Stackings and Misconceptions

[Volcana]

I've never met anyone that cares more about losing their place in the big, wide community than about their close friendships and having a partner. It would require serious illness to be that far removed from deep connection.
Soc instinct is not a mental illness or a 'problem with depth.' Being Soc dominant doesnt mean you care more about communities than people you're close to.
Soc is actually the instinct that cares most about deep connection between two humans.

I'm Sx/So, the love of my life is @Samson, blatantly Soc last. He really is not that taken with "connecting." The eros is high between us, and he does trust me and open up to me 100% - we have no lack of trust. But sometimes I have to remind him to get out of his personal corner to 'Share' - to remind him that we also need to bond.

He loves this about me, as it is a basic human need; but he's just not as good at recognizing it. But he's very high Sx, so he does merge with the fascinating and alluring qualities about me, like getting deep into my fantasy novel, both dressing up to impress and allure the other, etc.

[Memento Mori]

the love of my life is @Samson,

Oh, wow!

I already thought the two of You were lovely individually, but to hear You're together is incredible! This honestly made my day. Congratulations to the both of You!

[Volcana]

Oh, wow!

I already thought the two of You were lovely individually, but to hear You're together is incredible! This honestly made my day. Congratulations to the both of You!

This was so sweet... made my day too.

[Aylen]

I just came across this again. I believe it is from one of the workshops given by Russ. He referred to the weakness being in the third instinct in the video so if you are going by weakness it would be the blindspot.

The first instinct is the strongest force in the personality. It is usually where most of our "unexplainable" bad behaviour occurs. We focus on all 3 elements of this instinct.

With the second instinct, we focus on maybe 2 of the 3 elements of it. We sometimes use the strategy of the first instinct to meet the needs of the second instinct. This rarely goes well.

​The third (last or bottom) variant in the stack is can be called one's “blind spot”—it is akin to an unused muscle that on occasion feels sore. One believes that this area is uninteresting and unimportant, that one can do without it. At the same time, there is shame associated with the 'blind spot' variant - a sense of deficiency. One constantly feels like one is lacking skills and refinement in the areas pertaining to your last instinct.

Often a negative reaction develops in response to seeing your last instinct operate in others. For example, SP-last people might grow impatient with those who devote a lot of time and effort into making themselves well fed and comfortable - fiddling with the room temperature, checking seat cushions, arranging their bottled water, etc. SP-last people can grow bored if they find themselves trapped in a conversation about food, home decorations or furniture, local deals, home prices, salaries. SX-last people might feel uneasy when they see people openly demonstrating their sexuality, gender orientation or sexual preferences, engaging in PDA, discussing private feelings and experiences, etc. SO-last people might get impatient with 'shallow' socialite chit-chat, get frustrated when required to network, and wonder how others can keep up with so many acquaintances. One takes the dominant instinct as a given and believes that everyone should be this way, hence people become surprised and even frustrated when they meet others who show no concern for their primary area of preoccupation.

[andreasdevig]

I've never met anyone that cares more about losing their place in the big, wide community than about their close friendships and having a partner. It would require serious illness to be that far removed from deep connection.
Soc instinct is not a mental illness or a 'problem with depth.' Being Soc dominant doesnt mean you care more about communities than people you're close to.
Soc is actually the instinct that cares most about deep connection between two humans.

I'm Sx/So, the love of my life is @Samson, blatantly Soc last. He really is not that taken with "connecting." The eros is high between us, and he does trust me and open up to me 100% - we have no lack of trust. But sometimes I have to remind him to get out of his personal corner to 'Share' - to remind him that we also need to bond.

He loves this about me, as it is a basic human need; but he's just not as good at recognizing it. But he's very high Sx, so he does merge with the fascinating and alluring qualities about me, like getting deep into my fantasy novel, both dressing up to impress and allure the other, etc.

Interesting. I'm a bit confused, though, especially about the last paragraph. What's the difference between So and Sx again? There was a site that said that So is "personal connection" and Sx is "intimacy." Sounds like the same thing to me. When you say that he enjoys merging with the fascinating qualities about you, that sounds like 'connecting' to me. Connecting and merging sounds like the same thing to me. So, if you wouldn't mind, what's the difference between So and Sx?
Anyway, you make some interesting points, and maybe this could explain why so many people type themselves as Sx (because they're perhaps under the impression that Sx is one-on-one relationship, depth, romance, etc. and that So is group interactions and communities and so on). I guess I tend to be under this impression myself as well.

