# Thread: Is there an "Instinctual Dual"? ITRs and Instincts

1. ## Is there an "Instinctual Dual"? ITRs and Instincts

Is there one instinctual stacking match that is superior to all the other ones, and could classify as your "soulmate" or most compatible match? Or in other words, is there something like an "Instinctual Dual"?

I have expanded upon the romantic compatibilities of the instinctual stackings before, but in that article I was not looking at the stackings from a Socionics angle, mostly.

However, there do appear to be similar dynamics concerning the instinctual stacking combinations and certain Intertype relations in Socionics.

There are two key principles from Socionics intertype relations which can be applied to the Enneagram instinctual matches: The principle of being very similar (or not) in strengths and weaknesses, and the principle of valuing the same things in life (or not).

In that manner, I do have observed and experienced dynamics between the stackings that are reminiscent of certain intertype relations. This article has described those dynamics to some extent already, however I find it is incomplete and could benefit from more input, which I provide in the following.

Same stacking: Identity
e.g Sp/Sx with Sp/Sx
These stackings are identical to each other. They value the same things in life. However, they also cannot help each other when it comes to their weaknesses. In that manner, they are like Socionics Identicals.

Same blindspot, opposite flow: Semi-Duality
e.g Sp/Sx with Sx/Sp
These stackings share similar values; they both have the same blindspot, but also are in opposite flows. They both can help the other at what they value the most, however being in opposite flows creates a certain dissonance – the other person's help or input is not always exactly appropriate. Also, they both share the same blindspot, a certain weakness, that neither can help the other at. In that manner, they are like Socionics Semi-Duals.

Same flow, different blindspot: Benefit
e.g Sp/Sx is the Benefactor of Sx/So; Sp/Sx is the Beneficiary of So/Sp
These stackings partially share the same values, sharing one instinct and the same flow. One stacking is proficient at what the other stacking is lacking in and valuing the most; however, the reverse doesn't apply. The other stacking is just as if not weaker and more negligent at what the former stacking is valuing and would benefit from some aid in. In that manner, they are like Socionics Benefactor and Beneficiary.

Same first instinct, opposite flow: Kindred
e.g Sp/Sx with Sp/So
These stackings can relate to each other on the basis of their shared first instinct. However, the second instinct of the other as well as their opposite flow can be disorienting or at worst irritating. In that manner, they are like Socionics Kindred partners.

Same second instinct, opposite flow: Quasi-Identity
e.g Sp/Sx with So/Sx
These stackings share similar weaknesses and strengths. However, being in opposite flows and blind to what the other values the most they hardly or not at all share the same values. In that manner, they are like Socionics Quasi-Identicals.

So to answer the question: No, there is actually no "Instinctual Dual".

There is not one ideal instinctual stacking for you. However, certain ones are surely a better fit than others, both romantically and platonically. And these dynamics do have an impact on "real" Intertype dynamics. For instance, opposite Quadra interactions can to an extent be more enjoyable when the individuals have an Identical stacking combination. Or favourable ITRs can be worsened by a Quasi-Identity stacking combination.

I tend to recommend everyone to stay away from Quasi-Identity stacking individuals when it comes to romantic relationships. Based on my observations, only Duality and Identity couples have made it work long-term (=marriage).

A similar principle seems to apply to Kindred stacking combinations; they are best paired up with individuals of the same "real" Quadra.

Bottom-line for dating: Do not date a Quasi-Identity stacking when you are looking for a happy long-term relationship (esp. marriage), unless you are Duals or Identicals. Be careful about dating an individual who has the Kindred stacking and is neither your "real" Dual nor Identical; a relationship like that is unlikely going to last. The other three stackings are more or less good to go for, depending on your personal preferences.

Friendship-wise, an Identical stacking person is probably the easiest and most enjoyable to get along with. All the other stackings are more or less good to go for, apart from the Quasi-Identity one; being of the same Quadra is likely essential for it to work fine.

If you want to read more like this and be up-to-date, follow my blog here.

2. I had a similar kind of thread two months ago. Maybe you find some additional stuff there.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ckings-duality

3. Originally Posted by Jarno
I had a similar kind of thread two months ago. Maybe you find some additional stuff there.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ckings-duality
Yeah, that thread was my inspiration, haha.

4. Kindred seems like a very accurate analogy for "shares the dominant instinct" pairs, especially since the two will always be flipped in terms of syn/contraflow.

5. Originally Posted by Cassandra

Same blindspot, opposite flow: Semi-Duality
e.g Sp/Sx with Sx/Sp
These stackings share similar values; they both have the same blindspot, but also are in opposite flows. They both can help the other at what they value the most, however being in opposite flows creates a certain dissonance – the other person's help or input is not always exactly appropriate. Also, they both share the same blindspot, a certain weakness, that neither can help the other at. In that manner, they are like Socionics Semi-Duals.
I think these tend to overall be more like Quasi-Identical than anything, or possibly Illusory. None of the stackings relations match up well to socionics ITR for basic mathematical reasons.

