Which Types/Dual Pairs are the most “Independent”

[MissDucki]

I’ve been thinking about this. I have noticed that certain types hold independence more strongly then others. The thing is also, most of come from the western world so our view of “independence” can be vastly different to most of the collective culture societies so that got me thinking.

To be objective, I am going to use googles definition of independence.

Independent: free from outside control; not depending on another's authority. Not depending on another for livelihood or subsistence.

Personally, I don’t consider myself extremely independent but, I like to do my own thing and go about life like that and try and pay for my own stuff the most. I don’t like it when people keep chanting “be more independent!” It makes me a bit uncomfortable as I feel I have to be ultra lone wolf and that ain’t me. I don’t know how other SEI’s feel about that. I find Gammas to be the most independent. I would rank SEE and ILI up there personally.

[Adam Strange]

Do you mean, the two Duals are independent from each other within a Duality, or do you mean that the Duality is independent from the rest of the world?

[EUDAEMONIUM]

Yeah, I agree, while there are Gammas that are very community-minded, "independence" is a very Gamma concept.

I am very civic-minded, I see myself as a member of society. I rely on people and I want people to rely on me.

Gammas have their circle that they are steadfastly loyal to, but I think Beta's circles are much wider.

I think ILIs seem very reclusive and want so badly to just remove themselves from society. I think ESIs are probably more open to being dependent on those they can trust.

I think the Gamma extroverts see society as something to navigate through, I don't think they see themselves as a member of it.

But that's my skewed Beta perspective.

[MissDucki]

Do you mean, the two Duals are independent from each other within a Duality, or do you mean that the Duality is independent from the rest of the world?

Originally, I was thinking two duals that are independent from each other. Although, I would really love to here the case of duals that’s are independent from the rest of the world as I had not considered that. I think that can be an interesting argument.

[The Reality Denialist]

The dependence vary.

ESI's while they may tout their freedom it means that you are under their control until you can not breathe any longer. AKA gamma love. This would suck massively for me.

Then there are SEI's who have people around and that is entirely more breathable concept. [IEI's might have pretty bad dependence on their romantic relation which is also a lot less annoying than gamma love.]

[EUDAEMONIUM]

Now I want to go through all 8 of the dual relationships and rate them lol.

Alpha:

ILE - SEI: ILE needs SEI way more than the SEI need them.

LII - ESE: Pretty balanced. Both are pretty self sufficient. ESE may be a gold digger though.

Beta:

EIE - LSI: pretty balanced. EIE same as ESE but more useless and more gold digging.

SLE - IEI: No hope for IEI lol, SLE does not need the IEI but loves them anyway.


Gamma:

ILI - SEE: Pretty balanced. SEE may actually rely on the ILI more.

LIE - ESI: Pretty balanced, ESI may be tactically dependent i.e. getting pregnant to make a guy stay with them (Gone Girl), forcing someone into marriage, tricking LIE into paying off their debts by playing the damsel. Too harsh? lol maybe.

Delta:

LSE - EII: Pretty balanced, EII may have trouble asserting themselves in their career though.

IEE - SLI: IEE is a wildcard, but more often than not they will rely on the SLI. I've seen IEEs try to push SLIs to do what they really want to do in life though.

[Adam Strange]

Now I want to go through all 8 of the dual relationships and rate them lol.

Alpha:

ILE - SEI: ILE needs SEI way more than the SEI need them.

LII - ESE: Pretty balanced. Both are pretty self sufficient. ESE may be a gold digger though.

Beta:

EIE - LSI: pretty balanced. EIE same as ESE but more useless and more gold digging.

SLE - IEI: No hope for IEI lol, SLE does not need the IEI but loves them anyway.


Gamma:

ILI - SEE: Pretty balanced. SEE may actually rely on the ILI more.

LIE - ESI: Pretty balanced, ESI may be tactically dependent i.e. getting pregnant to make a guy stay with them (Gone Girl), forcing someone into marriage, tricking LIE into paying off their debts by playing the damsel. Too harsh? lol maybe.

Delta:

LSE - EII: Pretty balanced, EII may have trouble asserting themselves in their career though.

IEE - SLI: IEE is a wildcard, but more often than not they will rely on the SLI. I've seen IEEs try to push SLIs to do what they really want to do in life though.

LIEs need love, ESIs need money. It's just that simple.

[lkdhf qkb]

I've never seen a SLI who appreciated being told what to do. I am similar, and would never boss someone around like some people from central quadras do. So maybe SLI-IEE would be considered an independent dual pair. I've seen SLI-Te and IEE-Fi couples that seemed very close though(too close for me, and not what I'd consider ideal).

Having been on dates with some SLI women this last year, I could see some commonalities among them: they build a comfortable, low effort lifestyle and accumulate assets. At some point they'll look for someone to fill this golden cage they've built, someone they can bend into their "responsible" lifestyle and sometimes "re-educate". My personal problem is, I don't like cages, people who give me lessons about how I should live, who treat me like a child or people who snoop around/control my finances(there is a fine line between financial advice and control). Those gals seem to end up with ESI or EII or if they look for someone as "responsible" as themselves, with another Te-ego. Happily for me, not all SLI are like that; there are SLI women who live a more adventurous kind of lifestyle; but I think they are even more independent !

[The Reality Denialist]

SLE - IEI: No hope for IEI lol, SLE does not need the IEI but loves them anyway.

Have you ever met SLE's in need? Many of them loose hope. There have been example cases on this forum.

[InterPrizeWes]

Independence can be arrogance, think that Your way is so vastly wise and superior in mastery and council that Your hot pursuit can take down any controller or veil in the swordplay Shakespeare. It's better to be emotional, racing off along any dinosaur or rodeo to pump up the jack-o-lanterns and sing a carol to the ocean blue with a rose red paint brush on the island of druids and birds seeing the camera of a snipe on the legacy oracle, entrancing the straw hat of a careful farmer into the developer's resurrection.

