Results 1 to 40 of 173

Thread: Subtype matching or not in duality and activity

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    4,275
    Mentioned
    319 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    Which is a better match in duality, same subtype pairing or different subtype? For example, LIE-Ni goes better with ESI-Fi or with ESI-Se? Why?

    And in Activity (i.e. LIE-Ni with SEE-Se or SEE-Fi)?
    From a DCNH perspective:

    It doesn't matter what the relationship is. Subtype match is always the same. So also for duality it has to be either D+N or C+H.

    If you really are a Creative then you need a Harmonizer regardless of the socionics relationships. But I also see some D+C so that might function sometimes.

    If you use 2 subtypes there is a risk that you are not gonna get the desired precision for a realistic match.

    I have dated duals of the "wrong" subtypes and there is clearly some basic flaw in such a relationship. DCNH is imo the basis of any stable relationship.
    The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.

    (Jung on Si)

  2. #2
    lavos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Inside the Windfish's egg
    TIM
    LIE
    Posts
    1,702
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    From a DCNH perspective:

    It doesn't matter what the relationship is. Subtype match is always the same. So also for duality it has to be either D+N or C+H.

    If you really are a Creative then you need a Harmonizer regardless of the socionics relationships. But I also see some D+C so that might function sometimes.

    If you use 2 subtypes there is a risk that you are not gonna get the desired precision for a realistic match.

    I have dated duals of the "wrong" subtypes and there is clearly some basic flaw in such a relationship. DCNH is imo the basis of any stable relationship.
    Some relatives of mine are an IEE-Fi - LSI-Se couple. He is is D, and she is N. They're a very unhappy marriage. I think the original inter-type matters more than DCNH, but you are spot on on that most couples are complementary DCNH pairs.

  3. #3
    Shytan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    TIM
    EII 4w3 Sx/sp
    Posts
    522
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    Some relatives of mine are an IEE-Fi - LSI-Se couple. He is is D, and she is N. They're a very unhappy marriage. I think the original inter-type matters more than DCNH, but you are spot on on that most couples are complementary DCNH pairs.
    Their Conflict relations are the main cause of their unhappy marriage.

    C-EII-INFj 4w3 Sx/sp 479

  4. #4
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    4,275
    Mentioned
    319 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lavos View Post
    Some relatives of mine are an IEE-Fi - LSI-Se couple. He is is D, and she is N. They're a very unhappy marriage. I think the original inter-type matters more than DCNH, but you are spot on on that most couples are complementary DCNH pairs.
    oh yes, of course. You can't fix a bad socionics combination with DCNH. But it's still a major component in compatibility. And I think sometimes people get seduced into bad relationships if they happen to have a good DCNH and Enneagram match.
    The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.

    (Jung on Si)

Posting Permissions

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