Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 271

Thread: EII-LSE Duality (INFj-ESTj)

  1. #41
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,140
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    People with more than sufficient money, power and or status.

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    ...... among the elite?

    Elite what?

  2. #42
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    3,297
    Mentioned
    228 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I wish I knew more duals to judge.

  3. #43
    Saoirse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    San Junipero
    TIM
    EII 9w1 so/sx
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    sometimes I cant tell if EII is hitting on some deeper truth I just can't comprehend

    or they're simply arguing for its own sake

    either way it seems like they want to fail or otherwise make things out to be impossible, and I just don't like or understand that tendency, as it appears to me, about them

    I do think LSE gravitates more towards ESE and IEE as a rule though. I feel like LSE/ESE combo is relatively common
    I dunno if you're referring to my posts in this thread, but I wasn't trying to make LSE-EII duality sound impossible. It's just not as natural as OP seemed to be implying, IMO. I even specifically listed how I think it could work despite not being natural.

    Generally EIIs don't argue for its own sake. We find it very stressful while some logical types don't notice there is an argument at all or even think it's a bonding experience. This is even more the case for EII 9s. I really lost it with the LSE I dated for a while cos I was sick of him starting petty arguments over nothing, but when I told him how stressful it was, he didn't think we had any arguments at all. My best LSE friend argued with me on typology a lot when I first brought it up with our friend group, which really stressed me out, but the next day, he said it was a good discussion.

    But we'll defend what we think is the truth or what is right very stubbornly...

  4. #44
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,936
    Mentioned
    484 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    naw i wasnt thinking you were guilty of that at all, rather just thinking back to some interractions with EII in the past

    i was actually thinking about it earlier to myself and I think the conclusion i came to was that they dont want "solutions" in the technical sense they're just looking for emotional understanding but that goes against my innate proclivity to want to just fix things and move on so when i start offering stuff they shoot it down not because theyre bad ideas but because theyre trying to make sure i understand the emotional state, which is a kind of sadness or despair or whatever and they want that to be accepted as is

    i dont think theyre actually against solutions ultimately either, i think they just want to establish genuine mutual understanding first, so they take any attempt that feels like bypassing that as an invitation to use Ne to reframe things in order to better convey the emotional state, but it just comes off as argumentative from my point of view, which I understand your point and it is well taken that they hate arguing, its just a big miscommunication basically because theyre not trying to argue theyre simply trying to make themselves understood

  5. #45
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,963
    Mentioned
    697 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have to agree with @Economist that EII-LSE duality is not really "natural". Together with LII-ESE, it is the least "natural" pairing; at least when it comes to people's dating standards in the real world, outside of Socionics.

    I can take my own parents as examples here. My father is LSE, my mother is ESE. Neither one of them ended up with their Dual. Neither one of them "looks" or acts like their Dual.

    My LSE father is additionally a Sp/So 3. My mother fit into the general beauty ideal in his culture. She was young, fit, blonde, blue-eyed, and merry. He was attracted to that, quite simply. (Most 3s are attracted to women who fit the cultural ideal, more or less.) When it comes to personality and thoughts, he does value the movies of EII film directors a lot, I have noticed. He introduced me to them years ago. He's also read a book written by an EII, and he almost never reads. So he does appreciate their work and thoughts a lot, but he wouldn't date anyone like them of course, being straight (they are all men).

    Female EIIs in this day and age (and culture) are typically very "androgynous" in behavior and physical presentation, and very feminist. Most masculine or traditional men are not drawn to that. My LSE father is fairly traditional when it comes to what kind of appearance and behavior he likes in a woman. In my experience, most LSE men are rather traditional. A modern SJW EII would not fit into that. They wouldn't feel attracted. And their viewpoints would repel each other. For an EII, a traditional LSE with a "patriarchy-mindset" would turn into a Conflictor in their minds, simply because their Fi values are incompatible and opposing. It is no wonder most modern feminist EII women end up with a fellow Delta NF, or once in a while an SLI-Si in touch with their Fi, or an ESI-Fi. While most LSEs end up with an ISFx or SLI.
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  6. #46
    Saoirse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    San Junipero
    TIM
    EII 9w1 so/sx
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    actually, seeing this again..
    @Economist
    "LSE is instinctively attracted to power, beauty, and status, people who are talking charismatically and in control"

