comparative vs look-alike, illusionary vs semi-dual

[Joy]

What is your subtype, and which do you prefer?

[meatburger]

Ne Subtype.

OOps i didn't read properly.

I like Semi Duals > Illusionary
Shit probablly Lookalike > Comparative

That was actually really hard though they all seem really even

[Exodus]

I prefer look-a-like to comparative. As for semi-dual vs. illusionary, I prefer semi-dual, but my relationships with illusionaries seem to work out better (they prefer me?).

Not sure about my subtype, but I am leaning towards intuitive. Any ideas about my subtype would be greatly appreciated.

[Joy]

I'm intuitive subtype but I really like my comparative a lot more than my look a like... for some reason my look a likes always seem to see me as a threat and have a major problem with me.

As far as the other one... I don't know. I don't even know what an INFj is anymore. I thought I did, but then my 2 INFj models turned out to be ISFjs, and there's a third IxFj, but that doesn't really help. And now when I see INFjs they seem annoyingly girly or just simply obnoxious. The problem though is that I don't know if they're really even INFjs. They all seem sorta INFp or ISFp to me in a way. Maybe I should study up on INFjs a bit.

[April]

I'm probably an Fi subtype, but not strongly so.

I don't think I've ever been close with an ISFj, so I can't say anything about comparative relationships. I very much like look-a-likes, though.

semi-dual > illusionary

Joy, if you want to ask me any questions about INFjs, you can.

[Joy]

I'm thinkin I might start a topic.

[Blaze]

interesting question. depends on the situation. at work, probably lookalike. at home, probably illusionary. in social situations, probably semidual and lookalike.

[Gilly]

I tend to be more attracted to IEEs in terms of who I would like to be long term friends with, but I prefer SLEs socially because I never have to worry about offending them or rubbing them the wrong way; IEEs tend to make me a little nervous/on edge (they always seem more judgmental for some reason). IEEs can be touchy and moody; SLEs are always up for anything, and will play one-up with me or do crayzy dumb shit

SLI vs IEI...I'm more attracted to SLIs. They seem like mysteries to me, innaccessible in a way, which only makes them that much more appealing. However, contact is always easier with IEIs, and although I usually see them as ditzy and slightly flippant, I've had rewarding relationships with more than one. However, SLIs will always have that mystery about them, like a ball of yarn that I want to unravel.

[Expat]

I feel more at ease with comparatives than with look-alikes in social occasions, although at work I can imagine having problems of different kinds with both. For longer-term friendships, comparative would probably work better. So LSE rather than EIE.

I have both EII and LSI friends, but I'm closer to EIIs, and feel that I can be more open talking to them, too.

[FDG]

I guess Ti.

I prefer by a long shot ENTps to ESFps. I don't have much in common with many ESFps - they are too social and uhm, they think I am a bit strange and don't understand what I talk about, many times. I like them though.

I don't know many INTps really. Only one decently at university. He seems to be too coscentious to me, I feel much "free" around SEIs, generally.

[Mea]

ENFp - Fi subtype.

So far, I think Iget along pretty well with my semi-duals.
Illusion works fine.
Definite No to comparative.

I'd say semi-duals>illusion>look-a-like>contrary>comparative

[BLauritson]

I've had pretty limited experience with the four relations except for illusionary. Overall though, I think I prefer Comparative over Look-a-Like, and Illusionary over Semi-Dual. I only know one INFp and one ISTp though, so it's probably more a preference of person than relation, although I get on well with both. I've known 3 ENFps whereas I only knew one ESTp, so it's hard to say there. Again, I get on well with both types, but I think in general I've preferred illusionary relations.

I might be a logical subtype, but I'm not completely sure on that. I don't really know enough about subtypes to make a decision, although one Socionics test I did somewhere a while back suggested logical subtype.

[misutii]

INFp Ni subtype....

I find comparatives (INTp) > Look-a-like (ISFp).
Illusionary (ENTp) > Semi-dual (ESFp)

Both my INTp and ENTp friend are N subtypes. I can get along with ESFp and ISFp S-subtypes, but i've never really taken an interest (and them to me) in Ethical subtypes of either

[Exodus]

So far it seems that, in general, a preference for look-a-like goes with a preference for semi-dual, and vice-versa. There is also some correlation between the first option and being a creative subtype, with a few exceptions.

edit: If true, this would indicate that it's linked to a need for strong intuition/sensing/ethics/logic, irrespective of the attitude of the function.

