Freeform Analysis of Intertype Relations

[Creepy-male]

So pretty much the point of this is just to choose any intertype relation and then either

1) Write an analysis of it from personal experience

or

2) Write an analysis of it based on the technical mechanics of the theory

Freeform is emphasized. I think this would be a good way to expand knowledge.

[Galen]

Semi-duality is weird. I definitely feel like I get along with most all ISFps just fine, but something about them prevents me from going deeper. It's like we can shoot the shit and not have to worry about saying stupid shit (because everything is stupid shit!), but there's some sort of depth I look for that I don't often get from ISFps. Or maybe it's not the sort of depth that I look for in people. Once we get to talking about our desires and who we are as people, I almost always feel some sort of odd disconnect between how we think about the world. I seriously can't pin it down, but there's something about how they describe feelings or their sentiments that just irks me. I have a ton of ISFp friends though, so it's not like I dislike them by any means.

In a lot of ways I feel like illusory might be a better relationship for me in the long run, assuming the subtypes line up. When there's an intellectual understanding between me and the INTps I've met, we can sort of learn to accept and deal with the bizarre discrepancies we have in terms of how our respective mental imagery capacities work. I find that ILIs can take something I'm talking about, go off on their own little train of thoughts about it, and we'll end up somewhere almost similar but not quite on the mark. I can generally follow these patterns, but there's no little bread crumb trail that can lead me back to what we were talking about in the first place. So it feels like I have to change the topic to get back on topic (?). Even so, I don't really mind it as long as we're both talking about the same thing and are in agreement with each other (we generally are, oddly enough).

I want to see a new set of intertype relations descriptions that take subtype into account. The only issue with this is that there'd have to be agreement on what subtypes even are and how they operate. But if that's ever pinned down in some relatively regular pattern I think it would be interesting to see these things written down somewhere.

[Shazaam]

iei/sle:

At first I find them boring or even rude, like 'how in the world could I get along with that person' and then I end up falling deeply in love with them slowly over time if they are a young gay male close to my age. non-romantic relationships with sles always make me happy and light (but still deep in that good way), like Pink singing fucken perfect to me or fefe dobson singing don't let it go to your head.

iei/iei:

It can be very positive and uplifting but we also tend to get under each other skin's emotionally too much. Can be very emotionally abusive if one is in a bad mood. If both are independently healthy, it's a very good relationship.

iei/eie:

Like a big brother/sister, teach me stuff. Sometimes I can find them a little condescending or patronizing but over all I really value their input and they kinda boost my confidence naturally with their extroversion.

iei/lsi:

Physical sexual attraction is common. Feel comfortable doing stuff together. "Activity" is a good way to describe relationship.

iei/ese:

I find them really naive in dangerous ways. Always telling them what to do like "How could you actually believe that?" I believe their Oprah-esque positivity and optimist is both annoying and self-defeating. I like their cheerful spirit though.

iei/sei:

We kind of fight for the same territory but we're both pretty passive and so we can harbor secret anger for each other over time. A very very good relationship, if two people are mature/brave enough to talk about the negatives.

iei/ile:

entps are lookalike to estp, so it's usually very positive and dual-like however they lack that sensor touch. ie: won't throat fuck me. Romantically I find them too soft, but they're good as friends- it's just annoying when I get a crush on one... because romance is annoying with this type it's like this ice cold pepsi in the desert heart that you never get to feel on your tongue.

iei/lii:

They seem to look up to me and find me really interesting. I like them, but I also don't know what to do with them kinda. I wish I could be better friends to them. The male intjs always cutely accept my gayness. I mean both my real homosexuality and my more stereotypical 'Fe gayness' or whatever, if that makes sense.

iei/lie:

They get under my skin with all the Te shit, so I just avoid them. Having a gamma esfp around will smooth out conflicts pretty good between us. Supervision is pretty crappy, sometimes I wanna take their Te-ego valuing eyes and just gouge them out sociopathically. It's like this rage that passes though and I remember that, supervision is kinda overrated/socionics is bullshit and it helps me deal with anybody.