    That sounds so..... beta....? Or, enneagram 3?
    I do like people that are doing significant things, but, that sounds mostly like an EII's worst fears about being inadequate than what I would say LSEs are 'instinctively attracted to".
    Sure, maybe I generalized too much from my LSE 3 so/sp friend, and I am on the insecure side. 3 and social-first are common in enneagram types for LSEs though, so it's still relevant. Relations often don't work as stipulated in socionics theory, due to enneagram and idiosyncrasies, or even just the limits of current socionics theory, so I think it's useful not to get too caught up in stereotyping or over-romanticizing dual relations.

    Edit: or due to societal reasons as @Medusa points out above

    I also want to re-emphasize I think it's more of a problem for initial encounters/short-term situations. I really don't think LSEs, power-hungry enneagram type or not, are instinctively drawn to/pick out EIIs at a party/in a class and try to talk to them (unless the LSEs are ones who are into socionics). But if they see an EII working hard, being reliable & trustworthy, demonstrating good sense--over a substantial period of time (which is hard cos often there's no reason for them to keep interacting for that long)--then they might notice and like them more.
    Last edited by Saoirse; 07-28-2017 at 06:17 PM.

  7. #47
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    3,297
    Mentioned
    228 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    androgynous ftw!

  8. #48
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Economist View Post
    Sure, maybe I generalized too much from my LSE 3 so/sp friend, and I am on the insecure side. 3 and social-first are common in enneagram types for LSEs though, so it's still relevant. Relations often don't work as stipulated in socionics theory, due to enneagram and idiosyncrasies, or even just the limits of current socionics theory, so I think it's useful not to get too caught up in stereotyping or over-romanticizing dual relations.
    Mm, well I'm "post-duality" as of several years ago, so, I don't really have those concerns I guess. I'm not attempting to defend an image of duality, rather, offer counterpoints to what is being said.

    as far as "Relations often don't work as stipulated in socionics", I would argue that the profiles expressing particular pre-determined outcome for relationships are misguided and only useful in the context of explaining psychological lopsidedness and related stresses, mhm.


    I also want to re-emphasize
    Re-emphasize all you want.

    I think it's more of a problem for initial encounters/short-term situations. I really don't think LSEs, power-hungry enneagram type or not, are instinctively drawn to/pick out EIIs at a party/in a class and try to talk to them (unless the LSEs are ones who are into socionics). But if they see an EII working hard, being reliable & trustworthy, demonstrating good sense--over a substantial period of time (which is hard cos often there's no reason for them to keep interacting for that long)--then they might notice and like them more.
    The irony is that I find all of this fitting into the same general slate of stereotyping that you are basically trying to be against, above. I don't think many of these generalities really hold or are worth analyzing or drawing much from. I can see that being a trend and even a reality, but it's sort of like... what is the point, other than justifying someone's dismay or hopelessness.

    Yes, i think there is a default acclimation that takes place with all dualities, by nature of people being lopsided.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  9. #49
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medusa View Post
    I have to agree with @Economist that EII-LSE duality is not really "natural". Together with LII-ESE, it is the least "natural" pairing; at least when it comes to people's dating standards in the real world, outside of Socionics.
    I think this is a rather arbitrary classification. How can any duality be "natural"?

    In a typical or traditional sense, Te dominant men and Fi dom women were portrayed as "American" and "classic", even on the same par as the "ESE wife" trope.



    Female EIIs in this day and age (and culture) are typically very "androgynous" in behavior and physical presentation, and very feminist. Most masculine or traditional men are not drawn to that.
    I think these are very strong generalizations.


    My LSE father is fairly traditional when it comes to what kind of appearance and behavior he likes in a woman. In my experience, most LSE men are rather traditional. A modern SJW EII would not fit into that. They wouldn't feel attracted. And their viewpoints would repel each other. For an EII, a traditional LSE with a "patriarchy-mindset" would turn into a Conflictor in their minds, simply because their Fi values are incompatible and opposing.
    I think it's bad practice to associate types as inherently being of a default political disposition.

