Rankings/Ratings of Intertype Relations

[jewels]

I would say that honestly, most introverts really intrigue me (yeah all of them!). And also extroverts who appear like introverts (ENTps, ENFps...and then I'm SO sad when I find out their type .... Of course, this all crashes and burns later on...*wearing shirt that reads " still haven't met my dual" lol) Anyway...

For romance:

1) I still think duality is best for romance. Dual friendships I think could be good, but I haven't known one that I've been best friends with yet.
2) Activity is also good!!! warm fuzzy-ness
3) Semi-dual is also very good. also warm fuzzy-ness
4) supervision is very interesting, especially at first, and though there is some conflict, it's not all that bad
5) Look-a-like -- not bad! but they must be really interesting as a person for it to work long-term! They lack the "Mystery" factor so must be super cool for it to last.
Note: I don't like identical for romance because there ends up being a lot of either 1) insecurity because you assume they have the same tricks up their sleeve you do 2) annoyance or boredom if you realize they are exactly like you

For friends:

1) Identical all the way! Just make sure you get a non-boring and smart version like yourself...few things are worse than a boring identical I have an identical friend and we say we are clones...we react exactly the same way (obvious, but still surprising every time). Tonight we were both at a movie and both were overly concerned that we find a drinking fountain and bathroom before the show started - I mean, no one else in the group cared...but we have those Si concerns lol, and then we bitched about small Fi things people had done wrong that had upset us, that no one else thought was important, etc.
2) Activity!
3) Semi Dual
4) Mirrors I get "in theory" but I've had one good INFj friends, and honestly she annoyed me (but I think it was just her). She would act like everyone needed to think the same way she did, as far as supporting the exact same humanitarian causes (and sometimes I didn't want to buy a magnet for whatever, etc.) There were some things I really liked too, but in the end I was too annoyed by certain things. I'm sure most INFjs aren't like that though.

For friends you go out w/ and don't talk deeply with, or see a lot:

1) ALL types!! Even conflictors. I've had several ISTj girl friends who I really do admire and like, and because we're not roommates or anything we never have conflicts (mostly because I avoid saying things I know would set them off. I'm always aware that if I say certain things, especially Ne things, it will cause a conflict.

The worst imho: comparative! conflicting, quasi-identical, and illusionary is not all that great either.

[shakealittle]

Long-term relationship

- Dual: the closer you get to them, the harder it is to let them go. Can't beat them in terms of growth, reciprocated appreciation and sidekick to help you achieve everything you want in life. The only problem is life gets to feel a little different when they're not around.
- Activity: i love activity relations SO much. You never feel quite in-sync with them (with duality I feel like part of a whole). HOWEVER, it doesn't matter as you feel like your own person yet satisfied enough with what the other provides for you.
- Look-a-like: they are a bit boring but I could see myself with them long-term. We seem to have similar enough values to feel like we're a team working toward similar goals (unlike activity) but unlike activity, there's less depth there. Could really put illusionary in here as well.

Romance:
- Semi-dual: love relating to semi-duals with all the sensory-ness that comes with it. Sooo awesome in every way except there's a real clash with issues relating to the bigger picture, I think, so I couldn't see them as ideally long-term.
- Activity
- Mirror: the beta ST aggressor thing, I've been there, and it's probably the most intense thing ever. coupled with the sort of instant-knowingness of the other person, it's even more intensely awesome. the fact we're never quite sure of the relationship itself makes it a little hard to see things long-term. however, they are good for personal growth, i reckon.

Friendship:
- Identical: very easy relation until there's other people involved, then there's some competition/frustration/embarrassment. it's good to see where you need to grow but they don't really give you the tools to so
- Activity: they are always refreshing, and i put them above dual because you kinda relate to them on this introverted level

- Semi-dual and dual: dunno, introverts seem more stable in friendships or something?? I like all other types too for friendship, I also don't mind my conflictors

[07490]

Long-term relationship

- Dual: the closer you get to them, the harder it is to let them go. Can't beat them in terms of growth, reciprocated appreciation and sidekick to help you achieve everything you want in life. The only problem is life gets to feel a little different when they're not around.
- Activity: i love activity relations SO much. You never feel quite in-sync with them (with duality I feel like part of a whole). HOWEVER, it doesn't matter as you feel like your own person yet satisfied enough with what the other provides for you.
- Look-a-like: they are a bit boring but I could see myself with them long-term. We seem to have similar enough values to feel like we're a team working toward similar goals (unlike activity) but unlike activity, there's less depth there. Could really put illusionary in here as well.