6. I'm an sx/so, which means I know a lot of people and I use my (So) contacts to try to make one, good, intimate (Sx) connection. I don't really care that much about material security, although I seem to have some of it.

I recently went out with an ESI who is probably Sp/Sx. In other words, she uses her intimate, sexual side to try to secure material resources.

We had just sat down to have some coffee and she said "All the women that I work with are younger and prettier than me."
She said this while looking pretty good to me. ESIs know how to put together an appealing "look" for themselves.
"These women all make more money than I do because they are willing to do things for the bosses. All the people I know, think that I work with a bunch of prostitutes." And then she stopped talking and just looked at me, like, OK say something, dummy.

What the hell are you supposed to do with that as a conversation lead? I mean, what is she saying here?

I find meeting new people to be fascinating. Everyone is different in some amazing, unexpected, and intriguing way.

7. Originally Posted by Adam Strange
"These women all make more money than I do because they are willing to do things for the bosses. All the people I know, think that I work with a bunch of prostitutes." And then she stopped talking and just looked at me, like, OK say something, dummy.

What the hell are you supposed to do with that as a conversation lead? I mean, what is she saying here?
This joke sounds like her hint to you to make her a compliment like: "At least they have one person working there who is both good-looking and respectable."
She raises her insecurity about her looks and youthfulness, which you as her date should soothe. In addition to that, she points out her Fi-principle of not degrading herself to a quick fuck by her boss just to climb the ranks, but that she actually has morals and the grit to realize her ambitions, unlike those sluts. She would like to hear from you that you share the same values, in order to know that the two of you are on the same page.

Originally Posted by Adam Strange
She said this while looking pretty good to me.
You would have earned her favour, if you have spoken your mind, yet only if you had done so before she said: "All the people I know, think that I work with a bunch of prostitutes." If on the other hand you would have done so afterwards without complimenting her on her personality, you would have instead implied that she is just as pretty as the prostitutes and that this is the only reason that you're dating her.
When you're making a compliment on your date's looks, it's generally a good rule of thumb to always include a compliment on their personality and/or intelligence. Modern women want to be appreciated for both their brains and beauty.

Also, if this conversation is the sole reason why you label her as SP/sx, you might be mistyping her, because she's actually expressing how she, unlike her colleagues, is not exploiting her looks to bribe her boss for a quick and dirty promotion. This doesn't mean that it's impossible for her to be SP/sx, but just that I would be on the fence right now what instinctual typing she has, until further experiences tip the scales one way or another.

Originally Posted by Adam Strange
I find meeting new people to be fascinating. Everyone is different in some amazing, unexpected, and intriguing way.
Same

8. I agree with this. Quasi-Identical has been the worse for me and I notice I really bump heads with that instinct the most. Romantic and friendship wise. Me being the Benito art is hit or miss. Everything else is usually pretty good.

9. Originally Posted by Olimpia
Same first instinct, opposite flow: Kindred
e.g Sp/Sx with Sp/So
These stackings can relate to each other on the basis of their shared first instinct. However, the second instinct of the other as well as their opposite flow can be disorienting or at worst irritating. In that manner, they are like Socionics Kindred partners.
The second instinct is rather neutral whereas the dominant has many neuroses surrounding it. Therefore, it is more irritating for someone to have your dominant as their second because they treat your religion so flippantly.
That's one of the only substantial instinctual type dynamics I've noticed as of yet..
Tbh, in contrast with Socionics, I think the idea of ascribing instinctual/enneagram ITRs misses the point of the systems..

10. Jeez. Both of you two are giving me flashbacks to my arguments with my LIE.

Originally Posted by Adam Strange
I'm an sx/so, which means I know a lot of people and I use my (So) contacts to try to make one, good, intimate (Sx) connection. I don't really care that much about material security, although I seem to have some of it.

I recently went out with an ESI who is probably Sp/Sx. In other words, she uses her intimate, sexual side to try to secure material resources.

We had just sat down to have some coffee and she said "All the women that I work with are younger and prettier than me."
She said this while looking pretty good to me. ESIs know how to put together an appealing "look" for themselves.
Just because you think she looks good doesn't mean SHE sincerely views herself that way. What I'm saying is...you shouldn't disbelieve SHE is being sincere simply because your own judgment tells you that she is prettier than she is giving herself credit for. You can't just go and "run over/override" her personal feelings/thoughts/views because you don't personally agree with her, thus you assume she must also not believe what she is saying. That is just being invalidating of her personal perspectives, thoughts, feelings, etc.

