Stackings 'duality'

[Jarno]

There are a couple of interesting features in this stacking theory.

First there are sort of quadra's, although there are only two instead of four. Let's call them the duplets and label them according the stackings flow.

Outsiders duplet: Sx/So, So/Sp, Sp/Sx
Insiders duplet: Sx/Sp, So/Sx, Sp/So

Now what I've read on a site and experienced in real life, is that when your partner has your main instinct as their third 'disregarded' instinct, the relationship will not work out for you.
Fortunately this rule alone narrows it down enough, if you would want to find out which one of the six stacking types would be your most compatible instinctual partner!

Let's take for example Sx/So. This type is from the Outsiders duplet. So all partners from the Insiders duplet will suck a bit, not totally, but for a true 'dual' you will want to find one from the same duplet.

However the So/Sp cannot be the partner since it misses your main instinct, which annoys the crap out of you.
The Sp/Sx shares your main instinct, however, if you look the relationship from the Sp/Sx perspective, he/she will be annoyed the crap out of you since you don't share their main (Sp) instinct.
So the best ("dual") instinct partner, is the Sx/So in this example, the same stackings as you have!

Let's for fun try to label the 6 relationships:

Same duplet, same stackings: Attraction
Same duplet, your main, their last: Bored buddies
Same duplet, your main, their second: Comfortable
Different duplet, mirror stacking: Energizers
Different duplet, your main their last: Dull
Different duplet, same main: Semi-Attraction

These are just some idea's. I bet you guys can improve on it!

[Pallas]

Yeah, I saw this a long time ago, but then I saw stackings were probably not real for reasons that have nothing to do with enneagram.

[Jarno]

Yeah, I saw this a long time ago, but then I saw stackings were probably not real for reasons that have nothing to do with enneagram.

oke interesting, what have you observed? And what did you see long time ago, that these relations work out like this? Cause i made this up since yesterday, and there are several different opinions about relationship structures in the stackings community at this moment...

I'm still pretty new to this stackings. For me, it's a separate phenomenon of enneagram. So far these stackings are pretty clear to see i would think. Some are definitely pushing others buttons effectively, their eyes really scanning you, the sx types, some are whining really fast about pains, health, food etc, sp types, and the So types always makes me feel as if somebody is watching over me. I always felt attracted to certain people, thanks to stackings i now know these were the sx types.

[Chae]

"Dulls" are the new conflictors

Excellent transfer, and now we need clubs + romance styles

[Jarno]

"Dulls" are the new conflictors

hehe, yeah. However they might not be repulsed, but unsatisfied, i think is the word.

Clubs would be the main instincts: the sensation seekers, security seekers, social seekers.

[Chae]

hehe, yeah. However they might not be repulsed, but unsatisfied, i think is the word.

Clubs would be the main instincts: the sensation seekers, security seekers, social seekers.

Exactly! And: that feeling comes from having the same secondary instinct but otherwise functioning in a completely different manner, making the interaction both confusing and non-productive.

Yes. Seekers is actually a superb phrasing since that summarizes what instincts do Cool. The romance styles would be Grounded (SP/SO and SP/SX), Merging (SX/SO and SX/SP), and SO idk what they could be like, help

[lynn]

Yes. Seekers is actually a superb phrasing since that summarizes what instincts do Cool. The romance styles would be Grounded (SP/SO and SP/SX), Merging (SX/SO and SX/SP), and SO idk what they could be like, help

SO = cooperation, ...

[Chae]

SO = cooperation, ...

Ah, that kicked off a thought train, thanks "Collaborative" romance style for SO/SX and SO/SP it is.

[Saoirse]

Is it problematic that within the same duplet relationships, there are asymmetric feelings? For example, between me (so/sx) and sx/sp, my main is their last, so I should feel like we're "bored buddies," but their main is my second, so they should feel like we're "comfortable"?

You may be interested in this blog post.

Personally, I do not identify at all with how you think I should feel toward sx/sp. Three of my closest friends in the world are sx/sp. I also do not identify with how you think I should feel toward sp/sx. In particular, I kind of want to slap all the sp/sx's I know (no offense--they're good, kind, intelligent people, but boy can they rub me the wrong way), so I wouldn't call our relationship "dull." Interestingly enough, they all like me a ton for some unfathomable reason, so they also wouldn't call our relationship "dull."

