Stackings and Relationship Compatibility

[myresearch]

Stackings can be seen in two groups.


First group:

so/sp -> sp/sx -> sx/so -> so/sp

In this group info supervised as below:

so -> sp -> sx -> so

Second group: so/sx -> sx/sp -> sp/so -> so/sx

In this group info supervised as below:

so -> sx -> sp -> so


Duality always requires opposite partners. Hence our duals have completely opposite ordered drives than us.

For example, considering that we all use three instincts so/sp/sx(sp/so) is dualized by its opposite sx/sp/so(sx/sp). They dualize by their valued flexible second sp instinct, protecting and securing each other.


The forms of relationship mainly change by the signs of second instinct.

If the sign of second instincts match, members of the same group relates each other easily while members of the opposite group energize each other.


For example for so/sp relationships are as follows:

so/sp/sx - so/sp/sx: identical
so/sp/sx - sp/sx/so: benefit (so/sp as benefactor)
so/sp/sx - sx/so/sp: benefit (so/sp as beneficiary)

so/sp/sx - sx/sp/so: dual
so/sp/sx - so/sx/sp: kindred
so/sp/sx - sp/so/sx: mirror


When the signs of instincts don't match:

so/sp/sx - so/sp/sx: quasi-identical
so/sp/sx - sp/sx/so: supervison (so/sp as supervisor)
so/sp/sx - sx/so/sp: supervison (so/sp as supervisee)

so/sp/sx - sx/sp/so: conflictor
so/sp/sx - so/sx/sp: super-ego
so/sp/sx - sp/so/sx: extinguishment



I tried to name relationships same as socionics relations since they can be similar to those although they are not exactly for each case. I can change it, explain later.

If anyone has any thoughts and opinions about this, they are appreciated.

[AWellArmedCat]

It's an interesting idea, but is there a basis for assuming that duality works the same with regard to instinctual variants as it does with sociotype? I don't say this cause I doubt your hypothesis or anything. I'm not familiar enough with the nitty gritty of Enneagram to have any grounds to doubt any of what you wrote. Just curious about how you find it enlightening/useful to view instinctual variant stackings this way

[Aria]

What do you mean "when sign doesn't match?" For example listing Sx/Sp as the dual of So/Sp in one place, and conflictor in the other.

[roger557]

Not correct.

[roger557]

For sx/sp:

Sx/Sp - Identity
Sx/So - Dual
Sp/So - Supervisee of and Benefactor of
So/Sx - Supervisor of and Beneficiary of
Sp/Sx - Mirage
So/Sp - Conflictor

[Aria]

For sx/sp:

Sx/Sp - Identity
Sx/So - Dual
Sp/So - Supervisee of and Benefactor of
So/Sx - Supervisor of and Beneficiary of
Sp/Sx - Mirage
So/Sp - Conflictor

I can see this.

It's commonly thought "oh, I have to be with someone of my same flow" (if you go with the contraflow/synflow theory), and I can kind of see that, but the asymmetry of it never sat right with me because you end up in a sort of Benefit relation unless you go with your same stacking.

But I still can't wrap my mind around OP's hypothesis of sp/so being my Dual because they're somehow my equal. Sx/Sp are my "equal" as well, and don't ignore my needs. I don't feel like Sp/So see me.

[myresearch]

It's an interesting idea, but is there a basis for assuming that duality works the same with regard to instinctual variants as it does with sociotype? I don't say this cause I doubt your hypothesis or anything. I'm not familiar enough with the nitty gritty of Enneagram to have any grounds to doubt any of what you wrote. Just curious about how you find it enlightening/useful to view instinctual variant stackings this way

Definition of duality:

the quality or state of having two different or opposite parts or elements : DUALISM

It is not about socionics duality. You can see this in other typology systems as well. You can see this in non typological systems. Duality always requires opposite partners.



Saying that, people generally relate to people who are similar to themselves. That's why if someone is very similar, same, it is considered as good compability in dating platforms. However, that is not duality.

For sx/sp:
Sx/So - Dual

You can claim that is the best partner for sx/sp. However, you cannot claim that is duality because it is not according to the definition of duality as it is explained above.