    It is no wonder most modern feminist EII women end up with a fellow Delta NF, or once in a while an SLI-Si in touch with their Fi, or an ESI-Fi. While most LSEs end up with an ISFx or SLI.
    I think there's some relevance to people "taking the easier route" and preferring relations that have some ego block commonality.
    But I can't really say I've seen what you've said as the case, especially in this "it's no wonder most' tone. If by "modern" you mean" current young people seem to be this way - ok, sure. I would not say that holds true in a broader sense of things, although yes, there will be pockets where conservatism and liberalism is polarized within communities.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  10. #50
    nyessss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    TIM
    female
    Posts
    160
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    I think this is a rather arbitrary classification. How can any duality be "natural"?
    I think it's bad practice to associate types as inherently being of a default political disposition.
    Yes, not all feeling of attraction and repulsion are created equal.

  11. #51
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,558
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I kindly disagree

    maybe this is an unpopular perception of LSEs but I tend to regard them as soft-hearted people, they're rough on the surface but there's a childlike naivete underlying their rough exterior. strong capacity for love. you won't hear it but you'll feel it, they'd walk through fire for you, they'd walk through fire for their children. chivalrous and protective. it just feels like, I dunno, the translator that connects their brain to their mouth, it's kind of broken, but they have good intentions. their delivery is just poor, which is why they're paired up with Delta NFs. I think Delta NFs place way more value on intentions (and actions) than words. that, along with their natural admiration for goodness, is what draws them to Delta STs. I think my parents fall under the EII-LSE category and, in spite of the fact that my dad has a hard time verbalizing his love for her, I know that my mom knows it's there, he doesn't tell her, he shows her that he loves her. they spend all their time together. they wouldn't have it any other way. I think this is the ultimate "settle down and have a family together" duality. it may be hard to get going (for the aforementioned reasons listed on this thread) but once it gets going it doesn't really stop.
    awldjkwepierpgokqweølfqøerlkfdaergnhtm¨å¨æ''-we-fqpoeufasdøflthøljwtlhkjrøtlhhhhhhhhhhsapfoeporipr
    "WELL I'M SORRY THAT I LIKE TO HAVE OPEN COMMUNICATION IN MY RELATIONSHIPS" - Galen 2k13

  12. #52
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    5,789
    Mentioned
    689 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Mm, well I'm "post-duality" as of several years ago, so, I don't really have those concerns I guess. I'm not attempting to defend an image of duality, rather, offer counterpoints to what is being said.
    @UDP, what do you mean when you say you are "post-duality"?

    Do you no longer believe in duality?
    Are you past a dual relationship?
    Are you in a relationship with someone who is not a dual?
    Are you no longer seeking a dual relationship?
    Any or none of the above?

    What exactly do you mean? Please explain.

  13. #53
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,936
    Mentioned
    484 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've heard it said elsewhere that "people are subconsciously oriented to think that their dual looks best." Do you think that is true? Perhaps because the integral of USA is said to be LIE maybe there's a culture ideal of gamma SF women that spreads to other types?

  14. #54

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,686
    Mentioned
    503 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Economist View Post
    I also want to re-emphasize I think it's more of a problem for initial encounters/short-term situations. I really don't think LSEs, power-hungry enneagram type or not, are instinctively drawn to/pick out EIIs at a party/in a class and try to talk to them (unless the LSEs are ones who are into socionics). But if they see an EII working hard, being reliable & trustworthy, demonstrating good sense--over a substantial period of time (which is hard cos often there's no reason for them to keep interacting for that long)--then they might notice and like them more.
    I read in strat's ESTj/INFj duality article that if EII offers helpful stuff, LSE will notice them fast. Maybe a good tip for you

    Otherwise, I actually agree that all those other factors mentioned in this thread have to be taken into account wrt the topic of noticing a dual or not.