[Jarno]

Is it problematic that within the same duplet relationships, there are asymmetric feelings? For example, between me (so/sx) and sx/sp, my main is their last, so I should feel like we're "bored buddies," but their main is my second, so they should feel like we're "comfortable"?

Yes you are right. There are 3 asymetric and 3 symetric if i am correct.

Maybe this makes some sense, from the perspective of the Sx/So vs ...:

Sx/So: Symetric, similar to socionics dual relationship.
So/Sp: Asymetric, similar to socionics supervision relationship??? sx/so supervisor, so/sp supervisee
Sp/Sx: Asymetric, similar to socionics benefactor relationship??? sx/so benefactor, sp/sx benefeciary
So/Sx: Symetric, similar to socionics mirror relationship
Sx/Sp: Asymetric, similar to socioniocs semi-dual relationship
Sp/So: Symetric, similar to socionics conflictor relationship

I used dual and semi dual and not identical and comparative relations, due to that i think when both have same main stackings their is strong energetic attraction.

[lynn]

i just want to say that the worst relationship for me is same first instinct and different second instinct. so, in my case being so/sx that would be so/sp. i can't relate to the semi-attraction thing at all.

[Jarno]

i just want to say that the worst relationship for me is same first instinct and different second instinct. so, in my case being so/sx that would be so/sp. i can't relate to the semi-attraction thing at all.

Ah oke. Good, i like these real life observations, from that point we can make some model.

Do you know why the relation doesn't work? What are your feelings about that. Is it because the are to much into Sp, or that they lack to much Sx? Or does the So give some kind of competetion or something?

[Tigerfadder]

I find that judgers have stronger preference for So and perceivers for Sx. But ya.

This is pretty cool! I do think same in ennegram stackings = duality and that if someone lack the one you value and verse it lack the attraction. Maybe even that enneagram stackings as you described in OT is a better way to understanding attraction than ITR.

[Raver]

I don't know if I buy having the same second instinct, but different first and last instincts as the worst instinct stacking compatibility. I generally get along better with so/sx better than with so/sp and sx/so, which are supposedly in the same duplet and are supposed to be in my instinctual stacking quadra. My relations with so/sx are not without their issues, but I find I can actually connect with so/sx to a decent extent, while I struggle to connect with so/sp and sx/so even though they're not terrible relations either.

So/sx shares the same second instinct as sp/sx so it's not like they're complete opposites by any means, they both have the same levels of intimacy for one thing. To me, this holds more weight than syn-flow and contra-flow theory. I agree with the fact that I get along the best with other sp/sx and that is the best instinctual stacking pairing for me, that much is obvious. I know this is based on syn-flow and contra-flow theory and while there may be validity in this, I don't think it has much to do with compatibility to be honest.

[Pallas]

oke interesting, what have you observed? And what did you see long time ago, that these relations work out like this? Cause i made this up since yesterday, and there are several different opinions about relationship structures in the stackings community at this moment...

I'm still pretty new to this stackings. For me, it's a separate phenomenon of enneagram. So far these stackings are pretty clear to see i would think. Some are definitely pushing others buttons effectively, their eyes really scanning you, the sx types, some are whining really fast about pains, health, food etc, sp types, and the So types always makes me feel as if somebody is watching over me. I always felt attracted to certain people, thanks to stackings i now know these were the sx types.

Well, Sp, Sx, and So seem to be correlated with brain stem based, mid brain based, and neocortex based behaviors. However, the neocortex is basically all the things that make man a rational animal and not just another beast, and if it's not the primary working thing, you're basically sick from bad thought patterns, not eating right, or something like that. Also, most of the "So" behaviors generally listed are actually mid brain based, which does confirm that most people are actually just Sp/Sx or Sx/Sp and have low-to-low-moderate levels of health because they have difficulty accessing the neocortex. The instincts also seem like a bastardization of a concept found across multiple religions as well as mystical, esoteric, and occult schools, but it's basically perverted here, and I can't really stand for that. Enneagram really is largely derived from esotericism, but then so is most of modern science when you really look at it ("derived from" not meaning that it still is that).