That excessive trust in your own judgment (going with what you think as though it overrides others' judgment) ties into being used to being in the driver's seat of things in life, btw.

Hell, it might not even be insecurity; she may be perfectly fine with them being prettier than her. In her mind, a "who is prettier" egotistical competition may not be the point she is trying to make when she says that, and it may merely imply something about the character of someone instead (I don't have enough context to take a guess at what, but maybe she just meant that they have favor over her because they are prettier and that reflects poorly on the character of the bosses or something). (She may be failing to consider alternative views: that others might not think they are prettier than her, and that is only her personal perspective, thus her assessment of their character is too Ne PoLR.)

Oh, also, Sx is not sexuality. It's intensity, the craving for stimulation, etc. Deep and intense connections, or mentally stimulating learning materials when others think that kind of stuff is draining, or intensity in whateverblahblah. It's being drawn into, focused on "the magnet in the room," etc...which is why you will a lot of times notice Sx/Sp's unintentionally ignoring everyone else besides those they're personally interested in/drawn to and forgetting the rest of the group even exists.

"These women all make more money than I do because they are willing to do things for the bosses. All the people I know, think that I work with a bunch of prostitutes." And then she stopped talking and just looked at me, like, OK say something, dummy.

What the hell are you supposed to do with that as a conversation lead? I mean, what is she saying here?

I find meeting new people to be fascinating. Everyone is different in some amazing, unexpected, and intriguing way.
The bolded is precisely what I would've asked in that situation. You didn't need to know what to say, just needed to be able to genuinely listen and hear her. If you had asked questions, you might've also uncovered her real motives. The whole "listen more, two ears and one mouth" thing is something I used to argue with my LIE about in the past. Just because you hear what someone is saying doesn't mean you are actually hearing them - their heart, their voice, the person they are, their deeper self. It's almost as though people get too focused on weird Fe "rules for being good at socialization" to truly hear the person who is beneath the Fe dynamics and social rituals. The Fe ignoring ESI probably doesn't even care enough about those dynamics to operate within those rules, and would rather just be blunt and authentic about what they're saying while ignoring all of those rituals which may seem very shallow, hollow, and superficial to ESIs.

You have to be kind of cautious when judging an ESI according to Fe-ish social nuances (which they're not bothering to operate by, even) because when you misunderstand their motives, you would not only be misreading the person they truly are, but you would do so in a way that can be very potent: judging them as though they're some way that actually conflicts with their values in reality, since it goes against their highly valued Fi's emotional sincerity. It can be taken pretty personally, therefore, and feel as though you don't take the time to listen or know them at all, and are really bad at understanding their character that they pride themselves in, the core things that make them who they are. ESIs aren't really the subtle hinting types to begin with. One of the most frustrating experiences in communication is to be direct, straightforward, and saying exactly what you think/feel, and still being unheard because someone assumes what it "really means" and trusts their own judgment/assumptions about what YOU think/feel (which they are not the ones personally experiencing), than listening to how YOU feel from YOUR own mouth/words. It's basically assuming someone's thoughts/feelings instead of listening to them tell you flat out, which...for the ESI, feels like shouting at a fucking wall (you are the wall) and being invisible to you, since they're communicating directly and still not being heard as-is. They may see themselves as being "clear" in their communication because they are BLUNT ("I've said it plain as day, what don't you understand? I seriously don't know how I could break it down any further than that, I've said it as clear as it can get")...the thing is, bluntness may not actually be the same thing as clarity in speech, in reality, so you have to ask questions. Fi is very, "still waters run deep." We may willingly open up about those depths, but it requires depth in hearing. As in, more thorough listening. Otherwise, we're not only wasting our breath, but opening up backfires by making us even more misunderstood. The more we expose, the more things aren't heard thoroughly; assumptions replace truths, and we feel as though others don't really understand us the way we understand them. Feeling as though no one really understands you gets lonely...in that, "can't connect with others to the extent that I need to" type of way. This is basically the Fi Base curse. Need deep connections, but no one manages to understand those depths enough to connect to those depths.