Basically, a hedonistic view can be better than an imposing view, a view of kingship/independence.

[lkdhf qkb]

IME, all rational dualities are more dependent, in that they strive for an order in most things; gender roles, common plans, in sharing responsability and so forth. Irrational dualities go more with the flow. Doesn't mean they are necessarily less committed or close though.

Here a trailer of a japanese movie of a EII(wife)-LSE(husband) family that falls apart as they discover that their son was exchanged with another at birth. The other family is SEI(wife)-ILE(husband). It's a good movie to watch if you have time; you can really see how rational/irrational and merry/serious plays out in family life.

[MissDucki]

I do think that rational types tend to want more “dependence” and “closeness” from each other. My LIE friend needs closeness much more then me. If feels too suffocating for me. Though, I think it’s an overt thing.

I think with irrational duals, it’s more of a subjective or low-key thing that you don’t mention. They both need each other and depend on the other, but saying is and expecting it feels weird I think. I find that irrational types kinda manipulate the other into needing them while rationals overtly demand it.

[Number 9 large]

LIEs need love, ESIs need money. It's just that simple.

to be loved is Fe hidden agenda

[FreelancePoliceman]

I do think that rational types tend to want more “dependence” and “closeness” from each other. My LIE friend needs closeness much more then me. If feels too suffocating for me. Though, I think it’s an overt thing.

I think with irrational duals, it’s more of a subjective or low-key thing that you don’t mention. They both need each other and depend on the other, but saying is and expecting it feels weird I think. I find that irrational types kinda manipulate the other into needing them while rationals overtly demand it.

Out of curiosity, have you seen this play out in LII or ESE?

[MissDucki]

Out of curiosity, have you seen this play out in LII or ESE?

Irl, no. But honestly, from the way a lot of the INTj’s act and their opinions on here, they seem to want a lot more of that Fe closeness that makes me a little bit uncomfortable. They seem to be as close as Fi/Te doms but now like them if that makes sense? A lot more strong and agreed on objections judgements of people and themselves that they use to get close. I would also say to add strong emotional expression to the mix. Besides, it seems to me like ESE want to intrude and LII’s want the intrusion. So it works.

I know I can’t be as intrusive as LII would like and I would hate for ESE to be intrusive towards me. It doesn’t feel right and it feels like a chain almost. Besides, it seems a lot of LII and ESE seem to have the same objective views about people and systems that I agree with 50/50 of the time. It terms there seems to be a objective moral obligation of people, life, kindness that I don’t prescribe too. These two I view as the Alpha family values of the quadra. They seem to be the most “stereotypical” family where there is a lot more interdependence on one another and it’s expected with emotional expression. At least, that is my view.

[rose]

I’ve been thinking about this. I have noticed that certain types hold independence more strongly then others. The thing is also, most of come from the western world so our view of “independence” can be vastly different to most of the collective culture societies so that got me thinking.

To be objective, I am going to use googles definition of independence.

Independent: free from outside control; not depending on another's authority. Not depending on another for livelihood or subsistence.

Personally, I don’t consider myself extremely independent but, I like to do my own thing and go about life like that and try and pay for my own stuff the most. I don’t like it when people keep chanting “be more independent!” It makes me a bit uncomfortable as I feel I have to be ultra lone wolf and that ain’t me. I don’t know how other SEI’s feel about that. I find Gammas to be the most independent. I would rank SEE and ILI up there personally.

As an ILI, I do agree about this independence thing.
Fi>Fe, gamma>delta, irrationals>rationals, maybe also alpha>beta?

Either being dependent or depended on makes me an unreasonable stubborn bitch. Quietly. If I had to describe it, I'd say it feels like dying.
My cat is too much for me at times. Poor thing, I feel bad about that somedays.

I think I'm rather extreme in this attitude tho, had to deal with a lot of suffocating people and I'm ready to jump out of a moving car if need be. This is not a metaphore, I'm nuts.

Ideally, people aren't icing on the cake, they are extra decorations that aren't needed but add a nice touch.

A lot of people want to be the icing tho.

I've often wanted to not be this way, seems cold and cruel.

[lkdhf qkb]

Either being dependent or depended on makes me an unreasonable stubborn bitch. Quietly.

If I had to describe it, I'd say it feels like dying.

My cat is too much for me at times. Poor thing, I feel bad about that somedays.

I think I'm rather(?) extreme in this attitude tho, had to deal with a lot of suffocating people and I'm ready to jump out of a moving car if need be. This is not a metaphore, I'm nuts.

Ideally, people aren't icing on the cake, they are extra decorations that aren't needed but add a nice touch.

A lot of people want to be the icing tho.

I've often wanted to not be this way, seems cold and cruel.

Okay, we get it, miss, but this isn't a competition, so no need to be THAT dramatic You've rightfully earned the title of most independent type lol

EDIT: Don't worry, it's okay, the right people will make you want to stay with them

[myresearch]

I do think that rational types tend to want more “dependence” and “closeness” from each other. My LIE friend needs closeness much more then me. If feels too suffocating for me. Though, I think it’s an overt thing.

I think with irrational duals, it’s more of a subjective or low-key thing that you don’t mention. They both need each other and depend on the other, but saying is and expecting it feels weird I think. I find that irrational types kinda manipulate the other into needing them while rationals overtly demand it.

You are finding their Fi seeking suffocating. I also find it suffocating.

I always find irrationals dual pairs more freedom oriented than rational ones. However, different types may seek different things depending on their valued functions.