What I mean by bastardized and perverted:
Gnosticism and the three brains: https://gnosticteachings.org/faqs/ps...e-centers.html
The four Hindu strivings: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhar...stratification

You can google this if you want more links, but the instincts are basically something that humans are intuitively aware of to the extent that they pop up in a lot of different belief systems as well as modern science, but only enneagram people approach them this way. Everyone else says to sort of balance them out because they're not exclusive and that everyone should basically strive for "So". Also, it's interesting to note what enneagram people generally call "So" is really just a more head-y Sx (and basically aligns with E7): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triune_brain "Sp" should ubiquitously correlate with gut center, "Sx" with heart, and "So" with head if you're honest as well.

[Tigerfadder]

I read somewhere the stacking is the same as in the hierarchy of needs something, Sx is procreation focus, Sp is shelter and food focus and So is social safety net focus.

[may]

As an idea that kinda makes sense...

As I was reading it, though, I wondered about the distribution of stackings. Given that socionics types don't seem that they would be equally distributed among enneagram types, I wouldn't think that stackings would either. And if stackings are actually a separate phenomenon from enneagram, I still can't really come up with a reason why socionics types would be equally distributed.

I actually kinda get the feeling that each type would have a few stackings associated with it, if even that many. The idea of a duplet flow associated with each quadra is interesting to me. And then maybe two main stackings in the duplet for each type. In this case: I don't know how to explain it, but I would expect that your dual would not have the same stacking. In terms of your own stacking, you would have the choice of only one "better dual" or "worse dual", with them getting the converse benefits, hah.

Does that sound like anything?

[Jarno]

As an idea that kinda makes sense...

As I was reading it, though, I wondered about the distribution of stackings. Given that socionics types don't seem that they would be equally distributed among enneagram types, I wouldn't think that stackings would either. And if stackings are actually a separate phenomenon from enneagram, I still can't really come up with a reason why socionics types would be equally distributed.

I actually kinda get the feeling that each type would have a few stackings associated with it, if even that many. The idea of a duplet flow associated with each quadra is interesting to me. And then maybe two main stackings in the duplet for each type. In this case: I don't know how to explain it, but I would expect that your dual would not have the same stacking. In terms of your own stacking, you would have the choice of only one "better dual" or "worse dual", with them getting the converse benefits, hah.

Does that sound like anything?

I get why you expect the dual not to have same stacking, but rather something opposite like in socionics, however when I look at real life experience, and as 2 others posters in this thread also mentioned, there is most attraction with the person of exact same stacking. Maybe you rather compare it to identicals, they have a strong friendship attraction, to fit more in the model you have. But one way or the other, same stackings seems at this point the best candidate for having the most attraction.

I would think that nothing is equally distributed in the whole universe, between people, and thus socionics. But I also don't see a problem with that, yeah some people have a harder time finding a dual, though luck :-)

I also have the feeling that some stackings are more common in certain types. Though already, I have seen all kinds of combinations, so I guess nothing is impossible.

[Olimpia]

There are a couple of interesting features in this stacking theory.

First there are sort of quadra's, although there are only two instead of four. Let's call them the duplets and label them according the stackings flow.

Outsiders duplet: Sx/So, So/Sp, Sp/Sx
Insiders duplet: Sx/Sp, So/Sx, Sp/So

Now what I've read on a site and experienced in real life, is that when your partner has your main instinct as their third 'disregarded' instinct, the relationship will not work out for you.
Fortunately this rule alone narrows it down enough, if you would want to find out which one of the six stacking types would be your most compatible instinctual partner!

Let's take for example Sx/So. This type is from the Outsiders duplet. So all partners from the Insiders duplet will suck a bit, not totally, but for a true 'dual' you will want to find one from the same duplet.

However the So/Sp cannot be the partner since it misses your main instinct, which annoys the crap out of you.
The Sp/Sx shares your main instinct, however, if you look the relationship from the Sp/Sx perspective, he/she will be annoyed the crap out of you since you don't share their main (Sp) instinct.
So the best ("dual") instinct partner, is the Sx/So in this example, the same stackings as you have!

Let's for fun try to label the 6 relationships:

Same duplet, same stackings: Attraction
Same duplet, your main, their last: Bored buddies
Same duplet, your main, their second: Comfortable
Different duplet, mirror stacking: Energizers
Different duplet, your main their last: Dull
Different duplet, same main: Semi-Attraction

These are just some idea's. I bet you guys can improve on it!