  15. #55
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,558
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Medusa that's all bullshit, really

    it seems like something self-proclaimed intuitives tell themselves to make themselves feel better for being unattractive/not doing well in the dating game.
    awldjkwepierpgokqweølfqøerlkfdaergnhtm¨å¨æ''-we-fqpoeufasdøflthøljwtlhkjrøtlhhhhhhhhhhsapfoeporipr
    "WELL I'M SORRY THAT I LIKE TO HAVE OPEN COMMUNICATION IN MY RELATIONSHIPS" - Galen 2k13

  16. #56
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,936
    Mentioned
    484 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah the whole idea behind duality is they appreciate you for you... if you try to compensate for low d functions with more effort whos to say you're not just overworking for no return on an aspect your dual doesn't even care about. the whole problem with low d functions is you cant accurately assess information on that channel so you tend to miss the mark by either over or under compensating. so like how 1d Te tends to overwork for poor results, and gets beat out by higher dimensional users putting in half the effort getting twice the reward, trying to focus on sensory aspects as an intuitive is just pissing your effort away and still losing out on that front to sensors anyway. thats why theyre sensors. the point of socionics has always been to just be the best version of yourself and theres someone out there whos looking for precisely that, not some competition wherein you need to play someone elses game or risk losing out. you wouldnt want a partner that was looking for that anyway. youd just get some shithead with all the wrong priorities in life and youd be running just to stand still for them

    the point is not to be a slob or whatever, but to simply try your best (focus on your creative focus on your creative focus on your creative) and not worry about your place in the imagined hierarchy after that

    I feel like practical rather than theoretical tips on how to improve sensing would go a lot further, because the theory is all wrong headed. this whole thing is like a microcosm for "stick to your strong functions for optimal results"

  17. #57
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,558
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    intuition = reduced physical energy + heightened mental energy. that + their detachment from the real world = their appearance comes secondary to their personality. they usually view their appearance through the lens of utility ("what can my appearance do for me?") [aside from EIIs] in general Ne-egos only care about being labeled attractive by a handful of individuals (i.e. their partner) which works in their favor since Ne-Si valuing quadras tend to prize "natural beauty" above "artificial beauty" ("divorced from aggressive sexuality") and Si-egos are whizzes at spotting beauty in other people ("you may not shower, but you've got beautiful eyes!") which is the sweetest of compliments to Ne-egos, but their ultimate strength is still their personality. ime it's usually Ne-egos who have specific (even obscure) preferences wrt physical appearances, whereas Si-egos are drawn to wacky and witty infantile behavior, which would equate to the Ne-ego's "personality" ("i may not shower, but look what i can do!" [does a handstand and falls off the pier]) on top of that, intuitives tend to emanate an aura of "exclusivity". they've got a penchant for controlling other people's perception of them, which makes it sound like sensing types have bad personalities, but that's not the case either. it's more like, one man's "whatever" is another man's "hell yeah".

    that could be BS too but it seems to work with the theory that duals are "made for each other" [alternatively: "made to find each other attractive"]
    awldjkwepierpgokqweølfqøerlkfdaergnhtm¨å¨æ''-we-fqpoeufasdøflthøljwtlhkjrøtlhhhhhhhhhhsapfoeporipr
    "WELL I'M SORRY THAT I LIKE TO HAVE OPEN COMMUNICATION IN MY RELATIONSHIPS" - Galen 2k13

  18. #58
    Kids Turned Out Fine
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    TIM
    3w4
    Posts
    9,076
    Mentioned
    709 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paranoid View Post
    intuition = reduced physical energy + heightened mental energy. that + their detachment from the real world = their appearance comes secondary to their personality. they usually view their appearance through the lens of utility ("what can my appearance do for me?") [aside from EIIs] in general Ne-egos only care about being labeled attractive by a handful of individuals (i.e. their partner) which works in their favor since Ne-Si valuing quadras tend to prize "natural beauty" above "artificial beauty" ("divorced from aggressive sexuality") and Si-egos are whizzes at spotting beauty in other people ("you may not shower, but you've got beautiful eyes!") which is the sweetest of compliments to Ne-egos, but their ultimate strength is still their personality. ime it's usually Ne-egos who have specific (even obscure) preferences wrt physical appearances, whereas Si-egos are drawn to wacky and witty infantile behavior ("personality"). on top of that, intuitives tend to emanate an aura of "exclusivity". they've got a penchant for controlling other people's perception of them, which makes it sound like sensing types have bad personalities, but that's not the case either. far from it, actually. it's more like, one man's "whatever" is another man's "hell yeah".

    that could be BS too but it seems to work with the theory that duals are "made for each other" [alternatively: "made to find each other attractive"]
    Hehe I love this.