[Adam Strange]

The "instinct" system doesn't lend itself to the idea of Duality, since it has three components. In that sense, it is like the Enneagram system which also has on odd number of classifications. Either one category has no dual, or it has two duals.

You have to understand, though, that all of these systems are artificial filters placed over reality.

If you look at a stoplight through a red filter, you will say that the top light illuminates, sometimes. Through a minus-red filter, you'd say that the stoplight's middle and lower lights illuminate sometimes.

What shape is a soup can? From the side, it looks rectangular. From the top, it's circular.

What you see is what you filter for.

I think a better approach for finding compatible matches would be to do some research and look for which pairs of classifications work out best together. I realize that this is a Te approach, but I'm Te.

A couple years ago, I was interested in which types (sociotype, enneagram, & instincts) would be my best match. My desire to not waste time living a year or two with every possible combination to see how it goes drove this quest.

After some experimentation, I concluded that ESIs are a good match to my LIE. My e8 seems to get along fairly well with enneagram 6's. Also, sp/sx seems to be the best instinctual match for my sx/so.

Strangely enough, a lot of ESIs (more than by random chance) have these characteristics.


In my research, I found that each sociotype tends towards having just a few enneatypes.

Think soup can here. Soup cans look like rectangles or circles, and sometimes like some weird superposition of the two shapes, but they never look like starfish. Unless you run into a mentally unhealthy soup can that has been modified by a shotgun sometime before you tested it.

There are LIIs who think they are not e5, but there also exist testing errors and some level of human variance.
LIEs are typically e8 or e3, never e2 or e9. ESIs are e4, e6, and e9, never e8 or e3.
ILIs are typically e5 or e1, never e2 or e7. SEEs are e7 or e2, never e1.

See a pattern here? The filters of the two systems are telling you that you are measuring the same differences from slightly different angles. If the correlations are not perfect, then that is more likely to be the fault of the filter construction.

As for the instincts, I think it is possible to make up a lot of reasons why your first, seeking function should not be the other person's ignoring function, or some other string of rules, but the ultimate test of an randomly constructed classification system is to do experiments and see if the model fits reality.
If it does, then you are free to make up reasons as to why it does.

[myresearch]

What do you mean "when sign doesn't match?" For example listing Sx/Sp as the dual of So/Sp in one place, and conflictor in the other.

People have positively and negatively identify themselves with their instincts regardless of the order of the instincts.

For example, sp- first can think they are always at short and never get enough, they can be stingy, they can hoard and collect as much as they could. On the other hand, sp+ first can think they can get whatever they want from easily, hence they may not hoard at all, they can be spending too much, they can be generous to others in this regard. Although they are both sp first, +/- sign changes how people use their own drive.


According to these +/- signs, there are 384 different types of relations if we get into details. Hence, this is where things get complicated, I tried to simplify as much as I can.

The sign of the second instinct creates more major effect. Because people can understand where other person is coming from in terms of their first instinct. People don't use their third instinct that much, hence other person doesn't bother them when they use it in positive/negative way. Both first and third instinct are neurotic anyways.

For example, sp+ first gets themselves enough resources, so even if they spend too much, it doesn't seem off to sp- first. sp- first doesn't seem off to sp+ first because they are stingy because they understand their need to hoard.

In the same way, so+ last can be good with people, however, so+ last isn't bothered with loner so- last since it isn't even evaulated that much.


Second instinct is not neurotic as much as first and third instincts. Person wants to fulfill its needs and communicates and shares its needs much more easily hence the opposite approach in second instinct is more hurtful. It can create a repulse or worse it can pull you first then repulse you back depending on the signs of other instinct.

Hence, I meant if the sign of the second instinct doesn't match. However, as I said the signs of 1st and 3rd instinct also have some amount of effect, I generalized it without getting into some nuances.

[myresearch]

The "instinct" system doesn't lend itself to the idea of Duality, since it has three components. In that sense, it is like the Enneagram system which also has on odd number of classifications. Either one category has no dual, or it has two duals.

