Do you know of any other, non-Socionics place or resources that do discuss observations of the duality concept and phenomenon?
Do you know of any other, non-Socionics place or resources that do discuss observations of the duality concept and phenomenon?
If you mean duality matchmaking, Socionics is the only one I can think of that was designed entirely around combining a typology of relation pairs with a typology of personalities. People have tried to cram it into enneagram & mbti but it doesn't work.
If you mean the concept of inner duality, Jung covers the ins and outs of the anima (dual-seeking). But Jung is about the duality within you and how that duality is expressed in your relationships. Its about your personal development, and pitfalls in your personal life and your relationships due to not reckoning with your own anima (ds). Its not about finding a dual or what duality is like, but it indirectly explains what duals are "for" besides partnering.
You might try googling jung / jungian + relationships / love + anima / individuation / etc
I googled "jungian relationships" and this was a top 10 result
https://jungutah.org/blog/love-and-individuation-2/
It's what's inside that counts.
Yes. If you mean type duality then Jung and Marie-Louise von Franz also mention it. They are more critical than socionics, but of course the pioneers of typology had observed that opposite types complement each other. Check out "Lectures on Jungs Typology" by von Franz.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Attitudinal Psyche is a new (well, not completely new) typology which has its own form of intertype relations, including duality. I haven't looked into it heaps, so I can't tell you how deep exactly it goes, but it's something.
Facebook mbti groups you’ll come across people who have naturally met and married duals and they are like living testimony of duality without the Socionics jargon
-
Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Thanks everyone, nice suggestions. Anything that does not at all directly relate to jung's dichotomies/functions/mbti functions/socionics IEs/types? It can still be about personalities, personality traits, behaviours etc, but not based on anything originating from Jung, but a completely independent source.
You're probably best of reading a good book about relationships? A therapist could tell you what makes a good relationship- and it would probably sound a lot like duality, or share some qualities with duality descriptions.
BTW An answer so far is Oldham's personalities. It's independent from Jung/MBTI/Socionics. It does mention good and less good pairings though there is no forced symmetry or model in his system.
The idea of Duality is pretty much opposite symmetry.
If you're just looking for type compatibility, people theorize & discuss pairings in pretty much any system - enneagram, keirsey, attitudinal psyche, big 5, hexaco etc.
Search "compatibility" "relationships" + whatever system. (big 5/hexaco search results will probably turn up research papers)
Yes, the idea of duality is about opposites complementing and attracting each other. So you could call that symmetrical. Oldham does not have and never tried to force such a symmetry in his model, is what I said. I kinda miss the full-on duality idea from his system though yea. I used the word "forced" because, with these 8 IEs it can end up feeling like they tried to put the square peg into the round hole. I don't know if you can make a model that includes duality without there being that problem too. If you can, I am interested in that. Thanks for the tips though.
There’s a thread where the idea of ‘enneagram dual’ is discussed. You’d have to do some wading (including posts of my own, where I’m v much thinking out loud, it’s mess-y), but i found it to be a helpful discussion. In the end I figured out the following tritypes were my dual tritypes: 835(53), 836(63), 854(45), 721(12), 852(25), 359(95). I think the 369 tritypes can be suited to anyone and I’ve personally found that 846(64) and 739(93) can be suited to me too. I also think matching stacks are best: so/sx with so/sx.
Last edited by Bethanyclaire; 01-15-2023 at 09:04 AM.
Eh, like I said the system does not define duality per se. But there are good and bad matches for the personality styles. The system never aimed to find all possible good and bad pairings though or I'm not aware of it so far. Where I've seen matches, they seemed to line up with Socionics dual types pretty well
Here's a site: https://www.ptypes.com (Check out the pages on the character styles there)
That has 16 types, the original book referenced on the site has 14 types but they added 2 types later.
I've played with it now, lined it all up with sociotypes rather well.
Which is cool because it really isn't a jungian system. I've read the 14 styles come from professionally determined personality disorders for the American psychiatric diagnostic manual (DSM). Of course the styles are not pathological, they are supposed to be the everyday, normal styles derived from them. I don't know how they added the other 2 (Exuberant and Inventive, I believe).
Here are my Oldham-Socionics pairings.
Vigilant = ILE
Idiosyncratic = LII
Exuberant = ESE
Leisurely = SEI
Adventurous = SLE
Conscientious = LSI
Dramatic = EIE
Self-Sacrificing = IEI
Self-Confident = LIE
Serious = ILI
Inventive = SEE
Sensitive = ESI
Aggressive = LSE
Solitary = SLI
Mercurial = IEE
Devoted = EII
Oh one more thing on Oldham's system. You are allowed to have more than one personal style (they are NOT called personality types for a reason, sorry if I used the word "type" for it above).
So for example I am Conscientious-Aggressive-Adventurous in that system in this order. In Socionics it looks more messy, I have to play with subtypes including DCNH to get it working. Cognitive subtype & DCNH subtype together sorta work to cover all that
"love" related sources sometimes have ideas of compatibility and of complimentation for people with personality differences
duality is about friendship abbility. for long pair, in a family - it's important
where people are different to have what to give each other. and are same in views to do not oppose, but cooperate
Then, the angel asked her what her name was. She said: "I have none"