I seek independence as much as I can since childhood, however, I don't want to live outside civilization. I want to benefit from everything that is offered, enjoy things that outside world provides. I want to have access to things whenever I want or need. These things and independence are not something that could be obtained %100.

It is easier for me to depended on rather than depending the other person. If I see that I can trust a person, then it is like an unexpected gift, I appreciate that a lot, however, I don't rely on it. If I am having some problems, I don't want to interact with people, I disappear and don't return to any messages or phone calls, so maybe I am not that easy to depended on. People who know me, also know this and text me "urgent", if something important is going on.

In romance, I never felt dependent to the person I am with. Whether they are irrational or rational, they always seemed more dependend on me, maybe this is a F thing. Regardless of level of my emotions, I end it if I decide to so. My approach fits more into the lines of I don't need you but I want you. However, I can be demanding, devotion, passion> freedom in romance for me. I understand the importance of people who are supportive through experience, it is also a must.

[FreelancePoliceman]

Irl, no. But honestly, from the way a lot of the INTj’s act and their opinions on here, they seem to want a lot more of that Fe closeness that makes me a little bit uncomfortable. They seem to be as close as Fi/Te doms but now like them if that makes sense? A lot more strong and agreed on objections judgements of people and themselves that they use to get close. I would also say to add strong emotional expression to the mix. Besides, it seems to me like ESE want to intrude and LII’s want the intrusion. So it works.

I know I can’t be as intrusive as LII would like and I would hate for ESE to be intrusive towards me. It doesn’t feel right and it feels like a chain almost. Besides, it seems a lot of LII and ESE seem to have the same objective views about people and systems that I agree with 50/50 of the time. It terms there seems to be a objective moral obligation of people, life, kindness that I don’t prescribe too. These two I view as the Alpha family values of the quadra. They seem to be the most “stereotypical” family where there is a lot more interdependence on one another and it’s expected with emotional expression. At least, that is my view.

Interesting. I’m skeptical of duality, so I’m not sure I want an ESE nor any sense of “intrusion,” but I don’t know that I consider them particularly intrusive. Well, my mother and her mother are both ESE and they are, in a way, but this seems to be the result of some more or less unique psychological problems I don’t see in other ESE. So I’m curious; in what ways do they seem to you intrusive? Or how do you think LII want “intrusion?”

What you say about Alpha rationals having certain moral views is interesting. I’d say I tend to think in that kind of way, yeah. A difficulty between myself and my SEI ex was that I felt she had a certain ethical...flexibility. Which seems generally true of SEI, and of IEI also. I like to have more of a sense I can depend on someone and trust what they say. ILE I’ve known with SEI or IEI seem not to care or not to realize when their partners dress things up a little, so to speak. Irrationals also generally seem to prefer more tense and unstable interpersonal dynamics, as if occasional struggles are enjoyable for them. Rationals seem to prefer to eliminate problems/instability, ideally in advance.

[MissDucki]

Interesting. I’m skeptical of duality, so I’m not sure I want an ESE nor any sense of “intrusion,” but I don’t know that I consider them particularly intrusive. Well, my mother and her mother are both ESE and they are, in a way, but this seems to be the result of some more or less unique psychological problems I don’t see in other ESE. So I’m curious; in what ways do they seem to you intrusive? Or how do you think LII want “intrusion?”

What you say about Alpha rationals having certain moral views is interesting. I’d say I tend to think in that kind of way, yeah. A difficulty between myself and my SEI ex was that I felt she had a certain ethical...flexibility. Which seems generally true of SEI, and of IEI also. I like to have more of a sense I can depend on someone and trust what they say. ILE I’ve known with SEI or IEI seem not to care or not to realize when their partners dress things up a little, so to speak. Irrationals also generally seem to prefer more tense and unstable interpersonal dynamics, as if occasional struggles are enjoyable for them. Rationals seem to prefer to eliminate problems/instability, ideally in advance.

I think duality might be different for you if you were romantically attracted to an ESE. I prefer duality for romance but its not the end all be all.

Anyways, ESE seem to be intrusive is that they are not afraid to "go for it" then most types and they are not easily swayed to back down if they objectively believe they are right in regards to people. The more immature ones tend to do it out of dramatics but the healthy ones are able to do it out of tact and to genuinely understand why. I was watching Schitts creek and there seems to be a rational Fe/Ti couple in which the Ti dude didn't emote much but that didn't bother the Fe lead and she wasn't afraid to talk to him and 'include' him so to speak. She wasn't swayed despite his aloofness at first which would has discouraged me. ESE's are also Se demo so, they tend to ignore those kind of atmospheres but can play ball with the best if they need to. This allows them to be more 'intrusive' then others.

Yeah, I am pretty ethically flexible. There are very few hills that I will die on. Everything else is pretty fair game or 'flexible' enough to me because a lot of ethics can be very subject due to different life circumstances. I am also a very subjective person and 'live and let live' too. It can make me very uncomfortable to be so 'rigid' about ethical standards. That is one thing I know I will always struggle with rationals with. It is both a blessing and a curse. Rationals are very objective when it some to their ethics. Even the Fi/Te types IMO. Just they go about it a bit different. ESE and LII have very similar objective people rules then they realize. I find it cute how many LII have such strong Fe rules. Though, it gets a bit scary when they start rigidly putting that on me.....I love my Alpha fellows but I cant do that lol.