[Volcana]

Interesting. I'm a bit confused, though, especially about the last paragraph. What's the difference between So and Sx again? There was a site that said that So is "personal connection" and Sx is "intimacy." Sounds like the same thing to me. When you say that he enjoys merging with the fascinating qualities about you, that sounds like 'connecting' to me. Connecting and merging sounds like the same thing to me. So, if you wouldn't mind, what's the difference between So and Sx?
Anyway, you make some interesting points, and maybe this could explain why so many people type themselves as Sx (because they're perhaps under the impression that Sx is one-on-one relationship, depth, romance, etc. and that So is group interactions and communities and so on). I guess I tend to be under this impression myself as well.

Thanks for the interest and the thoughtful question.

Social is, at root: bonding, warmth, interpersonal intimacy, relationships, love between two people, friendship, having each other's back. It is also the human need that lies behind the sentiment of loneliness. (Any instinct type can feel lonely.)

If you think about it, not all your close relationships are sexual. You might have a one-on-one intense bond with your brother or sister, or one of your parents, or perhaps your teacher or boss who is elderly when you're a child; but none of these bonds (under typical healthy conditions) would be sexual. You can bond deeply with your sister without there having to be 'sexual charge.' So what would you call your intense, trusting, loving relationship bond with your sister? That would be social. And this extends to your friends.

Sexual is, at root: heat, allure, transformation, sexual intimacy eros. There's a sense that you want to penetrate and be penetrated by the other person entirely, as though being absorbed into their being; tearing down all walls. (This is often mistaken for intimacy, but it isn't necessarily, unless the Social instinct is also at play.) It is also the human need that lies behind obsession, limerence. (Any instinct type can experience this.) There's an addictive quality to it, whether or not you're actually intimate with the person.. you want them to want you.

In French, orgasm is called "la petite morte" - the little death. This is because when making love, you're naked, exposed, without walls. You spill your life seed into, or upon, another. Fluids are mixed. Boundaries are lost, and when boundaries are lost, it's impossible not to transform; to be reborn.

The reason sex has been deemed 'sinful' and bad is because it's too destructive to society - it brings unexpected changes. People who were otherwise loyal to their family, or their job, or "the state" - will suddenly throw it all away for the sake of passion. Or that is what they fear. Sx instinct has a transformative quality.. it is there to strip you down, expose you and entice you, leaving you wide open. In this sense, Sexual Instinct has a danger to it. It can be scary, overwhelming.

Sx dominants are tuned into enticement, allure; they can't turn it off. There's a sense they're always penetrating into you, using some type of luring siren signal, like the way birds show off their bright feathers and sing to impress a mate. All of that is sexual signaling and humans do it very similarly - through dressing up, showing virtuosity to entice (music, art etc).

Now this does not mean that "Sx dominants are sluts." Quite the contrary, in many cases. The Sx dominant is so deeply attuned to chemistry that they can tell whose chemistry mixes best with theirs. When this instinct is first, it can be very selective, holding out for the hottest person, some kind of Ideal Other who would attract them and allure and entice them for all eternity.

This can, of course, develop into a sense of intimacy very quickly- since there's an addictive quality, wanting to get deep into every part of the lover's psyche. But this is a very different type of intimacy than that which you experience with your sister. The type with your sister will outlast most of your sexual relationships. The intimacy with your lover is more penetrating and intense, but it is not in and of itself based on common interests, trust, deep bonding and so forth; until Social instinct comes into play.

And we must remember that people are whole - we are not "just one instinct." So an Sx/Sp and Sp/Sx couple will become bonded on a social level. Just as an So/Sp and Sp/So couple will enjoy heat and intensity, and want to allure each other. The question is, where does your attention automatically lie? What is the primary call of your instinctual senses? Which instinct is on all the time, in all situations, constantly guiding you, alternately holding you back and propelling you forward?

[andreasdevig]

@Volcana Thank you for the thorough explanation. Would it be fair to say that So is romantic and Sx is sexual/physical/sensual? Or is Sx romantic and Sp the physical/sexual/sensual side (as some have suggested)?

[lemontrees]

I've never met anyone that cares more about losing their place in the big, wide community than about their close friendships and having a partner. It would require serious illness to be that far removed from deep connection.
Soc instinct is not a mental illness or a 'problem with depth.' Being Soc dominant doesnt mean you care more about communities than people you're close to.
Soc is actually the instinct that cares most about deep connection between two humans.