Romance:
- Semi-dual: love relating to semi-duals with all the sensory-ness that comes with it. Sooo awesome in every way except there's a real clash with issues relating to the bigger picture, I think, so I couldn't see them as ideally long-term.
- Activity
- Mirror: the beta ST aggressor thing, I've been there, and it's probably the most intense thing ever. coupled with the sort of instant-knowingness of the other person, it's even more intensely awesome. the fact we're never quite sure of the relationship itself makes it a little hard to see things long-term. however, they are good for personal growth, i reckon.

Friendship:
- Identical: very easy relation until there's other people involved, then there's some competition/frustration/embarrassment. it's good to see where you need to grow but they don't really give you the tools to so
- Activity: they are always refreshing, and i put them above dual because you kinda relate to them on this introverted level

- Semi-dual and dual: dunno, introverts seem more stable in friendships or something?? I like all other types too for friendship, I also don't mind my conflictors

[duality is cringe]

Aside from duality, yada, yada, yada, I'd say the "best romantic intertype" relation has been activity, in my experience. I've noticed that in work environments, mutual attraction and interest manifests more immediately between myself and INFjs than even with ENFps, even when we don't have much to say to each other.

[Jarno]

Long-term relationship

- Dual: the closer you get to them, the harder it is to let them go. Can't beat them in terms of growth, reciprocated appreciation and sidekick to help you achieve everything you want in life. The only problem is life gets to feel a little different when they're not around.
- Activity: i love activity relations SO much. You never feel quite in-sync with them (with duality I feel like part of a whole). HOWEVER, it doesn't matter as you feel like your own person yet satisfied enough with what the other provides for you.
- Look-a-like: they are a bit boring but I could see myself with them long-term. We seem to have similar enough values to feel like we're a team working toward similar goals (unlike activity) but unlike activity, there's less depth there. Could really put illusionary in here as well.

Romance:
- Semi-dual: love relating to semi-duals with all the sensory-ness that comes with it. Sooo awesome in every way except there's a real clash with issues relating to the bigger picture, I think, so I couldn't see them as ideally long-term.
- Activity
- Mirror: the beta ST aggressor thing, I've been there, and it's probably the most intense thing ever. coupled with the sort of instant-knowingness of the other person, it's even more intensely awesome. the fact we're never quite sure of the relationship itself makes it a little hard to see things long-term. however, they are good for personal growth, i reckon.

Friendship:
- Identical: very easy relation until there's other people involved, then there's some competition/frustration/embarrassment. it's good to see where you need to grow but they don't really give you the tools to so
- Activity: they are always refreshing, and i put them above dual because you kinda relate to them on this introverted level

- Semi-dual and dual: dunno, introverts seem more stable in friendships or something?? I like all other types too for friendship, I also don't mind my conflictors

Yep.

[xyz]

Some kind of relations are just inherently better.

[Expat]

I think that the erotic attitudes thingy makes the ranking more complicated when it's about romantic relationships.

For instance, Benefit. One of my best friends is an EII guy married to a SEI. I can see signs of the strain around Te issues, but their favorable infantile-caregiver axis probably compensates for a lot. On the other hand, I have witnessed LSI-SEI Benefit relationships that ended in tears - and the aggressor-caregiver thing wouldn't have helped.

For rationals, Illusion is better from that PoV than Semi-Duality; for irrationals, it's the other way around.

Generally speaking, I tend to think that Victim-Victim is particularly unfavorable, so Gamma NT and Beta NF mirror and identical relationships will be less promising than Alpha SF and Delta ST mirror and identical - and, indeed, than Beta ST and Gamma SF mirror and identical (I have known a few Alpha SF mirror couples that overall did well).

A couple I know very well is LSI m - ESI f - kindred, and aggressor-aggressor. He seems sometimes a bit depressed due to the lack of Fe but overall they're ok.