I think it would appear that Irrationals also generally seem to prefer more tense and unstable interpersonal dynamics. I even think that sometimes. Though, from my perspective, I find unwavering stability extremely scary. My brain isn't equipped to handle steady stability, it is equipped to be flexible and handle storms to adapt. It feels like 'settling' to me and that you can't adapt to whats new. You need to be able to shed skins and keep together so to speak. If you cant be flexible, then what will happen? I don't like a lot of conflict or I want a lot of instability. I am not really like that. I need to know that I will have someone who can change the masts of the sails and follow the waves of the storm with me then go right through it. If we have to go through, we can do it. It just matters the circumstances and I trust someone who is more flexible then someone who is not in this regard. It's kinda of a non-spoken contract I think with irrationals. Problems are handled through flexibility rather then through elimination.

[FreelancePoliceman]

I think duality might be different for you if you were romantically attracted to an ESE. I prefer duality for romance but its not the end all be all.

Anyways, ESE seem to be intrusive is that they are not afraid to "go for it" then most types and they are not easily swayed to back down if they objectively believe they are right in regards to people. The more immature ones tend to do it out of dramatics but the healthy ones are able to do it out of tact and to genuinely understand why. I was watching Schitts creek and there seems to be a rational Fe/Ti couple in which the Ti dude didn't emote much but that didn't bother the Fe lead and she wasn't afraid to talk to him and 'include' him so to speak. She wasn't swayed despite his aloofness at first which would has discouraged me. ESE's are also Se demo so, they tend to ignore those kind of atmospheres but can play ball with the best if they need to. This allows them to be more 'intrusive' then others.

Yeah, I am pretty ethically flexible. There are very few hills that I will die on. Everything else is pretty fair game or 'flexible' enough to me because a lot of ethics can be very subject due to different life circumstances. I am also a very subjective person and 'live and let live' too. It can make me very uncomfortable to be so 'rigid' about ethical standards. That is one thing I know I will always struggle with rationals with. It is both a blessing and a curse. Rationals are very objective when it some to their ethics. Even the Fi/Te types IMO. Just they go about it a bit different. ESE and LII have very similar objective people rules then they realize. I find it cute how many LII have such strong Fe rules. Though, it gets a bit scary when they start rigidly putting that on me.....I love my Alpha fellows but I cant do that lol.

I think it would appear that Irrationals also generally seem to prefer more tense and unstable interpersonal dynamics. I even think that sometimes. Though, from my perspective, I find unwavering stability extremely scary. My brain isn't equipped to handle steady stability, it is equipped to be flexible and handle storms to adapt. It feels like 'settling' to me and that you can't adapt to whats new. You need to be able to shed skins and keep together so to speak. If you cant be flexible, then what will happen? I don't like a lot of conflict or I want a lot of instability. I am not really like that. I need to know that I will have someone who can change the masts of the sails and follow the waves of the storm with me then go right through it. If we have to go through, we can do it. It just matters the circumstances and I trust someone who is more flexible then someone who is not in this regard. It's kinda of a non-spoken contract I think with irrationals. Problems are handled through flexibility rather then through elimination.

That’s interesting.

To be clear, I’m often attracted to ESE. I’m just not sure duality is necessarily optimal; just one of the factors that can help a match be more suitable. I definitely wouldn’t want to marry the majority of ESE out there, or the majority of any other type, and I’d also be willing to marry some people of other types.

What you said is just confidence, isn’t it? I don’t know; maybe it’s because I don’t like pussyfooting around that I don’t see this as intrusive. Besides — people are typically morons and can’t be trusted to do the right thing. You generally have to push for what you want, even if it’s their own best interest, since no amount of reasoning will get through to them. So being pushy is often justified, I feel. Lol.

Re. weathering storms, the way I try to approach life is to not have to weather the storm in the first place by building a house. I don’t think I’m flaky or would fall to pieces in bad times — I think I can keep my head pretty decently in emergencies, actually — but I’d really rather avoid them in the first place, especially if I can see them coming; if I see a problem in the future it goes against the grain to ignore it. On the other hand I like this process: creating order and stability where there wasn’t; making plans; building and improving to make something better. At least when there’s a social aspect to this. I’d be a good colonist, I think.

[MissDucki]

That’s interesting.

To be clear, I’m often attracted to ESE. I’m just not sure duality is necessarily optimal; just one of the factors that can help a match be more suitable. I definitely wouldn’t want to marry the majority of ESE out there, or the majority of any other type, and I’d also be willing to marry some people of other types.

What you said is just confidence, isn’t it? I don’t know; maybe it’s because I don’t like pussyfooting around that I don’t see this as intrusive. Besides — people are typically morons and can’t be trusted to do the right thing. You generally have to push for what you want, even if it’s their own best interest, since no amount of reasoning will get through to them. So being pushy is often justified, I feel. Lol.

Re. weathering storms, the way I try to approach life is to not have to weather the storm in the first place by building a house. I don’t think I’m flaky or would fall to pieces in bad times — I think I can keep my head pretty decently in emergencies, actually — but I’d really rather avoid them in the first place, especially if I can see them coming; if I see a problem in the future it goes against the grain to ignore it. On the other hand I like this process: creating order and stability where there wasn’t; making plans; building and improving to make something better. At least when there’s a social aspect to this. I’d be a good colonist, I think.

Freelance, don’t make go on a hunt for an ESE. I will be heading over to the Bible Belt in two years time for a friends wedding and I will hunt down an ESE for romance for you I find it cute that you don’t see how much you are THAT naturally oriented toward ESE! Mwhahahaha! But in all seriousness, your partner doesn’t have to be a dual. They just have to be the best person for you and with all of your heart. Dual or not.


Irrationals and rationals I’ve noticed are oriented very differently. It’s funny that you mentioned that you would a good colonist because I do think rationals are oriented towards groups of people and groups of systems naturally. The only down side I’ve noticed with rationals being very “stable” is that they will often stay in bad relationships and situations because of this. An Ex-coworker is an ESE and she was just mentioning how things haven’t changed at our old work. She keeps expecting things to change and get better but I know they won’t and she just sticks it through. She’s just trying to built her house with what she’s got. When I started seeing shit recourses, I started looking for recourses elsewhere. Both have pros and cons with how we’re are naturally oriented. I do admire rationals in this aspect. I really do wish I was more like that but I am not.