iei/esi:

I find them a little weird, kinda overly moralistic and uppity in ways that I'm not familiar with. They seem really stern and angry all the time. "I AM NOT AMUSED BY YOUR FE." They tend to really like me emotionally one on one though.


iei/see:

It feels so emotionally positive and romantically warm. However, something always feel like it's kinda missing. Like both are eternally grasping for something and never really holding on to an actual penis. But semi-dual is the shit. So many good feelings.

iei/ili:

I feel really similar to them. We're a lot alike, really... it's just they are more thinker ish and I'm more feeler ish and that is really the core pure difference.

iei/lse:

My conflictor. I found out it's like the description says, or the opposite of duality: I am attracted right away to them at first and then I'm really turned off the more I get to know them.

iei/eii:

Their preferences can feel really intense sometimes, and also kinda how they always secretly want everybody to feel what they feel in this introverted sneaky way. I would say it depends on a lot of external conditions how I get along with this type or not. It can be really pleasant, or really disastrous.

iei/iee:

The females I get along with, but I've always clashed with male enfps. It's weird.

iei/sli:

They seem weird to me. We're both really introverted and so communicating in real life with one is awkward as hell. I don't dislike them or anything and they don't annoy me emotionally, it's just actually trying to have a conversation with one in real life is AWKWARD.

[Aivonaima]

I hope I understood the purpose of this thread correctly. I'm gonna tell a little story of me and a couple of my alpha buddies, yo.

I often hang out with my ESE brother and his/our LII friend, being SEI myself. They're the very best of friends, and share a funny platonic caregiver/infantile relationship. I'm very close to my brother and get along very well with the LII. This forms an interesting dual/activator/mirror-circle. We all have our own, very naturally flowing "roles" when hanging out together.

ESE is the one keeping the spirit high, always laughing cheerfully at pretty much everything, and babbling on about something. We often just laught at him laughing, really. He is extremely expressive and bursts into hysterical and hysterically funny fits of laughter on a very regular basis. He tells his stories with extreme enthusiasm and uses a lot of sound effects. The LII has his very own humoristically confused look for his dual's blabbering.

The LII guy is the brain of our little gang. He is usually sitting quietly and observing us two, but when he gets a hold of the flow, he is constantly coming up with witty jokes and remarks about life. Me and my bro be laughing our guts off... Which gives him more fuel to continue with his crazy stories and jokes.

I am the one who, ridiculously SEI'ishly, takes care of comfort. We hang out at my place; I cook for us; I'm usually the one to provide the intoxicants; I set up the hookah and serve tea from a glass teapot. And I go around burning incense and lighting candles.

I make them feel nice and get to enjoy their company in return. They let me have a thrid wheel sip of that amazing dual interaction of theirs and I get to enjoy their jokes and stories. Need I say we hang out together a lot. <3

[Aquagraph]

And I go around burning incense and lighting candles.

I so heard this in my head and your gestures used emerged so very vividly in my mindscape.

[DirectorAbbie]

Guys from an LSE female's perspective:

ESE: Nice guys. Good to work with, but not my kind of romantic.
LII: There's something vulnerable about them that attracts me, yet a blankness that confirms distance.
SEI: They're just too immature. I feel they need an older sister more than a mate.
ILE: Hilarious guys, but disinterested in me.

SLE: They seem like decent men at first, then I find out they're jerks.
IEI: Uncommon and interesting, but more like I'm watching an albino heron than a love interest.
LSI: Handsome, intelligent, and clever. So why am I not attracted?
EIE: The classical 'celebrity crush." But without the celebrity.

SEE: Oh, they're just charismatic, physical, understanding...*yawn* Next!
ILI: Magnetically fascinating, but impossible to understand.
ESI: Nice guys. I support them, we we just don't "click."
LIE: Easy to understand, which is an attractive trait, but we don't have similar enough interests for anything long-term.

