Quote Originally Posted by Airman View Post
Yeah @Muddytextures , the E2 and E5 relationship goes very much like that. Sometimes the E2 is a caregiver and the E5 an infantile, or E2 aggressor and E5 victim.

But just to keep this strictly along Enneagram lines, let's please stick to Enneagram and not superimpose or mix Socionics with it (though it'd make sense at a deeper analysis, what I'm trying to find out here is strictly Enneagram-related). Thanks for your input.

I've seen E9s with E6s a lot, but also E3s with E6s... so this is a doubt here...Perhaps the most beneficient relationship for both would be E3 + E6 . Usually 6s lack initiative (which the 3 has a lot) and the 3 are reckless and/or unaware of possible bad outcomes (which the 6 is too aware of). So I can add with almost certainty that E3 dualises with E6.

Let's keep it strictly enneagram talk here, otherwise we'll be lost in a myriad of possibilities and assumptions mixing the two systems.

It's also interesting to notice that, because of having 9 types in it, not an even number, Enneagram is not going to provide an easy dualisation. One type is going to be left to dualise with either its own or with all other types (that'd be E9 according to Enneagram knowledge because 9 is at the top of triangle and from where all types are said to emanate).
It sounds like you are not Ne valuing. LSI maybe? I'm probably doing more divergent speculation again so I guess I'll have to contain my urges to further elaborate about your type.



I brought up socionics since duality is socionics concept, not an enneagram one. Enneagram types simply don't inherently mix and match with each other in a nice neat perfect way. Therefore the best option is to see what parallels we can draw between enneagram and socionics, where types DO interact with each other in a nice neat systematic way.