I see, you renamed synflow as Insider and contraflow as Outsider. Not bad.

With your terminology, I would re-label the 6 relationships like this (based on this):

Same duplet, same stackings: Friendship (like Identicals)
Same duplet, your main, their last: Mentor-Mentee, Attraction & Sympathy subtype (you are like their Benefactor/Mentor)
Same duplet, your main, their second: Mentee-Mentor, Repulsion & Friendship subtype (you are like their Beneficiary/Mentee)

Different duplet, mirror stacking: Attraction (like Semi-Duality)
Different duplet, your main their last: Repulsion (like Conflict)
Different duplet, same main: Sympathy (similar to Quasi-identical)

Technically, there is no Stacking-Dual for anyone, because every stacking will either have the same strengths and weaknesses as you, or only partially balance out your weaknesses.

And if you go by which Intertype relations the stacking matches resemble the most, your view that the same stacking is the "best" would then be correct, for Identity is regarded to be the best relation out of those mentioned above.

Following that, order from "best" to "worst" based on correlating ITRs alone:

1. Same duplet, same stackings
2. Different duplet, mirror stacking
3. Same duplet, your main, their second
4. Same duplet, your main, their last
5. Different duplet, same main
6. Different duplet, your main their last

[mclane]

My theory at the moment about stacking compatibility is as follows:

Same first stack, different second stack: Ennegram Duality
Same stacking: Similar to Activity relations
Your first, their last; their first your last: Enneagram Conflict
Your first, their second, their first your last: Supervision
Your second stack, their first; their second stack your first: Semi-Duality
Your second stack, their first; their second stack your last: Benefit

This theory ignores the sync-flow/contra-flow theory (for the moment).

[lynn]

My theory at the moment about stacking compatibility is as follows:

Same first stack, different second stack: Ennegram Duality
Same stacking: Similar to Activity relations
Your first, their last; their first your last: Enneagram Conflict
Your first, their second, their first your last: Supervision
Your second stack, their first; their second stack your first: Semi-Duality
Your second stack, their first; their second stack your last: Benefit

This theory ignores the sync-flow/contra-flow theory (for the moment).

you pair up the businessman and the pirate; the best friend and the politician; the seeker who lives strictly on his/her personal outlook and the revolutionary, who wants to bring change in society as enneagram duals ? these are antagonistic energies in my opinion.

[mclane]

you pair up the businessman and the pirate; the best friend and the politician; the seeker who lives strictly on his/her personal outlook and the revolutionary, who wants to bring change in society as enneagram duals ? these are antagonistic energies in my opinion.

I know, but that's what I've observed (based on my own experiences as an sx/sp). The spice of life.

[Joy]

I'm interested in this topic... and I found this in this article: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-Compatibility

Sexual-Social + Sexual-Social (sx/so + sx/so): The two will have an intimate, powerful, and sexual relationship. They will be engaged in finding new, stimulating ways to demonstrate their energy and passion. They will understand each other’s aspirations, as both dedicate a portion of themselves to their worldly pursuits, and the two will likely work together to achieve a common vision.

Sounds lovely!

I've heard from a friend though that people with the same stacking usually have more of a friend vibe than a romantic spark between them. I'm curious how often each is the case...

[lynn]

this is not about stackings 'duality', but i wonder how the different ranges of each stacking affect interaction patterns with other stackings. e.g. i have the feeling that interaction of wanderer sx/sp would be much smoother with darkside so/sx than with lightside so/sx (in the latter case there could be a complete lack of 'common ground'.) or that lightside so/sx would get better along with strongside sp/so. if it's about working towards a common goal, for example.

?

[Jarno]

this is not about stackings 'duality', but i wonder how the different ranges of each stacking affect interaction patterns with other stackings. e.g. i have the feeling that interaction of wanderer sx/sp would be much smoother with darkside so/sx than with lightside so/sx (in the latter case there could be a complete lack of 'common ground'.) or that lightside so/sx would get better along with strongside sp/so. if it's about working towards a common goal, for example.

?

my experience is that same subtype works best, in the instincts theory. for example an so/SP goes along well with sx/SO and sp/SX