Basically a bit more in-depth convo on the how rationals may be more dependent on each other and they tend to be naturally group, ethically, rationally, and system oriented for the greater good it seems of groups. Irrationals…….they follow the shiny things

[rose]

Okay, we get it, miss, but this isn't a competition, so no need to be THAT dramatic You've rightfully earned the title of most independent type lol

EDIT: Don't worry, it's okay, the right people will make you want to stay with them

Lol, silly.

That's what I'm hoping for, people I just go back to without feeling obligated to.

[ouronis]

ILI and SLI

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

..okay I think @myresearch understands something so well on a deep level it is worth going into I think.

F types don't want anybody- but we need people. T types don't need anybody- but they want people. I like that as a general rule.

I don't want or like anybody but I need them practically. SLE likes me more than I like them usually- but I like the logic of SLE to help me. I prefer being liked then the one that does the liking anyway. I think that is the duality of T/F types. SLE has missed me more than I missed them I think- I only miss and love them because they've missed and loved me. ((I'm pathetically narcisisstic that way...))

F types are too senstive to truly want anybody as I end up being annoyed by everybody in that sense. but I need them for practical or logical reasons or to just handle some thinking-type thing my pansy feeling type ass doesn't wanna do. I can both "want" or "love" them but I don't trust that with me because of how often my own emotions lie. I like when people just logically make sense to me... I need that. FEELING TYPES ARE SWEET BUT RETARDED AND MENTALLY ILL LOL.

SLE misses IEI more than the IEI misses the SLE but IEI can be dramatic and emotionally manipulate people that we are more sensitive than we really are. I often do love SLEs but I only love them because of their logic and street smarts. there is nothing to LOVE about them because they have Fi polr and are often rude. My two-faced feeling type crap tells me that I should care if people are rude or mean but I really don't as I just mostly care if they make logical sense or not. I care if I myself am nice or mean sometimes depending on the situation but "caring if somebody is an asshole or not" is actually a T type thing - that's how F types end up seducing T types that we want lol. my LII dad always cared about that so much more than my ESE mom.

k I was being kinda humorous and campy and mbit-exaggeration like and too simple as obviously I mean there are a lot of nuances. mutual f sharing is obviously very nice if it's compatible. If it's the wrong thinking or logic for the sensitive pansy F type it often feels like being abused or like hannibal is eating your soul- I mean it still has to be right for me. but if it is the right one it feels more valuable than other feeling stuff. I think this is how the typology interactions occur.

I don't know how to answer your question @MissDucki because 'independence' can be complicated and I think most people are very independent in some ways but very dependent in others I've always liked the term 'interdependence' better- and yeah people who scream at somebody to be more independent are kinda annoying- why do they care so much? If independence was so valuable they wouldn't waste their own independence telling you to be more independent... I like my own freedom and independence but quite frankly there are just some things I'm naturally bad at and don't mind being 'dependent' and honest that I need other people to fill in those weaknesses lol

[FreelancePoliceman]

..okay I think @myresearch understands something so well on a deep level it is worth going into I think.

F types don't want anybody- but we need people. T types don't need anybody- but they want people. I like that as a general rule.

I don't want or like anybody but I need them practically. SLE likes me more than I like them usually- but I like the logic of SLE to help me. I prefer being liked then the one that does the liking anyway. I think that is the duality of T/F types. SLE has missed me more than I missed them I think- I only miss and love them because they've missed and loved me. ((I'm pathetically narcisisstic that way...))

F types are too senstive to truly want anybody as I end up being annoyed by everybody in that sense. but I need them for practical or logical reasons or to just handle some thinking-type thing my pansy feeling type ass doesn't wanna do. I can both "want" or "love" them but I don't trust that with me because of how often my own emotions lie. I like when people just logically make sense to me... I need that. FEELING TYPES ARE SWEET BUT RETARDED AND MENTALLY ILL LOL.

SLE misses IEI more than the IEI misses the SLE but IEI can be dramatic and emotionally manipulate people that we are more sensitive than we really are. I often do love SLEs but I only love them because of their logic and street smarts. there is nothing to LOVE about them because they have Fi polr and are often rude. My two-faced feeling type crap tells me that I should care if people are rude or mean but I really don't as I just mostly care if they make logical sense or not. I care if I myself am nice or mean sometimes depending on the situation but "caring if somebody is an asshole or not" is actually a T type thing - that's how F types end up seducing T types that we want lol. my LII dad always cared about that so much more than my ESE mom.

k I was being kinda humorous and campy and mbit-exaggeration like and too simple as obviously I mean there are a lot of nuances. mutual f sharing is obviously very nice if it's compatible. If it's the wrong thinking or logic for the sensitive pansy F type it often feels like being abused or like hannibal is eating your soul- I mean it still has to be right for me. but if it is the right one it feels more valuable than other feeling stuff. I think this is how the typology interactions occur.

I don't know how to answer your question @MissDucki because 'independence' can be complicated and I think most people are very independent in some ways but very dependent in others I've always liked the term 'interdependence' better- and yeah people who scream at somebody to be more independent are kinda annoying- why do they care so much? If independence was so valuable they wouldn't waste their own independence telling you to be more independent... I like my own freedom and independence but quite frankly there are just some things I'm naturally bad at and don't mind being 'dependent' and honest that I need other people to fill in those weaknesses lol

Something I read recently described F types as having more differentiated feeling, and so being able to use it for manipulative ends, while T types with primitive feeling were only able to express it in a primitive and intense way. I think I'd prefer to believe that interpretation over what I'm reading as your saying "F types are two-faced manipulative and stupid thots."