  19. #59
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,936
    Mentioned
    484 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah I think thats brilliant, bravo

  20. #60
    Saoirse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    San Junipero
    TIM
    EII 9w1 so/sx
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    The irony is that I find all of this fitting into the same general slate of stereotyping that you are basically trying to be against, above.
    I wasn't saying the theory/stereotypes are completely/180-degrees wrong. Just trying to point out the imperfections in practice

    I don't think many of these generalities really hold or are worth analyzing or drawing much from. I can see that being a trend and even a reality, but it's sort of like... what is the point, other than justifying someone's dismay or hopelessness.
    Quote Originally Posted by paranoid View Post
    it seems like something self-proclaimed intuitives tell themselves to make themselves feel better for being unattractive/not doing well in the dating game.
    Guuuys why did this thread turn kind of hostile

    Medusa and I weren't trying to say LSEs are dumb or shallow, just that things don't click between LSEs and EIIs right from the beginning necessarily, for numerous possible reasons, which is true of all dual relations, especially between people who haven't trained themselves to look for their dual. This is just providing another angle to consider in response to OP's question so that we have a variety of perspectives in the thread.

    My LSE best friend is one of the most woke people I've ever met, and he took care of me in a crisis during which no one else was there for me, none of my EII best friends even, so I know LSEs aren't dumb or shallow. But the Te/Se world is different from the Fi/Ni world so an LSE who doesn't know socionics wouldn't immediately notice and like an EII (or vice versa). (Gulenko's Model G defines types through their 4-D IEs, so there's also a theory that stipulates the importance of Se for LSEs.)

    I'm sure I sound like I'm beating a dead horse now, but I think we can all agree that all types have awesome people, and duality is cool but not super smooth and perfect.

  21. #61
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,936
    Mentioned
    484 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    LSEs arent dumb or shallow, except adam strange, and because of that an EII doesn't need to try to beat out gamma SFs, unless theyre trying to win adam strange, in order to attract one, because, unless theyre adam strange, that's not what LSE is looking for

    medusa and adam strange are just in a fucked up knot that if you can unravel socionics makes way more sense and EII and LSE come out a lot cleaner for it

  22. #62
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,558
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    nah, you're right. i can see how that'd come across as hostile (i shouldn't have used the word "bullshit", it was tactless of me)

    i think i've just grown tired of people falling back on socionics as an excuse for being (or not being) weak/strong in a particular area, when it's clear that it's just being used as a tool to justify one's weaknesses, independent from socionics, rather a humble acknowledgement of one's weaknesses. i agree that "duality" isn't impervious to criticism, but neither are potentially misled perspectives. that post in particular didn't seem to hold relevance to socionics, it seemed more self-focused-projected-outwards, so my issue lied in the spreading of potentially inaccurate information. [wrt medusa's post, not yours]

    i don't think you're beating a dead horse either. you're equally justified in clarifying your point of view as the rest of us are justified in clarifying our own. i agree that there needs to be a sense of tact present, otherwise nobody will listen to anybody and then we've got gundam 2.0 with, like, robots and stuff.
    Last edited by wasp; 07-29-2017 at 06:03 PM. Reason: omg my inner canuck is coming out
    awldjkwepierpgokqweølfqøerlkfdaergnhtm¨å¨æ''-we-fqpoeufasdøflthøljwtlhkjrøtlhhhhhhhhhhsapfoeporipr
    "WELL I'M SORRY THAT I LIKE TO HAVE OPEN COMMUNICATION IN MY RELATIONSHIPS" - Galen 2k13

  23. #63

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,686
    Mentioned
    503 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    LSEs arent dumb or shallow, except adam strange, and because of that an EII doesn't need to try to beat out gamma SFs, unless theyre trying to win adam strange, in order to attract one, because, unless theyre adam strange, that's not what LSE is looking for

    medusa and adam strange are just in a fucked up knot that if you can unravel socionics makes way more sense and EII and LSE come out a lot cleaner for it
    Lol people are always going to be a fucked up knot from the socionics pov if you try to apply the model on specifics without verifying the actual internal motives of people. Doing what you do, that is, using the socionics model to magically find the motives of people is just going to lead deeper and deeper into the rabbithole.