Everything has duality in it. It doesn't have to be odd or even numbered, duality doesn't even solely exist in typology.

After some experimentation, I concluded that ESIs are a good match to my LIE. My e8 seems to get along fairly well with enneagram 6's. Also, sp/sx seems to be the best instinctual match for my sx/so.

You can have a good relation with some sx/so. It depends on what you want in life. You can want to be fully complemented in life or you can want someone you resonate with. So this is a matter of choice.

However, in terms of theory, how you relate to sx/so is different than how sx/so relates to you, there is asymmetry.

[myresearch]

But I still can't wrap my mind around OP's hypothesis of sp/so being my Dual because they're somehow my equal. Sx/Sp are my "equal" as well, and don't ignore my needs. I don't feel like Sp/So see me.

People have to learn how to cope with the needs of their first instincts. People are insecure about their last instinct.

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.

According to enneagram and instinct theory, one has to be well rounded, balanced in order to be healthy. First sx-sx relationship has an unbalanced sx emphasis. When shits hit the fan, both of them are prone to get intense and these common attitude can explode their relationship. Hence this is not complementing. Besides they don't cover each other blind spots efficiently.

However, if the signs match, every type can have good relations. However, form of relationships is going to be different.

[mu4]

For example for so/sp relationships are as follows:

so/sx/sp - so//sx/sp: identical
so/sx/sp - sp/so/sx: benefit (so/sp as benefactor)
so/sp - sx/so: benefit (so/sp as beneficiary)

so/sp - sx/sp: dual
so/sp - so/sx: kindred
so/sp - sp/so: mirror


When sign doesn't match:

so/sp - so/sp: quasi-identical
so/sp - sp/sx: supervison (so/sp as supervisor)
so/sp - sx/so: supervison (so/sp as supervisee)

so/sp - sx/sp: conflictor
so/sp - so/sx: super-ego
so/sp - sp/so: extinguishment

This part is confusing

[myresearch]

This part is confusing

There 384 different relationships, I tried to simplify it. Second instinct has more impact in comparison to other instincts as I explained here:

https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...25#post1485825

Hence, I defined the relationships based on that. However, the signs of first and third instinct also have an effect.

I can explain better I think if I explain how relationships work.

[marooned]

i find this really quite confusing because the dominant instinct is oft described as an area that is over-emphasized in some at least borderline neurotic way.

It appears that the degree to which our instinctual drive's impulses control our lives is subject to the same kind of energy as our Enneagram point. For example, we can experience our drives and passions mildly or intensely; we can feel some sense of control or very little control at all; and in addition, we can either embrace our particular instinctual drive or act totally against it. It is important to note that whether embracing the drive as an asset or viewing it as a liability it is still ever present and influential.

More specifically, our dominant instinctual drive is, in actuality, our area of greatest weakness. Thus, when our sense of "survival" is threatened something has triggered whatever "button" happens to relate not only to our Enneagram point but, more important, also to our instinctual drive. The fixation then becomes even more severe as we take on the additional fears of the instinctual drive. The important factor here is that the triggering element of the fixation is the instinctual drive's issue. Nevertheless, the flavor will always be that of the Enneagram type, as the fixation and the drive are interactive, linked, and always related to the Enneagram type.

In the context of the "false self" or personality, it is the instinctual drive that supposedly protects the survival of the Enneagram point and is called to the front lines when in stress. However, since the dominant instinctual drive is actually one's "weak link," its entrance in times of stress may ultimately produce no "protection" at all to one's survival, and in fact, may exacerbate the level of stress and ultimate fixation.