LSE: I never met any young male ones.
EII: Many are too immature, some have conflicting interests, and some I can be interested in as a plausible long-term mate.
SLI: I never met any young male ones.
IEE: Please stop being attracted to me. It won't do you any good; I don't want a romantic relationship with anyone that much like my dad.

[somavision]

ILE: I know a couple of ILEs well. both are friends of mine. The first reminds me of dilbert, in looks at least. Seems sensible at first sight but with a love of role playing games. He's always really unsure about relationships and tends to get in trouble (He got married, realised that it wasn't right short yafter and then went with someone else), nice guy can be a bit of an idiot without meaning too at all, very interesting, but I don't share his love of role playing games. I think he might be a Ti subtype? Another one is an internationally respected scientist, he's has some of the same traits as the first guy, but is more controlled, less impulsive in his immediate behaviour, more mature I suppose, but still has a temperement that I can relate too. He reminds me of me but different. same same but different.
LII: In general terms, frustrating, I general terms appreciate the structural logic used where appropriate, however find it annoying when their logic is applied to situations which the individual is weak at understanding in relation to myself. For example a friend of mine very much see's the group of friends that I belong to as a fixed structure offering mutual support and does not understand that there has been a split in the group between those who have remained friends with ILE 1s ex-wife and pretty much dumped him and those who've sided with ILE1. To him it just doesn't make sense logically...He doesn't understand that some people can like her and dislike him in relation. grrr. And another uses either biological or social reductionism to describe psycholigical phenomenon interchangably depending on how each explanation would support her own politics. Despite having it constantly explained she doesn't seem to understand transactional models or emergent properties. Rigid in thinking, but those that I know are clever in their areas of strength and good people.
SEI: The SEI's I know I like, on the whole, we get on well. I like how they don't get on with LSE's that well, it makes me laugh. Generally fun, easygoing, sensual, you know the good stuff and an insight that's not immediately apparant.
ESE: I know two female ESE's reasonable well, good hosts, good to chat with, flirt with, nothing more.

LSI: I suspect that I never really get close enough to LSI's to be confident of their type. However I have worked with a couple of people I am reasonably sure were LSI. The most recent was stage managing whilst I operated lights. If I did everything fine so we got on ok, we were on freindly terms for the month we worked together, but didn't really hang out. I do know that she wound up a lot of the mainly delta in house staff and it's been requested that she not return. She wasn't that bad (I think mainly because she was good looking) but straightforward and not too aware of when she was being demanding or winding people up.. I think I've worked with other LSI stage managers, my one observastion would be that they mix theatre loviness with exacting standards, sometimes about things that are perfectly fine whilst ignoring things that could have more attention paid. I think that LSI is perhaps the best type for that job though -I noticed Silverchris has also pointed this out.
SLE - Some of the biggest pricks I've ever met have been SLE's. Positives? Not all are pricks all the time, some are funny when they are not being pricks.
EIE - The people who remind me of me if my head was screwed on the other way. They act dramatic and do stuff in groups, I meet a lot of EIE performers. Many have done me great kindnesses, our relationships have been short and superficial. I still appreciate the kindnesses and the brief relationships that we have had.
IEI - I went out with an IEI for a long time, one of the most interesting people I've ever met, but very wrong romatically, very lovely, thoughtful, insightful, curious, but stubborn and obstructive, always looking for a decicive voice, reluctant to make important decisions independently.

ILI - One of my very best friends was an ILI. Happy on the surface, very sad underneath.
LIE - Pass
SEE- typical interaction "I don't understand why you're so competative" "I don't understand why you're so laid back" this issue (amoungst others) turned a close but volatile relationship into a more distant one, a situation I'm happy with.
ESI - I've worked with an ESI stage manager as well, I really pissed her off, she said I was being inconsiderate to an actor, I justified myself, the LSI production manager thought it was funny. It's funny, I can be occasionally self righteous, but more flexiible.