  24. #64
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paranoid View Post
    I kindly disagree
    .. with what?
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  25. #65
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paranoid View Post
    maybe this is an unpopular perception of LSEs but I tend to regard them as soft-hearted people, they're rough on the surface but there's a childlike naivete underlying their rough exterior. strong capacity for love.
    I don't see how that could be anything other than stereotypical. What would the popular opinion be, then?
    LSE are your hardass boss control freaks?

    I think this is the ultimate "settle down and have a family together" duality. it may be hard to get going (for the aforementioned reasons listed on this thread) but once it gets going it doesn't really stop.
    I would say the nature of duality is like the last sentence.
    Activity partners and other more easier to access dynamics seem to happen "faster". Duality tends to have to have some sticking-power or certain interactions, to an extent. However, that's somewhat assuming that no party has any experience with the nature of the other person, at all. I think you can develop a cumulative sense of your dual's compatibility over time, even if you don't know what socionics is. I could do this with delta NFs in general at least, prior to socionics.

    The first sentence (in quote) may be somewhat more rational Si valuing as a trope, mm.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  26. #66
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    @UDP, what do you mean when you say you are "post-duality"?

    Do you no longer believe in duality?
    Are you past a dual relationship?
    Are you in a relationship with someone who is not a dual?
    Are you no longer seeking a dual relationship?
    Any or none of the above?

    What exactly do you mean? Please explain.
    This was specifically in response to @Economists "so I think it's useful not to get too caught up in stereotyping or over-romanticizing dual relations."


    I'm not sure if I'm suggested as defending or romancing duality, but in my mind I've moved past that a long time ago. I can see how it would appear like that here, though.

    Post-duality in this usage meant I don't really care about it either way. I was at certain points anti- or pro-duality, and now I'm returning towards a general ambivalence, with a slight sense of greater appreciation for it now. Not that the intertype relation is particularly world-beating, but really appreciating the dynamics I do have with my dual friends.

    I've been in serious relationships with people that were not my dual, and, trope-confirmingly so, almost married one of them. I've been in periods where I thought my dual was explicitly NOT the best match for me; even after becoming familiar with socionics. I thought they were too boring or risk averse or unable to deal with hardship or exertion, etc, in a more categorical way. I still might see some that way, but I don't generally throw that around types as a whole - I think that's not very good practice.


    Do I no longer believe in duality? I mean, I "believe" in socionics, which necessitates there are different types, and some of them have arrangements of their elements in ways that are referred to as duality. Sure. Do I think duality is the best/only option for a relationship romantically? No.

    I think people will go through rotations about what they want from other people in terms of relationships, to a degree. I think it's best to keep that outside of what socionics says about information processing and metabolism. A lot of the tropes about what a type is or isn't or how they act or don't or should are all kind of..... arbitrary, and somewhat Thought-Catalogue in their overall substance.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  27. #67
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    I've heard it said elsewhere that "people are subconsciously oriented to think that their dual looks best." Do you think that is true? Perhaps because the integral of USA is said to be LIE maybe there's a culture ideal of gamma SF women that spreads to other types?
    I've heard this also.
    I have mixed feelings about it. Personally there are some...... some things that are more difficult to remove from that sense, for me. As in, certain ethic or genetic traits, certain ways the eyes relate to the face, that I do find attractive.

    The most attractive dual I know is also of a somewhat similar background to me genetically. I think there is something about that. But I'm certainly attracted to people that are not similar genetically nor are my duals.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  28. #68
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    I read in strat's ESTj/INFj duality article that if EII offers helpful stuff, LSE will notice them fast. Maybe a good tip for you

    Otherwise, I actually agree that all those other factors mentioned in this thread have to be taken into account wrt the topic of noticing a dual or not.
    As a LSE I would say things that require an action or the figuring out of how to do or achieve something are often significantly easier to comment on and engage than basic dynamics of bridging interpersonal gaps. So it's good advice
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  29. #69
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,936
    Mentioned
    484 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah I honestly feel like I've been genuinely attracted to the maximal degree to probably every single type in the socion at varying times. I feel like physical attraction is kind of a one dimensional aspect of attraction as a whole, and the later supplants the former as you get to know someone in terms of dictating an overall attitude towards that person, but I feel like as it pertains to physical attraction in of itself, there is no such phenomenon in play or it is highly subdued and easily offset by other situational factors