The real question is, how do we express anger, fear and desire? How do we experience illness and what types of illnesses do we have? How do we act when we're happy or sad? As an example, ask yourself how you like to spend your time. Do you tend to make sure your own needs are met and satisfied with the essentials of life (self-preservation)? Or does your attention go to being in the company of others and, if so, how many others, and/or do you need to be in service of others (social)? Or instead do you find that your ultimate expression of self is linked to the company of one significant other in an intimate and profound way, and that no matter where you are or what you are doing, you are always in search of that beloved special person (sexual)?

from https://www.katherinefauvre.com/subtypes

is for instance sp blind the best to balance out sp first or is sp second? the second instinct is sometimes described as the most stable one.

i often throw around different stacks for myself largely because i find everything i read about the stacks to be kinda contradictory of other things i read about them. it often depends on who is describing them and what their "take" is. my sp as an example is out of control... it's a combo of the "sp+" with over-spending and indulgence and the sp- with neglect of health matters like a bottomless well so overwhelming i can't even begin. it's "unhealthy" and i am not sure if it is "neurotic" as i feel like i don't feel panicked enough about it. so frankly sp- from someone else that is stable feels like the best thing for it, but sp may well be MY first instinct because there's a lot of "activity" in the sp realm even if it's pure chaos.

it's hard to think of this in a "duality" way when the enneagram is kinda about what is "wrong" with us. and when the model has this stress emphasis. the over-involved first instinct goes especially bad under stress. it can't help someone with the same instinct in the blind position in that case - it can't even help itself. is it a weakness or is it a strength? it depends.

is the blind spot some neglected area like the DS function that needs help, or is it simply an area that is balanced and stable because it ISN'T a fixation?

[Aria]

People have positively and negatively identify themselves with their instincts regardless of the order of the instincts.

For example, sp- first can think they are always at short and never get enough, they can be stingy, they can hoard and collect as much as they could. On the other hand, sp+ first can think they can get whatever they want from easily, hence they may not hoard at all, they can be spending too much, they can be generous to others in this regard. Although they are both sp first, +/- sign changes how people use their own drive.


According to these +/- signs, there are 384 different types of relations if we get into details. Hence, this is where things get complicated, I tried to simplify as much as I can.

The sign of the second instinct creates more major effect. Because people can understand where other person is coming from in terms of their first instinct. People don't use their third instinct that much, hence other person doesn't bother them when they use it in positive/negative way. Both first and third instinct are neurotic anyways.

For example, sp+ first gets themselves enough resources, so even if they spend too much, it doesn't seem off to sp- first. sp- first doesn't seem off to sp+ first because they are stingy because they understand their need to hoard.

In the same way, so+ last can be good with people, however, so+ last isn't bothered with loner so- last since it isn't even evaulated that much.


Second instinct is not neurotic as much as first and third instincts. Person wants to fulfill its needs and communicates and shares its needs much more easily hence the opposite approach in second instinct is more hurtful. It can create a repulse or worse it can pull you first then repulse you back depending on the signs of other instinct.

Hence, I meant if the sign of the second instinct doesn't match. However, as I said the signs of 1st and 3rd instinct also have some amount of effect, I generalized it without getting into some nuances.

Ah okay, I see what you meant by that now.

[Aria]

People have to learn how to cope with the needs of their first instincts. People are insecure about their last instinct.

According to enneagram and instinct theory, one has to be well rounded, balanced in order to be healthy. First sx-sx relationship has an unbalanced sx emphasis. When shits hit the fan, both of them are prone to get intense and these common attitude can explode their relationship. Hence this is not complementing. Besides they don't cover each other blind spots efficiently.

I agree people need to learn to deal with the last instinct and that Sx-Sx can be intense. It would take two mature people, but I also think if they are securely attached/committed they have even more incentive to work through things because of the value they place on the relationship. I also don't agree that they can't cover the blind spot. Often the second instinct can be very strong--better balanced than when it's first--and I think when people have their dominant instinct need met they're better able to focus and flow energy to the second. But I'm speaking in generalities.

I'm sort of coming to the conclusion that instincts are really just more about personal preference than they are about an airtight theory of what's always "best." Of course some stackings seem worse than others. This is sort of how I view socionics ITR too, to be honest.

[Aria]

i often throw around different stacks for myself largely because i find everything i read about the stacks to be kinda contradictory of other things i read about them.

Exactly, and to me it seems like people's life experiences and relation to their instincts can vary so much that often theory can be thrown out the window, even if there are observable trends.

the over-involved first instinct goes especially bad under stress. it can't help someone with the same instinct in the blind position in that case - it can't even help itself. is it a weakness or is it a strength? it depends.