I happen to know even a quasi-identity couple - SEI f, ESI m. That's not really favorable but in their case it seems to work due to their being both in their second marriages, and already rather old - so they just accept each other as they are and avoid open sources of disagreements. I talk a lot to the ESI guy, and he essentially accepts her SEI-ness as "just the way she is" - even as he clearly doesn't understand it - but in a good-humored way.

My basic point is that while it doesnt' affect the broad duality-> conflict worsening progression, I think that those factors make the precise ranking more complicated.

[redbaron]

I think that the erotic attitudes thingy makes the ranking more complicated when it's about romantic relationships.

For instance, Benefit. One of my best friends is an EII guy married to a SEI. I can see signs of the strain around Te issues, but their favorable infantile-caregiver axis probably compensates for a lot. On the other hand, I have witnessed LSI-SEI Benefit relationships that ended in tears - and the aggressor-caregiver thing wouldn't have helped.

For rationals, Illusion is better from that PoV than Semi-Duality; for irrationals, it's the other way around.

Generally speaking, I tend to think that Victim-Victim is particularly unfavorable, so Gamma NT and Beta NF mirror and identical relationships will be less promising than Alpha SF and Delta ST mirror and identical - and, indeed, than Beta ST and Gamma SF mirror and identical (I have known a few Alpha SF mirror couples that overall did well).

A couple I know very well is LSI m - ESI f - kindred, and aggressor-aggressor. He seems sometimes a bit depressed due to the lack of Fe but overall they're ok.

I happen to know even a quasi-identity couple - SEI f, ESI m. That's not really favorable but in their case it seems to work due to their being both in their second marriages, and already rather old - so they just accept each other as they are and avoid open sources of disagreements. I talk a lot to the ESI guy, and he essentially accepts her SEI-ness as "just the way she is" - even as he clearly doesn't understand it - but in a good-humored way.

My basic point is that while it doesnt' affect the broad duality-> conflict worsening progression, I think that those factors make the precise ranking more complicated.

yes. this is really good. I've seen EII/SEI couples also and I think the infantile/caregiver thing does really help. Makes perfect sense.

[Jarno]

I think the absolute worst relationship is with your supervisee (with you being the supervisor). THE WORST. I had it for four years and it sucked SO much...

could be, but conflict relationship is the most dangerous. People get killed in those.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Does comfort always mean best? That just seems like the middle class fantasy that nothing should ever be hard. But childbirth is hard- and it brings forth new life. Sooo...

I'd imagine some conflicting relationships are comfortable, but are a 'slow suicide' ya know?

[redbaron]

Does comfort always mean best?

this is a really good question.

[Kritik]

There's nothing better than getting laid by your conflictor and screwing the crap out of each other.

[Kritik]

I don't want to experience semi-duality in a relationship. ESTP is way too controlling and overwhelming for me. My dad is ESTP, so is my friend's relative. I know them very close and cannot tolerate them for a long time.

[Kritik]

why would anyone get into a relationship with a conflictor ? Do you people not feel (even if you never heard of socionics) that that person is not right for you ? I somehow subconsciencely filter out the unsuitable types and never get close to them. I can somehow feel who's who within 5-10 minutes of meeting a person.

[717495]

Super-ego and conflict is a disrecommend.

[717495]

Does comfort always mean best? That just seems like the middle class fantasy that nothing should ever be hard. But childbirth is hard- and it brings forth new life. Sooo...

I'd imagine some conflicting relationships are comfortable, but are a 'slow suicide' ya know?

Duality isn't the most comfortable relation, but it's comfortable enough for its weakness-strength impacts to build on each other. That's why it's the best relationship for growth. Didn't anyone actually read this or know what duality means? Shit...

A couple I know very well is LSI m - ESI f - kindred, and aggressor-aggressor. He seems sometimes a bit depressed due to the lack of Fe but overall they're ok.

I happen to know even a quasi-identity couple - SEI f, ESI m. That's not really favorable but in their case it seems to work due to their being both in their second marriages, and already rather old - so they just accept each other as they are and avoid open sources of disagreements. I talk a lot to the ESI guy, and he essentially accepts her SEI-ness as "just the way she is" - even as he clearly doesn't understand it - but in a good-humored way.