    but then again I type myself as LIE, hence my question about the culture and how from my unique perspective that may be hard to entangle. in other words, if the culture holds up an ideal of attraction that is in tune with my own psychological predisposition it would be hard to suss out what "shades of ESI" im really attracted to in every type to the extent they're not just "being themselves" but channeling the "culture ideal" hence it would be possible for me to find any type attractive simply because theres someone from each type shooting for the same ideal I hold as a matter of enculteration, and as a numbers game someone is likely to succeed (thus I may be attracted to LII #319248 to the degree they've internalized and in turn manifest ESI-as-ideal, etc etc)

    all that aside, I do feel like once you date someone after a while you learn to appreciate things about them you didn't before you met them. I feel like this is just being a good non bigoted person in a certain sense. But I will say after I dated SLI I really came to love things about them, and seeing pictures of other SLI I sense and appreciate those qualities suggested in them as well. Same thing goes for SEE and ESI, which I believe I also dated. I see no reason that wouldnt be common across every type

  30. #70
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paranoid View Post
    ime it's usually Ne-egos who have specific (even obscure) preferences wrt physical appearances, whereas Si-egos are drawn to wacky and witty infantile behavior, which would equate to the Ne-ego's "personality" ("i may not shower, but look what i can do!" [does a handstand and falls off the pier]) on top of that, intuitives tend to emanate an aura of "exclusivity".
    I've seen this particularly with alphas, and to an extent ...... say, anne of green gables type IEEs.

    I find myself more so drawn to ethereal or other-worldly , natures, rather than that OMG CRAZY UNIQUE BIZARREE stuff. I have seen that though - especially in my SEI friend. He loves atypical women (even though he wants a traditional marriage ultimately), which is a tough deal for him. He knows about nerdy ILE and NT women and likes them quite a bit, but many of them don't want what he wants, at this time.

    Eccentricity itself isn't a turn on for me. There is a post/article something somewhere, about love types, and I do relate to pragma first eros second. But perhaps eccentricity in terms of a higher-than-normal relational or moral focus, maybe. I find aspiration or even some level of idealism in that realm appealing, there's an underlying sense of growth and progress or something to aim for, there.

    I think that's why I ultimately find ESIs boring, because everything is so much more face-value, all the time. It's not that I don't value that - it's more, I am that way myself, so I don't feel they add anything to it. The alpha SFs are similarly this way, but more sort of just feel more.... superficial-happy idk. That's personal preferences to discuss elsewhere . Perhaps a better term is more ambition as an eccentricity, although it has to be more enlightened than dogmatic.


    I think Si egos are perhaps more able to see past some of the superficial presentation of things, some to an extent being drawn to peopl with poor presentations due to their own low self esteem or uncertainty, IMO and IME. Which is ironic sense they are also sometimes super picky about their preesntation or cleanliness. But I suppose that dynamic happens with Se egos and their victim counterparts, too, regarding "Se Stuff"
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  31. #71
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Economist View Post
    Guuuys why did this thread turn kind of hostile
    Because duality is a "BIG DEAL"

    Medusa and I weren't trying to say LSEs are dumb or shallow, just that things don't click between LSEs and EIIs right from the beginning necessarily, for numerous possible reasons, which is true of all dual relations, especially between people who haven't trained themselves to look for their dual. This is just providing another angle to consider in response to OP's question so that we have a variety of perspectives in the thread.
    Well you know what they say about OP.

    My LSE best friend is one of the most woke people I've ever met, and he took care of me in a crisis during which no one else was there for me, none of my EII best friends even, so I know LSEs aren't dumb or shallow. But the Te/Se world is different from the Fi/Ni world so an LSE who doesn't know socionics wouldn't immediately notice and like an EII (or vice versa). (Gulenko's Model G defines types through their 4-D IEs, so there's also a theory that stipulates the importance of Se for LSEs.)
    I'm not really a fan of model G but I think dimensionaltiy is important and I agree.
    I don't think anything that is being said about duals not immediately clicking is controversial even in more classical socionics literature. It's been said very often that people, esp wit h little experience, will not see the value or merits of their dual, as they focus on very different spheres of informational prioritization etc.etc. \[/QUOTE]
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  32. #72
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,936
    Mentioned
    484 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've commented on this elsewhere, but I actually really like where Gulenko is taking things because I think it makes things easier to understand why type X is X and not Y despite manifesting Y which people seem to have a really hard time sorting out according to classical socionics. I think its his desire to create a more "objective" socionics and the way to do that is to peg things to their manifestation as much as possible to cut down on things being lost in translation. I hope it turns out to be a masterwork and catches on because the idea seems really great. I think its the best shot we have at a real step forward in socionics as far as its Ti rendering goes