I'm Sx/So, the love of my life is @Samson, blatantly Soc last. He really is not that taken with "connecting." The eros is high between us, and he does trust me and open up to me 100% - we have no lack of trust. But sometimes I have to remind him to get out of his personal corner to 'Share' - to remind him that we also need to bond.

He loves this about me, as it is a basic human need; but he's just not as good at recognizing it. But he's very high Sx, so he does merge with the fascinating and alluring qualities about me, like getting deep into my fantasy novel, both dressing up to impress and allure the other, etc.

So agree.

IMO

So also has a mental hierarchy of who is more "important" in your world. It's not like sx, that immediate tug where you throw away what you're doing to chase the energy (is that sx?) It's more calculated, an awareness that you only have so much time so some people have to be put above others. If sx is in the second position, chemistry would play a big part in that, although things like loyalty, responsibility, would still be at the forefront.

That's why some so ppl freak out over things like slow response times - anything to signal that they got "devalued"

[silke]

IMO

So also has a mental hierarchy of who is more "important" in your world. It's not like sx, that immediate tug where you throw away what you're doing to chase the energy (is that sx?) It's more calculated, an awareness that you only have so much time so some people have to be put above others. If sx is in the second position, chemistry would play a big part in that, although things like loyalty, responsibility, would still be at the forefront.

That's why some so ppl freak out over things like slow response times - anything to signal that they got "devalued"

That calculated awareness of "important-unimportant" sounds like a 3 wing or core 3. 3s will hold themselves to these terms, but I'm not sure that this is social instinct related. Loyalty is the 3 integration to 6.

[lemontrees]

That calculated awareness of "important-unimportant" sounds like a 3 wing or core 3. 3s will hold themselves to these terms, but I'm not sure that this is social instinct related. Loyalty is the 3 integration to 6.

Ha. "Important" is a word I've heard several people use, but now that I think about it... they were all social eights.

[Irime]

This thread made me look for informations about instinctual stackings and while I still haven't typed myself, I came to one conclusion:

Instinct stackings are about focus, not strength.

The last instinct is called a blind spot and it's a very good term. Blind spot is the place of our visual field where image detection doesn't occur.
Let's imagine a tree. It's a very important tree and we want it to grow tall and strong. But if we stand too close to the tree, we won't be able to take care of it properly - we don't see surroundings, therefore we don't have information about the soil, the weather, if our tree is lone or a part of some forest.
Let's take a few steps backwards.
Now we can see not only our main object of interest (tree) but also the surroundings. The object on which we focus our vision is the area of first instinct, the surroundings is our second instinct and there is still an area that we don't see, which is our blindspot. But at least now we can care properly about our tree and its surroundings.
But sometimes we need to pay attention on more things than the tree - what if there is a madman with an axe behind us? To see our blindspot area we can do one of the two things:
1.Take a few more steps bacwards. We can see everything but then our main object of interest becomes blurry, we cannot see it clearly and therefore cannot take care of it.
2.Turn the head from our main object of interest. Change the focus. We don't want to lose the tree from our sight but we can do it for short time periods if we need to.
That's why the last instinct is often underdeveloped when compared to the first two. We focus on it sporadically unless we make an active effort to get better in a given area. The second instinct can serve as a mean to develop the first instinct but also to keep it at bay.

[Xaiviay]

I've never met anyone that cares more about losing their place in the big, wide community than about their close friendships and having a partner. It would require serious illness to be that far removed from deep connection.
Soc instinct is not a mental illness or a 'problem with depth.' Being Soc dominant doesnt mean you care more about communities than people you're close to.
Soc is actually the instinct that cares most about deep connection between two humans.

I'm Sx/So, the love of my life is @Samson, blatantly Soc last. He really is not that taken with "connecting." The eros is high between us, and he does trust me and open up to me 100% - we have no lack of trust. But sometimes I have to remind him to get out of his personal corner to 'Share' - to remind him that we also need to bond.

He loves this about me, as it is a basic human need; but he's just not as good at recognizing it. But he's very high Sx, so he does merge with the fascinating and alluring qualities about me, like getting deep into my fantasy novel, both dressing up to impress and allure the other, etc.

This is actually completely turning around my concept of the social instinct. I always thought of it being about groups and social status, sort of like the social-first person must care more about their place in the hierarchy than their most intimate relationships, just like you said. And I thought 'yuck, some people really are just that way naturally?!' But if it's about bonding and deep connection...that is much more human. And wow idk, it might be my first or second instinct. The only bond I'm that motivated to maintain is the one with my lover, though...and family, to a degree...so I'm not sure what my instinct stack must be