My basic point is that while it doesnt' affect the broad duality-> conflict worsening progression, I think that those factors make the precise ranking more complicated.

Exactly. +4.5

Comfort is only one piece of the puzzle. It's a distraction to think it's the whole concept, and the ignoring of all the other factors might as well delay your growth like any conflictor relationship.

[717495]

I think supervision can be a good relation. It has a lot in common with duality.

[munenori2]

Assuming I'm an ISFp (I know some of you will disagree :wink, I'd say mirror, semi duality, and of course duality not in that order. Mirror is really really easy to start but seems almost too fun and shallow. Semi Duality isn't too hard to get started but goes deeper than I want and feel comfortable with. Duality is about the right mix, but also a little harder since there's generally less immediately in common I think.

[The Exception]

I think supervision can be a good relation. It has a lot in common with duality.

Not in my experience. I feel like I'm constantly being evaluated and watched and not in a good way in the presence of SLE's. Supervision is an assymetrical relationship. One is the supervisor, the other is the supervisee. Dual is a symmetrical relationship- you're both duals to each other.

[Jarno]

why would anyone get into a relationship with a conflictor ? Do you people not feel (even if you never heard of socionics) that that person is not right for you ? I somehow subconsciencely filter out the unsuitable types and never get close to them. I can somehow feel who's who within 5-10 minutes of meeting a person.

actually, if you read a couple of conflict descriptions, not the standard ones, you'll notice that conflictors have strong mutual attraction in the beginning.

ofcourse you are right if you are totally in tune with what is happening, you might see through that. But anyways, conflictors are much more attracted to eachother then you would expect.

[baittoman]

I think one great thing about duality is the feeling that somebody needs you.

Feeling useless is kind of a source of discomfort for me. That sounds so Te-Superego. Gah. But it's nice to be needed for who are sometimes. =P.

[redbaron]

I think one great thing about duality is the feeling that somebody needs you.

Feeling useless is kind of a source of discomfort for me. That sounds so Te-Superego. Gah. But it's nice to be needed for who are sometimes. =P.

to be needed for who you are... yes, that would be nice. As much as my husband and I love and accept each other for who we are, we don't NEED each other's base function. This has resulted in me being extremely independent and him kind of like "why don't you appreciate me more?" type of thing. I do try to "appreciate" him but I'm afraid it comes off as insincere and less than heartfelt. Which is too bad. He deserves more than that. So it makes me sad. If I'm going to be really honest (and I might as well be), lately my analysis is that supervisory marriages can "work" --it can be loving and you can stay together forever, raise a family etc--but the individuals need to be so healthy that they don't need to need their spouse (at least in the psychological sense of "need") and they can find the dual-seeking functions elsewhere. But I don't recommend it. It can feel unstable to one or both partners. And it's a far cry from "blissful" which is what many dual marriages have been described as. We ARE good friends, which is nice. It's not horrible or anything. You just have to be aware that you're not going to feel that deep sense of comfort or joy at being embraced for being yourself. You have to find that within yourself and accept the partner for who they are, even if you don't necessarily value the same functions. He's so clearly Si>Se and I'm so clearly looking for Se that it's almost hilarious. And neither of us have Ti. It's pretty amusing actually, if you're able to laugh.

[Jarno]

I think one great thing about duality is the feeling that somebody needs you.

Feeling useless is kind of a source of discomfort for me.

Yes that was what Augusta also noticed from a larger perspective. People become happy when society needs them. They start to feel useful again. It's something that is inborn and probably an important factor in your life. Duality is especially useful for this purpose.

There was another study that comes to my mind in that people who had nobody to live for would die sooner, then people who were married. It was concluded that you live more for other people, then you live for yourself. Just another indicator that humans are more part of society then they are individuals.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[mu4]

I think supervision can be a good relation. It has a lot in common with duality.

Are you sure you're not talking about benefit?

A study they did noted that Duality was a high % of marriages.

followed by Benefit

then Activity

followed by Identity/Mirror and Supervision.

Bing Translator - Translate a webpage

Over 75% of marriages were covered by these 6 relationships.

[DirectorAbbie]

I think one great thing about duality is the feeling that somebody needs you.