Originally Posted by Armitage
This joke sounds like her hint to you to make her a compliment like: "At least they have one person working there who is both good-looking and respectable."
She raises her insecurity about her looks and youthfulness, which you as her date should soothe. In addition to that, she points out her Fi-principle of not degrading herself to a quick fuck by her boss just to climb the ranks, but that she actually has morals and the grit to realize her ambitions, unlike those sluts. She would like to hear from you that you share the same values, in order to know that the two of you are on the same page.
This reminds me a lot of my LIE. Over time, I have helped him to learn not to read into peoples' motives so swiftly. By jumping to conclusions about peoples' inner workings, he was misjudging me big time. That is actually part of how we first began to get closer, even. He and another person ended up hurting me by misjudging me big time. I tried to be protective of others when a certain person was trying to manipulate them, and he jumped to the conclusion that I was just being vindictive toward the person I was shielding others from. There were many, many instances like this...so many that for the first year I knew him, I basically concluded he couldn't understand me and I should just stop talking with him about things pertaining to myself. He has shared that his regrets, guilt, etc. from hurting me with that was what helped him to change. (The reason it was hurtful is that I was often behind the scenes enduring pains for the sake of others, being vulnerable to them, trying to help them, trying to "do the right thing," trying to be a good person...only for those exact efforts to be misconstrued as ill intentions, talked badly about behind my back for it, etc. and I was basically just like "why did I even trust people?") He became slower to judge and more open-minded.

For all you know, this girl may have just been venting. If she really is ESI, she was probably being straightforward and blunt. That is the way ESIs are: we pride ourselves in our emotional sincerity, authenticity, being candid, blunt, and direct. She might've just been annoyed by their willingness to let their virtues kick the bucket like China Town turtles just for job security instead of remaining true to who they are, which is a rather Fi Ego value. Regardless of whether that's what it was, though...your statement here assumes she was insincere about her (subjective, personal) perspective that they're prettier than her. Maybe she was just conveying a point with that (one we lack context for figuring out).

ou would have earned her favour, if you have spoken your mind, yet only if you had done so before she said: "All the people I know, think that I work with a bunch of prostitutes." If on the other hand you would have done so afterwards without complimenting her on her personality, you would have instead implied that she is just as pretty as the prostitutes and that this is the only reason that you're dating her.
When you're making a compliment on your date's looks, it's generally a good rule of thumb to always include a compliment on their personality and/or intelligence. Modern women want to be appreciated for both their brains and beauty.
ESIs are very blunt. Someone who is blunt generally isn't the type to play complex unspoken mind games or go through social rituals like these. It conflicts with Fi Base, AKA the emotional sincerity we pride ourselves in.

11. Originally Posted by Neuroplasticity
That excessive trust in your own judgment (going with what you think as though it overrides others' judgment) ties into being used to being in the driver's seat of things in life, btw.

This reminds me a lot of my LIE. Over time, I have helped him to learn not to read into peoples' motives so swiftly. By jumping to conclusions about peoples' inner workings, he was misjudging me big time. That is actually part of how we first began to get closer, even. He and another person ended up hurting me by misjudging me big time.
Dang, I think that you're very right about all of this. Oof, it's pretty confronting to admit that I was so wrong.

Originally Posted by Neuroplasticity
Regardless of whether that's what it was, though...your statement here assumes she was insincere about her (subjective, personal) perspective that they're prettier than her. Maybe she was just conveying a point with that (one we lack context for figuring out).
By thinking it to be an expression of insecurity I don't think that she was insincere, though. I think that she meant what she said, no doubt about.
Originally Posted by Neuroplasticity
ESIs are very blunt. Someone who is blunt generally isn't the type to play complex unspoken mind games or go through social rituals like these. It conflicts with Fi Base, AKA the emotional sincerity we pride ourselves in.
Regardless, you're probably right about her motives, or at least I was mistaken about them. It might have very well been the case indeed that she was venting.

Originally Posted by Neuroplasticity
Oh, also, Sx is not sexuality. It's intensity, the craving for stimulation, etc. Deep and intense connections, or mentally stimulating learning materials when others think that kind of stuff is draining, or intensity in whateverblahblah. It's being drawn into, focused on "the magnet in the room," etc...which is why you will a lot of times notice Sx/Sp's unintentionally ignoring everyone else besides those they're personally interested in/drawn to and forgetting the rest of the group even exists.
I have been pondering forever if I'm SX/so, or SO/sx instead, and still am not sure. The only thing that I do know for certain is that I undervalue sp.

12. Originally Posted by Armitage
I have been pondering forever if I'm SX/so, or SO/sx instead, and still am not sure. The only thing that I do know for certain is that I undervalue sp.
@Armitage, we might be similar in that respect. Maybe an LIE trait?

https://imgur.com/gqyjlSG

13. @Adam Strange, this doesn't clarify much for me at all: https://i.imgur.com/OAieDT3.png
I still feel like SX/so, because for true love I would move to a different country, even though this means I shall only be able to see my friend groups online from then on. Socializing is for me a means to form closer, individual, and intimate bonds with people. I think my results are mostly biased by the tests ubiquitous use of the word "intense", which I wouldn't necessarily describe myself with, but more passionate, enthusiastic, and lively.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•