LSE - It was an LSE that got me interested in type theories, just because I couldn't understand why we were friends. seemingly we are opposites, but there is a strong complementary factor which feeds friendships. mutual interest in someone who lives life differently
SLI - mainly quiet grumpy fuckers... there is one thing I would say, they are not fairweather friends, I've known many people say about SLI's I know (and I'll say it as well) if you're introuble they can be relied upon. I also appreciate their practical laziness, the motto seems to be "don't create work for yourself"
IEE - It's like talking to myself and being read, penetrated, assessed and judged, softly, judged without being judged, which is perhaps the worst kind of being judged.
EII - Nice people on the whole, good to have a one to one chat with.

[strangeling]

SEE: Easy to get along with when they are in a good mood and not bored.
ESI: Generally well-meaning people that can seem stand-offish until they actually have to talk to you. The best kind of cop because the rules seem implicitly secondary to them.
ILI: Poopy heads.
LIE: Don't know any.

ESE: Tries too hard to control moods and tell everyone why they should think a certain way about something.
SEI: Easy to get along with and usually tries to be nice and welcoming. Overly suspicious of other people though, tends to assume, and becomes neurotic and unbearable when dealing with unfamiliar stress or believe they can't handle something without first trying.
ILE: Okay. Can kind of treat any implicit social rules as non-existent, which leads to him being a dick and getting a lot of shit for it. Doesn't really matter what types are involved.
LII: A little frustrating because they are really nit-picky about doing anything, even when they may not know the best way to do something. Seems pretentious at times because of this.

EII: Don't know any.
IEE: Okay. They are usually pretty friendly, but seem to have an idea of how people should relate with one another. It can feel a little controlling and intense at times. They don't seem to hesitate in arguing against something that they may find fault with in some way, as if there is nothing to lose in doing so, but only to gain.
SLI: Alright. These seem to be the kind of people I'd feel the most terrible for betraying. They don't really assume much about people, are usually really easy to get along with (especially if they like you as company), and have a unique balance between intellectual ability and being down to earth.
LSE: These people seem to be workaholics. And they get mad at other people for not listening to their experience and analysis of what is best and what needs to be done. Seem way too obsessed with making more work than is needed to do a good enough job. All of the ones I know have trouble balancing work with their life; their work seems to be their life...

SLE: Okay. Can seem a little intimidating at times though. Their introverted gauze is off-putting because you can tell they are synthesizing everything about you, as if completely detached from any relation to the world (Ni and Ti valuing probably). Usually not too bad at avoiding being a dick, somewhat opposite from the ILE. Easy-going and doesn't seem to try and force anyone to do things that they may not really want to do. Fe is sort of used to motivate rather than command (opposite from LSEs).
LSI: Not really sure. The one I know is kind of anal about how things should be. Is usually very self-conscious to the point of being haughty to other people. Seems to have an implicit need or desire to control the manifestation of events.
EIE: Okay. A little intellectually intimidating at times, I think because he can easily confuse himself with his Ni, preferring to keep the details and intricacies of things as simple as they can be without impeding understanding (maybe that's Si-PoLR).
IEI: don't know any.

[aixelsyd]

 

ILE: usually pretty good unless they make socially awkward blunders and don't know or don't care how uncomfortable they are making the people around us. The Jon Stewart-esque types are a hit or miss with me but generally I find ILEs to be interesting and pleasant. If we hit each other's weak points, it's not pretty.

LII: Ok but I find that a lot of what they say about things, especially in criticism, bothers me. They offend me without meaning to and very often. When they point out the lack of logic, from their POV, of my actions or way of thinking, it irks me a lot. Otherwise they're fine at a distance and when we aren't trying to do something together as that usually destroys all harmony really, really fast.

ESE: I don't get them. They are ok but confuse me. I get on better with the Si subtype who are more chill and down to earth and make sense. The Fe subtype strikes me as cray cray and emotionally everywhere. Their attempts to get everyone to do stuff together makes me blanch inwardly and overall I can't help but find them as fake. I think we just confuse each other, but I know I can't ever tell if they are being sincere or not. Us trying to connect is like two paraplegics trying to waltz. It's silly and stupid.