Feeling useless is kind of a source of discomfort for me. That sounds so Te-Superego. Gah. But it's nice to be needed for who are sometimes. =P.

Amen to that.

[JuJu]

I was skeptical for a long time, but when you live it several times, you understand that this goes beyond a mere theory and it describes some very real and very life-changing feelings and experiences. Some of the people who have made the most deepest marks on me I later realized where SEEs though it took me a while to see it, but when I did, it all clicked.

I'm highlighting this because it's very well-written, and expresses my feelings too. Great post.

[Linalee]

Redbaron, is your marriage a supervisory relationship ?
The "why don't you appreciate me more" thing sounds exactly the same as I've experienced with my supervisee ILE.

Thanks to hkkmr for the link. I am very curious about the method of selection for the study sample. But it is not described. If someone has further info on this study... I'd be glad to read about it.

[redbaron]

Redbaron, is your marriage a supervisory relationship ?

yes.

[mu4]

Redbaron, is your marriage a supervisory relationship ?
The "why don't you appreciate me more" thing sounds exactly the same as I've experienced with my supervisee ILE.

Thanks to hkkmr for the link. I am very curious about the method of selection for the study sample. But it is not described. If someone has further info on this study... I'd be glad to read about it.

In the article they describe it a bit(althrough only a summary).

The couples were picked randomly and typed separately.

Based on this study and theory, the best relationship other then duality going by the study and is a beneficiary relationship of close subtype.

Taking Filatova's subtyping methodology one step further. (Her subtyping is 4 sub-types, Accepting/Creative - Process(right)/Result(left) and allowing for combination of Accepting/Creative and Process/Result, this produces 6 sub types. This methodology suggest closeness to 6 subtypes within the same quadra and adjacent quadra along the dynamic and static dichotomy. So ILE theoretical subtypes are, ILE-LSI, ILE-LII, ILE-EII, ILE-SLE, ILE-IEE and of course ILE-ILE.

Note this is merely a theoretical prediction of socionics, there is no real surprise to this. You will be closer to your same quadra and your adjacent quadra then your conflicting quadra. The only question is whether or not if there is a possibility for dynamic/static subtype. Basically how close you will be to your dual.

So for me a ILE, it would be ILE + Creative + Process= ILE-LSI.
The best dual relationship is a SEI + Creative + Process= SEI-EIE
The closest relationship other then a SEI is a EIE + Accepting + Process = EIE-SEI.

This study more or less gives this prediction some empirical backing. Now let's go back to theorizing.

[Linalee]

Sorry, I like facts and figures, it gives me some reassurance I'm not wasting my time in obviously incorrect theories.

I hadn't seen this Filatova typing anywhere, thanks again for exposing it. I find it very interesting actually, although it makes me feel as if socionic boxes won't ever fit everybody.

[redbaron]

I don't understand that 6 subtypes thing at all.

[mu4]

I hadn't seen this Filatova typing anywhere, thanks again for exposing it. I find it very interesting actually, although it makes me feel as if socionic boxes won't ever fit everybody.

This is more my deduction of Filatova subtypes, although she also said this was possible but she did not make the deduction.

Typing is a means of categorization, thus the boxes surround large groups of different people. Thus it is merely a guess at the similarities of people.

Within a box, sometimes the distance between the opposing ends of the box are more then the distance to the next box.

Subtyping is merely a way to represent relative distance within the box to adjacent boxes.

As far as the 6 subtypes.

Given quadras types on static-dynamic scale

Static

IEE EII
ILE LII
SLE LSI
SEE ESI

If someone is type XXX, the 6 quadra+adjacent quadra types are closer then conflicting types.

So let XXX be ILE then IEE,EII,ILE,LII,SLE,LSI are closer types then SEE and ESI.

Within ILE, the type can be closer to one the these 6 types, including ILE itself.

[The Exception]

Given quadras types on static-dynamic scale

Static

IEE EII
ILE LII
SLE LSI
SEE ESI

If someone is type XXX, the 6 quadra+adjacent quadra types are closer then conflicting types.

So let XXX be ILE then IEE,EII,ILE,LII,SLE,LSI are closer types then SEE and ESI.

Within ILE, the type can be closer to one the these 6 types, including ILE itself.