Anyway, feeling is just as necessary as thinking. Thinking types don't need feeling any less than feeling types need thinking. Humans aren't, or shouldn't be robots; people need to hold some kind of subjective values in order to decide what to do. Discovering the laws of thermodynamics isn't going to tell you how you should treat your neighbor, whether you should commit suicide, whether you should beat up a prostitute, or whether you should pursue a goal or watch TV all day.

Railroads and explosives and steel and modern communications systems are all probably the products of thinking types, but these things don't necessarily lead to anything good. You could argue that they're actually a net detriment to humanity, actually. They've facilitated wars, genocides, slavery, and greater ability for governments and strongmen to control populations, while most people I know don't seem particularly happy because they have these things. Thinking on its own is nothing. The feeling function is the only possible source of determining value, at least beyond basic instinctual reactions like "food=good."

[rtht]

The only down side I’ve noticed with rationals being very “stable” is that they will often stay in bad relationships and situations because of this. An Ex-coworker is an ESE and she was just mentioning how things haven’t changed at our old work. She keeps expecting things to change and get better but I know they won’t and she just sticks it through. She’s just trying to built her house with what she’s got. When I started seeing shit recourses, I started looking for recourses elsewhere.

Hmmm, don't expect that to be the norm MissDucki..... in your example you sound like the EJ, and she sounds like the IP.....


In general....


IPs are waiting for change....


IJs dislike too much change/unexpected changes....


EPs get bored and periodically make changes....


EJs Make/prevent changes, where necessary....




I definitely relate to the EJ in theory, and never hesitate to make changes when needed...

Socionics Temperaments (sociotype.com)

[Braingel]

Gamma ones. LIE-ESI. SEE-ILI.

[FreelancePoliceman]

Freelance, don’t make go on a hunt for an ESE. I will be heading over to the Bible Belt in two years time for a friends wedding and I will hunt down an ESE for romance for you I find it cute that you don’t see how much you are THAT naturally oriented toward ESE! Mwhahahaha! But in all seriousness, your partner doesn’t have to be a dual. They just have to be the best person for you and with all of your heart. Dual or not.

Out of curiosity, why do you think I'm oriented toward ESE? Just because I type myself LII?

Irrationals and rationals I’ve noticed are oriented very differently. It’s funny that you mentioned that you would a good colonist because I do think rationals are oriented towards groups of people and groups of systems naturally. The only down side I’ve noticed with rationals being very “stable” is that they will often stay in bad relationships and situations because of this. An Ex-coworker is an ESE and she was just mentioning how things haven’t changed at our old work. She keeps expecting things to change and get better but I know they won’t and she just sticks it through. She’s just trying to built her house with what she’s got. When I started seeing shit recourses, I started looking for recourses elsewhere. Both have pros and cons with how we’re are naturally oriented. I do admire rationals in this aspect. I really do wish I was more like that but I am not.

If I'm in a relationship with someone I'm obligated to do what I can to make it work. Presumably I'm in it because I care for them, so I'm not going to leave them just because I feel a little inconvenienced or annoyed. I left my previous relationship since it was clear she'd lost her own sense of commitment. I don't think it's generally good for serious relationships -- not just romantic, but friendly or familial as well -- to mean nothing and be severed at a whim. If you say you care about someone, you should mean it.

[aixelsyd]

It really depends but I'm guessing serious irrational dyads.

[myresearch]

Something I read recently described F types as having more differentiated feeling, and so being able to use it for manipulative ends, while T types with primitive feeling were only able to express it in a primitive and intense way. I think I'd prefer to believe that interpretation over what I'm reading as your saying "F types are two-faced manipulative and stupid thots."

It is generally harder for T types to feel things or form bonds. F types are more prone to it, hence more accustomed to it and control this area better. Hence, when T types have strong feelings and bonds, it is uncommon for them in comparison, they are more likely to appreciate that more since they don't even know how they get there.

Anyway, feeling is just as necessary as thinking. Thinking types don't need feeling any less than feeling types need thinking. Humans aren't, or shouldn't be robots; people need to hold some kind of subjective values in order to decide what to do. Discovering the laws of thermodynamics isn't going to tell you how you should treat your neighbor, whether you should commit suicide, whether you should beat up a prostitute, or whether you should pursue a goal or watch TV all day.

T can also have values and form ethical rules using T, T isn't only useful in terms of understanding thermodynamics. However, they are not good at knowing how to affect people's emotion and how to get close to them.

Railroads and explosives and steel and modern communications systems are all probably the products of thinking types, but these things don't necessarily lead to anything good. You could argue that they're actually a net detriment to humanity, actually. They've facilitated wars, genocides, slavery, and greater ability for governments and strongmen to control populations, while most people I know don't seem particularly happy because they have these things. Thinking on its own is nothing. The feeling function is the only possible source of determining value, at least beyond basic instinctual reactions like "food=good."

You may like or may not like what every T type does. T types solve and do things, hence it is more needed. Things go more smoothly and nicer when F types around, their people skills can change things a lot, however, its effect is more hidden rather than apparent, so people are more prone to want them and not need them.

[EUDAEMONIUM]

Now that I'm reading some of these responses, I'm thinking that SFs need NTs way less than anyone else. The talk about F types not needing T types I think is true. You can go very far in life just by being likable. I know people on here have witnessed situations where a competent yet quiet person was passed over for a more "likable" person.

In real life, most situations call for sensing or ethics of some kind, and talk about quantum physics or epistemology has almost no use lol.

I think I retract my earlier statement EIEs are not independent usually, NFs are even more useless than NTs. At NTs can develop software or work for tesla. But we get by with people skills alone. I think this puts us in a very dependent situation, but it's not really that obvious.

