which is the opposite of conflicting relations.

[UDP]

I am hesitant to label relationships as 'beneficial' or not.

[silverchris9]

You could reframe the word "beneficial" as meaning "expressing more of the potentials of a dual interpersonal relationship as described by the theory."

It took twoish years before I became friends with my I-think-SLE friend, and I don't know that I'm close friends with any other SLEs.

One possible influence to this is how many interactions one has had with activity/dual as opposed to superego/conflictor. Since quasi-identicals are superficially similar, one who has spent a lot of time with superegos or conflictors may learn through conditionally to consciously or subconsciously associate certain superficial traits shared by quasi-identical pairs with negative experiences, so that they avoid both quasi-identicals. For example, an SLE who has spent a lot of time around EIIs and little around IEIs may see an IEI's idealism as similar to the EII's brand of moral idealism, and this may turn him or her off of the IEI, not because of how the IEI is, but because the IEI reminds him/her of a similar but extremely unpleasant individual/situation/expereince/etc.

[UDP]

You could reframe the word "beneficial" as meaning "expressing more of the potentials of a dual interpersonal relationship as described by the theory."

And what are the potentials as described by the theory?

...?

The potential to have a wonderful, great relationship with someone else?
I have very good relationships with people from a few types.


Really, though, I see how it's much easier to say "duals get along well" than try to be positive and less normative, and detach "good/bad" from explanations. That's how I talk about things when I'm introducing people to socionics myself. I wanted to comment that there is (and should be) a more advanced and more objective interpretation of what dual relationships are, as there seems to be a trend to think that duality = relational bliss. I don't think, however, that Danielle particularly is a person to believe that duality = bliss; I wasn't trying to correct her, per se.

[silverchris9]

I dunno. Basically, the information you put out is received well, and the information you receive is packaged how you like it. Some possible feelings and benefits that may flow from this include comfort, ease of communication, and the warm-fuzzies.

It's hard to describe because it's hard to transcend one's own prejudices/expectations. I very nearly used the phrase "they get shit done" in trying to describe what is positive about dual relationships, but of course this is something that an IEI would like especially about an SLE. Anyway, what am I doing justifying the concept of duality to you? Ask the lady who made it up. (She's dead though, right?)


EDIT: Ah, once I saw your edit (or my computer loaded the whole page, I'm not sure) I understood what you were getting at. True. There should be something better than vague duality = better crap.