SEI: At a distance I can say I really like them but when we get closer, I can't help but distrust them to not make me look bad or else emotionally manipulate me. They seem nice but too nice. Did I mention I feel they say things that just put me in a bad spot. Though the SEIs here seem really cool. I may be focusing too much on a few isolated cases.

SLE: I can relate to them a lot and feel a lot of sympathy but other times I feel like we really focus on different things. I'm sometimes bewildered by their competitiveness and need to win and have the spot light. I think we are generally kindly towards the other despite the confusion. I find them easy to understand but can focus too much on the complexity of things. Not everything has to be precise or reflect a mechanical understanding to be more than sufficient. I think my burst of randomness and my lack of consistence proves utterly bewildering to them. I also don't fully get the status consciousness and their way of measuring how good something is based on awards, recommendations, and credentials.

IEI: I generally find them really interesting and engaging. The dreamier ones are very alluring. Others make me feel like a million bucks by their smile and eyes. Where there is an attraction, I find myself more gallant. I enjoy cracking them up when I put on an "in your face" attitude. Either we have a lot to talk about and conversations are really interesting or we don't and things sink into a sort of silence that I don't know how to break out of. I feel like they color my world but I don't always know how to playfully respond to the really cutesy Fe at times or just don't feel like emoting back and that sometimes creates discomfort.

EIE: I find them very interesting. To be in their good favor is grand but to have their indignation is horrible. I usually say little around them as I find myself wary of saying something which displeases them. I find their advice to be uplifting, especially when it comes to someone who is older and wiser than me, but find it off putting when they try to fix me if they also have a lot of maturing to do. I prefer to keep a distance, in any case as I find close distance interactions awkward as I sense the frailty in long term communication.

LSI: Generally like them but feel like I need to watch myself. I generally feel vulnerable in their presence but at times feel like they can look after me.

ESI: Easy to talk with but don't find our relations especially insightful or meaningful. It's kind of redundant, our relations, so I like to kind of touch base briefly and leave it at that. I like experiencing things with them, though, and then talking about it afterwards since our after thoughts are pretty compatible. When they get moralistic, though, it can be really off-putting. I find many of them too focused on propriety and like they need to let loose a bit and worry less about being so damn proper. Of course, they wish I was more into that shit. Tough tits. Apparently I can be too impatient for their liking. But most will say I'm downright hilarious but usually there needs to be a third or fourth person to see that side of me.

LIE: Depends. I prefer these relations on the basis of friendship than joint work. I find we have a lot to talk about and that there isn't much awkwardness in talking and establishing an acquaintance. These are some of the people I first become familiar with in a group. Can tire me out, though. I usually prefer to let them do the talking and just respond without adding too much of my own feedback to avoid information overload.

SEE: Usually involves the other person seeing something in me or about me that makes them take notice. Usually it's something that isn't obvious to others. It's like they can latch onto me and see into me. That or we know how to have a crazy awesome time. However, there reaches a point where I feel the need to get away from them. I find being alone with them to be uncomfortable though sometimes if one of us can break through the awkwardness of it, we can spill our deepest thoughts. Sometimes, though, when we do have something to talk about, it is like we talk faster than we can think. It's kinda crazy. It feels like there is no invisible wall, like if our words were objects, that the communication space we share has no gravity. Information flows freely. It's weird.

ILI: Some, especially the meaner ones, put me off. It's like "damn, they are jerks" but then I start talking with them and I'm like "wow, s/he's super nice and helpful." Helpful is probably the first word that comes to mind. They know shit, they understand technical shit. I feel like I can rely on them for that stuff. I trust them enough to talk about really painful things but without feeling the painful emotions. I just tell them some really personal shit and it feels like it's ok. Comforting is a good word. I tend to become more confident and spontaneously playful. Same goes with them. When first meeting one of my friends, he remarked how he didn't understand why he was smiling and laughing for no reason. To be honest, though, I don't feel our relations ever go really deep. Like, we trust each other a lot, but it's nothing intense. I love doing stuff with them, though. I remember being in London and having difficulties making the most of the time with LII and ESI and wishing an ILI friend of mine was with me, feeling it would just come together more organically and would be so much more fun. This was way before I self-typed as I do now. In any case, I find them cute, easy to feel deep affection for. I only get frustrated, really, when I can't tell how they feel or if they care at all.