[Bethanyclaire]

I picture the following pairs together:

Semi-dual/ Illusionary

LII EIE
IEI ILE
SEI IEE
ESE EII
LSI LIE
SLE ILI
SLI SEE
LSE ESI

Kindred/Look-a-like

IEI SEI
ESE EIE
IEE SEE
ILE SLE
LII LSI
LIE LSE
SLI ILI
EII ESI

[Lord Pixel]

I can attest to kindred being off the charts amazing.

[Bethanyclaire]

I think that maybe good illusionary/ semi duals pairs will have some of the benefits of both ITR? So a good illusionary pair will feel a little like semi-duality and a good semi-dual pair will feel a little like illusionary...

I think it might be the same for look-a-like/ kindred. I always thought the words 'nothing to fight for' were a bit melodramatic when describing look-a-like pairs. I have a look-a-like friend and I wouldn't say there's nothing to fight for. Sometimes I feel really annoyed with her..we are very different and that seems to create a nice feeling of challenge in the friendship. We have to make a lot of effort with each other but when we do, and when it works well, I feel very calm and pleased around her. Maybe we are just not that great friends- but I think there is something to be said for having a friend that is different to you, but cares about you. I know another SEI female I'd like to get in touch with- perhaps I have a little more in common with her. I think it's the same though- it's a bit of fire that pulls me to her. It just takes a bit of patience with each other to realise it's there.

[Bethanyclaire]

Also, sometimes I think I like SEIs more than they like me and ILIs like me more than I like them.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Look-alike for friends
Semi-dual for deeper friends/almost lovers but not quite sort of thing
Illusionary for You annoy me sometimes-sometimes I have a soft spot for you
Comparative for- shit. I always forget what my comparative type is. =p

Just shit posting cuz I want to get to 14,000+ posts!

[Bethanyclaire]

Look-alike for friends
Semi-dual for deeper friends/almost lovers but not quite sort of thing
Illusionary for You annoy me sometimes-sometimes I have a soft spot for you
Comparative for- shit. I always forget what my comparative type is. =p

Just shit posting cuz I want to get to 14,000+ posts!

I just had an awkward moment with an LSI-se. I see him once in a while at work and I always feel a bit stupid around him- he mocked me a bit (though maybe playfully) when everyone was chatting recently. But just now, he made a work error and he got a bit flustered. And it was quite funny and cute and he wasn’t off with me for asking stupid questions..

anyway, I’ve been thinking about SEI vs LSI- lookalike vs activity. Can’t be bothered to make another thread.

I think that good/ semi good activity partners (relationship material) can remind me of the type of hot SEIs that are not really suitable for me.

I may be wrong, but I think if lookalike relations are to work- the chemistry can’t be too fiery. Activity can be fiery however. Or maybe I just never met a lookalike type that was right for me..there was a young Italian guy who liked me and there wasn’t explosive chemistry but there was a nice click and he was hot. If he was older, maybe.

I think lookalike pairs mostly get together when young- it doesn’t matter so much if a lover feels a bit like a friend then. You’re more open minded.

uh- I don’t think I could be friends with SEE males. Too much chemistry. With women..it doesn’t feel THAT romantic for me. More romantic with female/gay male IEEs. I do like a random chat with a male SEE. Of course my brother is SEE and life would be far more dull without him in it, even though we are nothing alike

I’d like to make a thread about lookalike/kindred/activity/identical chemistry and what works and what doesn’t

[Bethanyclaire]

Sometimes thinking about lookalike/kindred and supervision confuses me. Like is an ESE more like an SEI to me? And an ILI more like an LIE? But then for an EIE their supervisor is mirrors with their kindred..I guess kindred is a weird ITR that reminds us of both our lookalike and one supervision partner.

reminder that the quadras are only so important

and maybe that certain pairs work better, especially superficially and when it comes to supervision

[Sol]

> comparative [kindred] vs. look-alike

kindred is better
Same base funtion and not 2nd gives more understanding. Lesser opposing from 2nd function should be lesser annoying. Also as by Jung the weakest function is 4th (suggestive), then no opposing against base function is better, then no opposing against your 2nd.

> illusionary [mirage] vs. semi-dual

semidual is better
it complements 1st function what is more important than 2nd

I guess kindred is a weird ITR

By the theory it's neutral and close to identity. On practice would felt as should in case types were correct - your and of other people. Then there would be no need to rationalize by heresies.

> reminder that the quadras are only so important

The most important is functions complementation. Quadras are about similar valued functions, while a complementation also needs functions strenght. Dichotomies are also important.