Where would the remaining 8 types fit in according to this theory? I'm guessing they be less close than the adjacent 6 types but closer than the conflicting types.

Also, shouldn't there be just one conflicting type for every type? (For ILE that would be ESI) or are you considering anyone who's in the opposing quadra and club to be a conflicting type (which would also include SEE for ILE).

Third, I don't see EII and LSI as being all that similar to ILE except for the fact that they are all static types. EII is the supervisor of ILE; ILE supervises LSI. EII's base function of is the PoLR of ILE. ILE's base function of is the PoLR of LSI. Wouldn't just that alone make them quite different?

I'm not trying to criticize your theory, just trying to gain more understanding of it.

[mu4]

Where would the remaining 8 types fit in according to this theory? I'm guessing they be less close than the adjacent 6 types but closer than the conflicting types.

The other 8 types are dynamic, not static and that is the scale we are not looking at. Which is how I have laid this out. Theoretically the gap between static and dynamic can be closed. But then we get into more interesting territory, as we get to speculate whether being more balanced in this dichotomy make you more like your quasi-identical or more like your dual.

Also, shouldn't there be just one conflicting type for every type? (For ILE that would be ESI) or are you considering anyone who's in the opposing quadra and club to be a conflicting type (which would also include SEE for ILE).

Third, I don't see EII and LSI as being all that similar to ILE except for the fact that they are all static types. EII is the supervisor of ILE; ILE supervises LSI. EII's base function of is the PoLR of ILE. ILE's base function of is the PoLR of LSI. Wouldn't just that alone make them quite different?

I'm not trying to criticize your theory, just trying to gain more understanding of it.

EII and LSI both value one function a ILE values, while a SEE or ESI value nothing a ILE values. So this is at least part of the reason why ILE is closer to EII and LSI then SEE or ESI.

As far as EII-ILE-LSI, these are more related types then you would think as they are on the same ring of supervision.

The 2nd and third functions of supervisor type is equal to the 1st and second function of the supervisee type.

[pluie]

Duality being the most comfortable inter-type romantic relation--I think most would agree--what, in your personal opinions, are the other most and least comfortable relations?

E.g. Is activity more comfortable than mirror, or vice versa? Why?

E.g. Is supervision worse than conflict?

please tell about your experiences so we can all learn

maybe you already know
but its posted on socionics.com

4-star and down.
best to worst.

[Jarno]

maybe you already know
but its posted on socionics.com

4-star and down.
best to worst.

yeah, but that's probably ganin's idea. Not that it's bad.

We've had a similar thread a couple of years ago and 'identical' was the most surprising because it was rarely seen in the top 3.

[UDP]

I think that the erotic attitudes thingy makes the ranking more complicated when it's about romantic relationships.

For instance, Benefit. One of my best friends is an EII guy married to a SEI. I can see signs of the strain around Te issues, but their favorable infantile-caregiver axis probably compensates for a lot. On the other hand, I have witnessed LSI-SEI Benefit relationships that ended in tears - and the aggressor-caregiver thing wouldn't have helped.

For rationals, Illusion is better from that PoV than Semi-Duality; for irrationals, it's the other way around.

Generally speaking, I tend to think that Victim-Victim is particularly unfavorable, so Gamma NT and Beta NF mirror and identical relationships will be less promising than Alpha SF and Delta ST mirror and identical - and, indeed, than Beta ST and Gamma SF mirror and identical (I have known a few Alpha SF mirror couples that overall did well).

A couple I know very well is LSI m - ESI f - kindred, and aggressor-aggressor. He seems sometimes a bit depressed due to the lack of Fe but overall they're ok.

I happen to know even a quasi-identity couple - SEI f, ESI m. That's not really favorable but in their case it seems to work due to their being both in their second marriages, and already rather old - so they just accept each other as they are and avoid open sources of disagreements. I talk a lot to the ESI guy, and he essentially accepts her SEI-ness as "just the way she is" - even as he clearly doesn't understand it - but in a good-humored way.

My basic point is that while it doesnt' affect the broad duality-> conflict worsening progression, I think that those factors make the precise ranking more complicated.

I don't disagree with anything much there.
The bold is somewhat confirmed with my own experience.