SLI: Love their artwork and style. I find them to be nice people, easy to be around, but otherwise boring. Usually ends up being a nod and smile relationship. I feel like I have to tone myself down around them instead of just saying abrasive but funny shit.

IEE: Easy to talk with, interesting, but I can get impatient in joint tasks when it comes to going from brainstorming to the actual activity. Or I don't agree with their suggestions for me to add more variety for the sake of variety, especially when my more direct and simplistic style connects better.

LSE: Alright, I guess. Have had a lot of negative experiences but on the other hand, I realize I take their advice for granted. A lot of what they say is a no brainer, to me, and feels like "no shit, Sherlock, quit treating me like I'm a five year old moron" but later I find myself using old advice in a current situation. I feel like they take life too slowly. I don't appreciate them trying to get me to slow down or judging me when I let loose and say cutting shit. I think they take me way too literally and need to not do that. Oh, and quit trying to help me so much. I can figure things out on my own, too, even if I have to do a little trial by error.

EII: I find their way of approaching life to be stifling but on the other hand, I admire their dedication and their capability of producing top quality work. They can be very inspiring to me and to others, and how they can bring out the best work in a group is what impresses me the most. I feel a bit awkward around them, though. Sometimes I feel like I put them off, like I come off as too full of myself, too aggressive, and feel like I say things that intimidate them and I don't understand it. Can be sneaky and I do not appreciate it when they put people down behind their backs, especially when they are frustrated by the other person's lack of fastidiousness but can't just confront them and talk about it without making a big to do about doing a few things differently. I feel like they can have too high standards that puts me off, initially, until I realize it's actually doable.

[Creepy-male]

You all should continue

I'm a bit nerdy but I was thinking... we could store these in some kind of data repository as a 2 dimensional object that maps types and members tbl_intertype or something, this could be a table in a database of which also self typings and other information is stored. These tables could be translated and compared through a series of analytic multithreaded procedures and methods to immediately give an advance centralized repository of information... we could build a class library of methods to statistically analyze the database -- such to get the convergence between peoples agreements in types and then compare how similar their intertype relations are.... it would be a very powerful tool -- plus the idea of a library of data makes me jizz in my pants in a nerdy way, its like a modern day library of alexandria.

[PistolShrimp]

I'm going to write about my experiences with Illusionary/Mirage relations.

My parents have been in an Illusionary relationship (SLE dad, SEI mom) for around 35 years, and are still very much in love. They've traveled a lot together, pursued interests both together and apart, and climbed mountains both figuratively and literally. I often find them sitting together and chatting about life over coffee for hours on the weekends. They rarely argue, and when they do, they make up quickly. The Si/Se difference is apparent, as my mom focuses on health, harmony and relaxation, and my dad focuses on getting things done ASAP with a "work hard, play hard" mentality. However, they've accommodated each others' differences over the years, and have one of the strongest relationships of any couple I know. They are still best friends.

I wonder if I subconsciously modeled my own relationship preferences on what my parents have, as I've found love in an Illusionary relationship, as well. I've been dating an ILE for over a year now, and it has been a worthwhile relationship.

He fell in love almost immediately, while I was more reticent at first but grew to love him over time. Our senses of humor are pretty similar, which is very important for me in a relationship. We generally communicate pretty well, though we've had fights over misunderstandings before and there are some things we just can't agree on.

He actually appreciates my occasional Ni insights into his inner world, as he doesn't really explore it on his own. We e-mailed very lengthy messages back-and-forth when he had to travel abroad for six weeks at the beginning of our relationship, and he said that he learned a lot about himself and was amazed at how well I could guess what was on his mind. I like his Ne in small doses because it helps to give me new ideas if I'm stuck and some of his insights into life are intriguing, though in large doses it confuses and drains me sometimes.