[MissDucki]

Out of curiosity, why do you think I'm oriented toward ESE? Just because I type myself LII?



If I'm in a relationship with someone I'm obligated to do what I can to make it work. Presumably I'm in it because I care for them, so I'm not going to leave them just because I feel a little inconvenienced or annoyed. I left my previous relationship since it was clear she'd lost her own sense of commitment. I don't think it's generally good for serious relationships -- not just romantic, but friendly or familial as well -- to mean nothing and be severed at a whim. If you say you care about someone, you should mean it.

Not at all because you type LII. It’s hard to explain but the way you think, view the world and people, and explain yourself is oriented toward being the dual for ESE. It is very IJ and I can easily see with the right intelligent and mature ESE you would be the most happiest and understood by them. I am just not naturally oriented to the way you think or naturally process stuff. I have noticed that with other LII on here in some strong rational irrational differences in that regard and it’s so obvious that they would compliment an ESE. Like…a nerd and a cheerleader getting together. It doesn’t look right but when you get down to it, they’re strengths really help each other and they have a lot more in common then you would think. That’s the best way I can explain it without going into a novel.


Alright, let me clarify before y’all think I’m the biggest flake that will jump ship lol. I do take my commitments very seriously. I was at this job for 2-3 years in total. When we had a renovation, it was when everything went to shit. I was there for 9 months extra and I had a change of heart the last month of that 9. I did not want to leave originally because of my coworkers and thought I could stick it out a year. We were overworked, under appreciated, and dealt with toxic managers/upper managers who refuse to do anything. A fryer caught on fire during my one’s coworkers shift and they STILL barely did anything to fix those fryers afterward. 6 people quit in two months after I left. My ESE coworker was convinced that if we all said something to higher management that things will change. I saw the writing on the wall that toxic abusive companies won’t do that after learning this with my first part-time job. I broke and I looked for another job that would appreciate me and I found it. I also had a lot of long-term friendships that I had to cut off after years once I realized that toxic behaviours are not going to change (average of 4-8 years). I have just gotten quicker at figuring it out and leaving before I kill myself in the process.

I heavily heavily believe in sticking to commitments and pride myself on doing so. I am very loyal in this regard. I have also learned that just because YOU are loyal, doesn’t mean people will be loyal to you. It’s just finding the people that believe in such notion and are loyal back. I have gotten quicker at viewing where my time and effort will be better suited and appreciated. I just find that Rationals are more willing to stick around in a relationship or environment on principle, even when it’s clearly not working and they both would be suited for different people or a better environment.

[Flaxe]

In my experience, level of independence, is better indicated by Enneagram instincts than any Socionics traits.
The order I've observed is basically Sp > Sx > So.
It basically seems tied to the instinct's focus of attention.

Sp focus of attention tends to be approval of themselves: "If I'm OK with my behaviour, I'm OK."
Thus Sp has the strongest drive for independence as they mainly look to themselves for approval, and tend to focus the most on being self-sustaining. An Sp/Sp couple tends to be the kind of people who ideally sleep in separate beds while living together, and are happy doing so. (But do many other couple's activities together)

Sx focus of attention tends to be approval of their closest circle: "If my behaviour is OK with my partner/family/best friends, then I'm OK."
Thus Sx tend to have a desire for close companionship, but look to keep that bubble of connections independent from (but not unreliant on) the rest of society.

So focus of attention tends to be; approval of their distant peers: "If my behaviour is OK with the general public, I'm OK."
Thus So are the ones mostly dependent on others, as their focus is the perception of acquaintances and distant connections. Archetype; politicians.

[myresearch]

Now that I'm reading some of these responses, I'm thinking that SFs need NTs way less than anyone else. The talk about F types not needing T types I think is true.

I have never been in a relationship with a SF type. However, I have SF friends and I have worked with them. If you make a poll for most independent person, noone would nominate SF irl, maybe they can nominate some ESIs, if they don't know those ESIs that well since some of them can be lone wolf types.

Why?

Because SFs are connected to people in terms of real life events. Hence, one can look at them and recognize that they are connected to people. When you are connected to people, connection goes both ways, it is a form of dependence and not necessarily a bad thing. We are all connected to people and external world and we all need to be, that's why I said noone can be independent %100. Most handle their T problems through people rather than on their own. It is a good thing because I think reverse can lead us to obtain less information about those subjects, not seeking help where you superid/super ego T/F problems can cause disasters, I know this from first hand. However, if a person relies on other people without learning anything, they can fail in the absence of people regardless of type.

You can go very far in life just by being likable.

True. Being independent doesn't necessarily indicate being better at life.

I know people on here have witnessed situations where a competent yet quiet person was passed over for a more "likable" person.

Again, you are seeing this in terms of Fe and maybe a bit Pe. Getting attention, recognition is not about being independent. Someone can be independent and can be passed over their entire life, this doesn't make them dependent.

In real life, most situations call for sensing or ethics of some kind, and talk about quantum physics or epistemology has almost no use lol.

I think lots of things can be worked through via sensing and ethics. Everyone knows how to deal with things via their strong functions. T or NT can be about quantum physics or epistemology, but not necessarily and exclusively about that.

I think I retract my earlier statement EIEs are not independent usually, NFs are even more useless than NTs. At NTs can develop software or work for tesla. But we get by with people skills alone. I think this puts us in a very dependent situation, but it's not really that obvious.

I think NFs are better at understanding their own dependence and seek help in areas that most people find it easier, this also make them appear more depedent.

[EUDAEMONIUM]

I have never been in a relationship with a SF type. However, I have SF friends and I have worked with them. If you make a poll for most independent person, noone would nominate SF irl, maybe they can nominate some ESIs, if they don't know those ESIs that well since some of them can be lone wolf types.