    right now its like you have to be psychoanalytically minded to really, I believe, understand a lot of what's going on; and most people just aren't there

    right now G is in sad shape though and needs a lot of work and polish and promotion so I don't blame anyone for not liking it as it stands. I know I like to stick to classical socionics simply because that's the framework everyone is at least trying to use

  33. #73

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,686
    Mentioned
    503 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    I think its his desire to create a more "objective" socionics and the way to do that is to peg things to their manifestation as much as possible to cut down on things being lost in translation.
    Dream on...


    right now its like you have to be psychoanalytically minded to really, I believe, understand a lot of what's going on; and most people just aren't there
    Yup and Gulenko isn't going to solve this magically.

    Dream on Ni HA (Mine accepted it a long time ago)

  34. #74
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,936
    Mentioned
    484 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    your way of latching onto people is what Ni HA actually looks like by the way

    I liked it better when you were begging @squark for information, not me

  35. #75

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,686
    Mentioned
    503 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    your way of latching onto people is what Ni HA actually looks like by the way

    I liked it better when you were begging @squark for information, not me
    Wow two stupid assumptions in just two lines.

    We accidentally agree on Ni HA for me tho'

  36. #76
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Don't make me prepare a table and have you all sit down for a tea party
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  37. #77
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,881
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    For some real talk,

    my biggest concern with EIIs and Se polrs in general is that they are averse to any kind of exertion, either from willpower or especially physically. I'm ... kind of averse to .... the notion of not being able to hold your own physically. Not you have to be a UFC fighting champion, but more, someone who can move and function. This even extends somewhat into 'weight" , although this affects EIIs less than others IME. There's an old profile that talks about LSE not liking "excess", and that fits.

    But much more than that, there are some people - although more so LIIs - that have a kind of aversion towards exertion. Towards breaking a sweat or trying hard, or to some extent being somewhat athletic. EIIs, on the other hand, seem more just lacking confidence or assuredness about their abilities - "I'm too clumsy" or whatever, which is different than this kind of "ewww working out is icky" .

    I know more than one serious EII weightlighters (that are female), and some amateur ones also. Thankfully they are open to improving themselves in general. I am not even a person who works out alllll the time, but, some kind of ambition towards health, at least.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  38. #78
    sorrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    TIM
    ESE- Fe 4w3
    Posts
    573
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    They don't want an overtly "sexual" look. It is a turn off to them. They like a softer voice, gentle nature and lots of Fi.
    EII is se polr and not comfortable initially sexual relations and showing much skin. They have a very modest appearance and presentation- LSE needs that.
    EII is a good match for LSEs. EIIs gobble up that Te. They think the LSE is brilliant for being blunt and stating the facts.


    Its the Feeling-Thinking axis. Look at all Te leads with Fi leads and Ti leads with Fe leads. There is something magical going on.
    “Until he extends the circle of his compassion to all living things, man will not himself find peace.”



  39. #79
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,558
    Mentioned
    126 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    .. with what?
    everything
    awldjkwepierpgokqweølfqøerlkfdaergnhtm¨å¨æ''-we-fqpoeufasdøflthøljwtlhkjrøtlhhhhhhhhhhsapfoeporipr
    "WELL I'M SORRY THAT I LIKE TO HAVE OPEN COMMUNICATION IN MY RELATIONSHIPS" - Galen 2k13

  40. #80
    Saoirse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    San Junipero
    TIM
    EII 9w1 so/sx
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    serious EII weightlifters (that are female), and some amateur ones also
    I'm in this set of people! I'm kind of shocked though, you know multiple female EII weightlifters? Female weightlifters are already pretty rare.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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