I've often found I learn the most about Sp from people who are Sp-second, and that my Sp-first friends worry about it in a way that doesn't actually seem productive (sometimes, not always of course).

*Edit: case in point, my mom's So/Sp and dad is Sp/So. They are both very focused on Sp concerns and I would say the reason the household ran so smoothly was because of my mom's amazing skills. Truly a strength for her. I remember my dad as anxious and obsessive compulsive about Sp things, which I think bred a certain neuroticism in me over Sp. If the "sign" thing is correct, he'd definitely be Sp-. So I feel like the actual skills I learned from mom, and the neuroses from him.

[Adam Strange]

I've often found I learn the most about Sp from people who are Sp-second, and that my Sp-first friends worry about it in a way that doesn't actually seem productive (sometimes, not always of course).

I always thought that the first instinct is the one that you need and worry about, the second instinct is the one that you have mastered and are competent at, and the third instinct is the one that you ignore?

[Aria]

I always thought that the first instinct is the one that you need and worry about, the second instinct is the one that you have mastered and are competent at, and the third instinct is the one that you ignore?

That's my understanding as well. I do know people who seem pretty good at their first instinct, and sometimes life makes you focus on your blind spot unnaturally, but the idea seems to hold up in general.

[roger557]

Definition of duality:



It is not about socionics duality. You can see this in other typology systems as well. You can see this in non typological systems. Duality always requires opposite partners.



Saying that, people generally relate to people who are similar to themselves. That's why if someone is very similar, same, it is considered as good compability in dating platforms. However, that is not duality.



You can claim that is the best partner for sx/sp. However, you cannot claim that is duality because it is not according to the definition of duality as it is explained above.

A dual is different, but the same. A Conflictor is similar, but irreconciliably different. Under this definition, the one with the same instinct first and switched second is the one that fits for dual. Also, I have some evidence; I know two pairs of twin flames that follow this rule. Also, I have most trouble getting along with sp/sx (Mirage under my theory) and So/sp (conflictor under my theory).

[myresearch]

i find this really quite confusing because the dominant instinct is oft described as an area that is over-emphasized in some at least borderline neurotic way.

is for instance sp blind the best to balance out sp first or is sp second? the second instinct is sometimes described as the most stable one.

These are true and I agree to this, that's why I said both first and third instincts are neurotic on my prior post. They are neurotic in different ways though, hence one is first and the other is third. You cannot balance someone's neuroticism with a balanced use of it. If something is on the extreme end of the spectrum, its dual is on the opposite extreme of the spectrum not in the middle of it. Ofcourse saying that we can say both extreme ends are unhealthy and middle is healthy, however, that doesn't change the relation of those.

it's hard to think of this in a "duality" way when the enneagram is kinda about what is "wrong" with us.

We can say every kind of filter, cognition style is there as a survival mechanism. What is wrong with us generally dictates our relationships more than anything else.

and when the model has this stress emphasis. the over-involved first instinct goes especially bad under stress. it can't help someone with the same instinct in the blind position in that case - it can't even help itself. is it a weakness or is it a strength? it depends.

Why do you think first instinct cannot help last one? Can you explain by giving an example?

is the blind spot some neglected area like the DS function that needs help, or is it simply an area that is balanced and stable because it ISN'T a fixation?

I don't know @inumbra, I get pretty fixated on my DS function as well

As I said I think both first and third instinct are neurotic in a complementing way. However, that neuroticism doesn't alone make this duality a duality. If opposite stacks get dualized in other words, if they start to communicate with each other via using their second instinct, then they can push each other on the middle ground.

I see the second instinct as a tool to merge these different worlds together, hence each partner being more open to other person's view since it is transmitted in a way that they can understand.

For example, so/sp/sx's sp is supervised by so, hence that second sp carries some so info. Its dual carries sx info, since second instinct is balanced in both, they are more open to receive it via that.