Lol this is true.

Why?

Because SFs are connected to people in terms of real life events. Hence, one can look at them and recognize that they are connected to people. When you are connected to people, connection goes both ways, it is a form of dependence and not necessarily a bad thing. We are all connected to people and external world and we all need to be, that's why I said noone can be independent %100. Most handle their T problems through people rather than on their own. It is a good thing because I think reverse can lead us to obtain less information about those subjects, not seeking help where you superid/super ego T/F problems can cause disasters, I know this from first hand. However, if a person relies on other people without learning anything, they can fail in the absence of people regardless of type.

Yeah I think that the idea of of half of the dual relationship being more independent kind of goes against socionics theory.

Again, you are seeing this in terms of Fe and maybe a bit Pe. Getting attention, recognition is not about being independent. Someone can be independent and can be passed over their entire life, this doesn't make them dependent.

Lol this made me laugh because I didn't realize how much this was painted by my own perspective. What is Pe? Was that a typo?

I think lots of things can be worked through via sensing and ethics. Everyone knows how to deal with things via their strong functions. T or NT can be about quantum physics or epistemology, but not necessarily and exclusively about that.

Yeah, I agree with this but I was making a generalization to make a point.

I think NFs are better at understanding their own dependence and seek help in areas that most people find it easier, this also make them appear more depedent.

I think a lot of why I said all this was coming from my own frustrations I'm having right now. I feel like things would be so much easier if I was a sensor so a lot of what I said earlier was really coming from that place. This is why I said NFs are the most useless because I feel useless. I find myself having that problem, I talk about "everyone" when I'm just talking about myself.

[Baqer]

Probably has more to do with sxthan type when it comes to closeness. Sx dom is gonna expect much closer relationship, of any type, than an sx last

[Flaxe]

LIEs need love, ESIs need money. It's just that simple.

Ah, Adam! Happy to see you're still around. xD

To make it slightly more ethereal - what about;
LIE seeks devotion, while ESI seeks power?

I'm thinking in terms of the underyling principles and connecting it to the archetypical depictions;
LIE as leaders/commanders - commanders don't seek the love of their subjects, but they seek their devotion. For without devoted followers, one cannot be a commander. Love seems more like a grand summary of the various behaviours that come with devotion.
ESI are usually depicted with money - but money is ultimately just a means to an end. But it's also the currently most significant metaphor for power. ESI are usually found around money, those circles also happen to be the circles of power at the moment.

I'm also thinking of my experience with my ESI ex. She wasn't with me because of money. I never had a lot in comparison to my peers. What I did have though, was a lot of influence in her social circles at the time.
When we parted, because I wasn't responsive to her wishes, and also moved cities, she got together with another guy who had even more influence - and remained in that social circle from which I moved.

In closing, I'm thinking that the LIE - ESI duality works on the premise that LIE feels powerful from the devotion of others, that there is a following to lead. While ESI feels powerful because they can influence someone who holds much power, and by extension use that power for their needs.
Anything resonating with you from this?

[Adam Strange]

To make it slightly more ethereal - what about;
LIE seeks devotion, while ESI seeks power?

I'm thinking in terms of the underyling principles and connecting it to the archetypical depictions;
LIE as leaders/commanders - commanders don't seek the love of their subjects, but they seek their devotion. For without devoted followers, one cannot be a commander. Love seems more like a grand summary of the various behaviours that come with devotion.
ESI are usually depicted with money - but money is ultimately just a means to an end. But it's also the currently most significant metaphor for power. ESI are usually found around money, those circles also happen to be the circles of power at the moment.

I'm also thinking of my experience with my ex. She wasn't with me because of money. I never had a lot in comparison to my peers. What I did have though, was a lot of influence in her social circles at the time.
When we parted, because I wasn't responsive to her wishes, and also moved cities, she got together with another guy who had even more influence - and remained in that social circle from which I moved.

In closing, I'm thinking that the LIE - ESI duality works on the premise that LIE feels powerful from the devotion of others, that there is a following to lead. While ESI feels powerful because they can influence someone who holds much power, and by extension use that power for their needs.

@Flaxe, This is not at all how LIEs work, but I don't have time to elaborate right now. I'll say more on this later today.

[myresearch]

[QUOTE=Eudaimonia;1474895]Yeah I think that the idea of of half of the dual relationship being more independent kind of goes against socionics theory.

I think irrationals may seem more dependent to rationals in terms of perceiving functions. Due to their creative T/F functions, they may seem more independent and loose in those areas.

What is Pe? Was that a typo?

I meant extraverted perception functions, Ne, Se. Te can also have its own way at this. I think extraverted J and P functions are better at getting desired outcome from external.

Yeah, I agree with this but I was making a generalization to make a point.

I know and there is a truth in that generalization, however, I don't appreciate in caricatured aspect of types that much. I don't appreciate SFs because they cook, clean, tidy. These things requires effort, I don't undermine this, but I can do it or get it done in other ways, this cannot be the main thing that makes them appealing. Their approach to life, the way they are, the way they exist makes them more appealing in my eyes. Same goes for NFs, NTs, STs.

I think a lot of why I said all this was coming from my own frustrations I'm having right now. I feel like things would be so much easier if I was a sensor so a lot of what I said earlier was really coming from that place. This is why I said NFs are the most useless because I feel useless. I find myself having that problem, I talk about "everyone" when I'm just talking about myself.

Be EIE and get those things through other people I don't know your spesific problems but systematizing things, having clear cut organized structures and deadlines makes wonders on EIEs, customized closet, shelves, having minimal furniture makes it easier for them to keep things tidy for example.