I feel like I'm OK at giving him the Si he needs. He's always like, "HOW DID YOU KNOW??" when I start giving him a shoulder/neck rub, but it's always safe to assume he'd like one because he is hunched over his desk all day at work. I give Si to him from a more detached and cerebral standpoint, while SEIs would provide it more intuitively, I think. If he's lightheaded, for example, I'll run through common causes of light-headedness in my head, settle on the most likely one, and address it in a kind of brusque way: "You should eat this applesauce and drink this water ASAP. I don't care if you don't feel like it, do it or you're going to plop." In turn, he offers me Se now and then when he senses I need a push, though it doesn't come naturally to him.

It's also hard to get shit done together because we'd rather bum around and nap/have sex/watch cartoons, but when we do accomplish things together it is an amazing feeling.

The overall feel of an Illusionary relationship is interesting to me because I feel like it exemplifies a fundamental trait of human relationships in general: the human inability to know completely what someone else is experiencing despite attempts to communicate and express our inner worlds. I feel close to him much of the time, while other times I am acutely aware of his "otherness," and there is something tragically beautiful about that feeling of being so close and yet so far apart at the same time. I feel this way with many people, like I'm chasing a will-o'-the-wisp of understanding when I try to get to know them, but with my ILE it is amplified. It's hard to describe, but it reminds me of this:

We live together, we act on, and react to, one another; but always and in all circumstances we are by ourselves. The martyrs go hand in hand into the arena; they are crucified alone. Embraced, the lovers desperately try to fuse their insulated ecstasies into a single self-transcendence; in vain. By its very nature every embodied spirit is doomed to suffer and enjoy in solitude. Sensations, feelings, insights, fancies - all these are private and, except through symbols and at second hand, incommunicable. We can pool information about experiences, but never the experiences themselves. From family to nation, every human group is a society of island universes. Most island universes are sufficiently like one another to Permit of inferential understanding or even of mutual empathy or "feeling into." Thus, remembering our own bereavements and humiliations, we can condole with others in analogous circumstances, can put ourselves (always, of course, in a slightly Pickwickian sense) in their places. But in certain cases communication between universes is incomplete or even nonexistent...Words are uttered, but fail to enlighten. The things and events to which the symbols refer belong to mutually exclusive realms of experience.

[cherrysidecar]

He fell in love almost immediately, while I was more reticent at first but grew to love him over time.

...

It's also hard to get shit done together because we'd rather bum around and nap/have sex/watch cartoons, but when we do accomplish things together it is an amazing feeling.

The overall feel of an Illusionary relationship is interesting to me because I feel like it exemplifies a fundamental trait of human relationships in general: the human inability to know completely what someone else is experiencing despite attempts to communicate and express our inner worlds. I feel close to him much of the time, while other times I am acutely aware of his "otherness," and there is something tragically beautiful about that feeling of being so close and yet so far apart at the same time. I feel this way with many people, like I'm chasing a will-o'-the-wisp of understanding when I try to get to know them, but with my ILE it is amplified. It's hard to describe, but it reminds me of this:

So first I'll apologize if I get too weird but I'm a little drunk, 3 pints in on a Sat. afternoon, and all the exact same things apply to the ILE I'm with, and the Aldous Huxley excerpt which didn't show up in my quote kind of blew my mind.

Let's just assume that duality IS that magical, mystical thing - what would happen if we were to realize it in the most fundamental, elemental way? The force of our attraction would bring us together with so much momentum that we would collapse into each other and form a black hole, annihilating ourselves and freeing ourselves from the cycle of life and death and the universe, but also taking with us anyone who was connected or had gravitated too near. And that's it. It's over.

Maybe this is a philosophical ideal for some people.

But another philosophical ideal is also the illusionary relationship - where you go through all the motions of companionship that are necessary to survive in the material world, but none of them are binding because in the end your relationship with that person is a mirage. You support each other and physically provide what is needed, but the evolution and final destiny of your soul is independent of that other person. There is a struggle that is beautiful and life-affirming, because you are each fighting for yourselves, and this does not happen with your dual.