[marooned]

I don't know @inumbra, I get pretty fixated on my DS function as well

that's bc it's a neglected valued area that needs help. the blind spot is described as an area of no concern often... it's like this is something one doesn't care about and doesn't want to be around... it's ignored as an area of no importance. and i think it's bc maybe we don't need all the instincts? we all have the instinct to survive as living creatures... sp/so/sx is like putting light through a prism... none of us lack the white light (the pure instinct to survive)... all of this is how we express it and where we start getting neurotic about it...

it's different than socionics bc there isn't anything wrong with any socionics type really - it's a matter of strength and weakness. but enneagram system began as self-help of a spiritual kind because it's trying to point people to how they are lying to themselves and therefore getting lost on some false journey that is actually UNTRUE to themselves. an integrated enneagram type still has the flavor of the type, but has transcended the neuroticism of the type and so really it's like they have returned to the white light, to just being a full human no longer lost in some ego-maze. was kinda my understanding?


i really need to think about this all more... because i'm more confused about the structure than you are so everything i say and ask will reflect that...


PS i really agree with this

What is wrong with us generally dictates our relationships more than anything else.

i mean i don't know what to do with it, but it's kinda true.

Why do you think first instinct cannot help last one? Can you explain by giving an example?

well i will use the sp instinct... can someone who say deprives themselves of everything (sp first, neurotic) help someone who doesn't care about sp (sp-last). it's like i have developed anorexia, i will help you to not consume food and beverage as well??? although haha this happened with my grandma who is sp first and she controlled her husband's food, which may have saved his life... but i think he's sp first as well. lol

so actually they are two sp people who helped each other. he LOVES eating all the time. she has an eating disorder. pair them and she still has an eating disorder but he is not allowed to eat all the bad food all the time. aaaah.

[myresearch]

that's bc it's a neglected valued area that needs help. the blind spot is described as an area of no concern often... it's like this is something one doesn't care about and doesn't want to be around... it's ignored as an area of no importance. and i think it's bc maybe we don't need all the instincts? we all have the instinct to survive as living creatures... sp/so/sx is like putting light through a prism... none of us lack the white light (the pure instinct to survive)... all of this is how we express it and where we start getting neurotic about it...

It is stated in many enneagram articles you can check and find it anywhere even in the article you shared, they suggest to use it all in order to get balanced and healthy and we need it all.

This being survival mechanism makes this more important than cognition in terms of relations.

Partners who prone to flight as a survival mechanism probably cannot last, same goes for fight-fight or freeze-freeze couples.

[myresearch]

*Edit: case in point, my mom's So/Sp and dad is Sp/So. They are both very focused on Sp concerns and I would say the reason the household ran so smoothly was because of my mom's amazing skills. Truly a strength for her. I remember my dad as anxious and obsessive compulsive about Sp things, which I think bred a certain neuroticism in me over Sp. If the "sign" thing is correct, he'd definitely be Sp-. So I feel like the actual skills I learned from mom, and the neuroses from him.

Do you know your and your father's so signs?

[Aria]

Do you know your and your father's so signs?

I don't, it's too hard to say for sure. Not super familiar with the + and - criteria, but I think mine used to be pretty positive (+), a clear natural strength, but has gotten negative over the years as I've become more mistrustful of people.

[thistle]

I am still trying to get to grips with the signs-reversed part and there is reluctance because I prefer to think a person has a shifting attitude toward their main drive/instinct - that they can desire to use/deal with the attitude in a different way, because they recognise the neuroticism.

If I am understanding the structure correctly, is it right that a change in sign from + to - could shift an duality instinct relationship to a conflict one?

My own instinct stacking is Sp/So. Something I have noticed is that most of my close friends are So-first, and partners from my past So/Sx. (Adding these to your data sheet @myresearch)

[Jarno]

There are two groups. Synflow and Contraflow. And in both groups there is a supervision going on.
Synflow: sp/so > sx/sp > so/sx >
Contraflow: sx/so > sp/sx > so/sp >

When you combine a synflow type with a contraflow type, they are always somewhat conflictors and the So place decides who is the top dog.
These relations are usually very short lived or quickly boring.

Best matches are from same flow and often very long lived. Often the same instinct is the best. There is a feeling of respect among people from the same flow.