I agree with Expat's last paragraph.

I happen to know even a quasi-identity couple - SEI f, ESI m. That's not really favorable but in their case it seems to work due to their being both in their second marriages, and already rather old - so they just accept each other as they are and avoid open sources of disagreements. I talk a lot to the ESI guy, and he essentially accepts her SEI-ness as "just the way she is" - even as he clearly doesn't understand it - but in a good-humored way..

Very interesting.

[bluesballsbobs]

Also saying that that is a good way to put it. I think all types feel that way about all duals. When I'm around SEEs, I suddenly see how I become valuable to them and I naturally put off my pretenses and fall into my most natural way of thinking and being. The only bad side is that I often stop making an effort to be nice and show my snarky self for all it's worth, though not without an inner sense of giddiness that they are being so receptive and appreciative to me because of it. And I also sometimes imagine what it's like for a SEE without their dual . I think they are so amazing but then think if they feel as mundane as I do when I don't have a dual around who needs someone like me to be me.

But having my dual take such a large interest in me and be just so curious about who I am and trying to get closer and closer to me is an amazing feeling and I struggle hard to be as emotionally cool as possible since I don't like to express my real feelings if I possibly can. I, of course, find them enthralling, most times, as well, and it feels really great being so well liked by someone who is so interesting, from my viewpoint, at least.

But many, many times I have fallen into my critical mode where I bluntly point out how idiotic something is (in the way ILIs can sometimes) and I've had SEEs who never talked to me before turn to me, grin widely, and tell me that they loved me. That sort of stuff really appeals to a lot of them (since they usually know I'm making an observation which is not personally related to anyone specifically or meant to cut anyone down since I don't play that way unless someone's being an ass and deserves to be put in their place).

I always become protective of my dual, as well. All too often I come to their defense if I don't agree how someone is approaching them, even if someone is not being mean but is missing their point or not noticing what the person (dual) needs at that moment. It really surprises me when I act that way because I'm usually so taciturn and easy-going. But being around my dual and getting close to them awakens my most admirable qualities as well as well as my greatest strengths. It also awakens a very self-sacrificing part of me to where I believe I would put myself through a lot if it meant sparing them from some misfortune. I mean, it has to do with the individual, too, but only within the realm of duality have I experienced this.

I admit that duality seemed over-rated to me when I originally typed myself as IEI, but now I understand what it really amounts to...and it's a lot. I was skeptical for a long time, but when you live it several times, you understand that this goes beyond a mere theory and it describes some very real and very life-changing feelings and experiences. Some of the people who have made the most deepest marks on me I later realized where SEEs though it took me a while to see it, but when I did, it all clicked.

thanks dude.
I had so many questions on my mind about how an INTP-ESFP dual relationship would work (since I have not experienced it in real life yet - only in theory)

I'm currently with an INFP gal and she's really awesome. but we do have our emotional conflicts/arguments. (quadra battles?) the 'aggressor-victim thing works out well, though...in bed


I have only ever met one INTP, and he's a dude (I'm a dude), but I felt really deeply connected with him. I met him, and we got to know each other EXTREMELY well (fast) within 4 hours. Then, every preceding time we hung out, it felt like we've been friends forever (like, since childhood)
He was REALLY REALLY dorky, and I thought it was ADORABLE. and he constantly made funny little snide remarks and jokes that made me FEEL how silly/dumb I was (in a great way - because I know I'm dumb)
our communication was ridiculously easy and it seemed like he understood everything I was saying AND he knew what I was about to say MOMENTS before I actually said it.

really fun relationship. I've only hung out with him like 15 times, and he moved away to some faraway country without a trace. (and without saying goodbye)


I already really miss him, but he's left me wondering...

is there truly a girl out there that's an INTP that I would ever meet, like, befriend, trust, and LOVE???

if this is true, I can't wait. I have dated so many girls of different types and I just want true love, so I can finally stop focusing on trying to get laid all the time. I need true love so I can finally focus on what I really want in life - entertaining the world, or influencing it in some grandiose way.


WHERE THE HELL DO YOU FIND THEM??@$%?
I HAVE MET GIRLS EVERYWHERE...PARTIES, CLUBS, SOCIAL EVENTS, CONCERTS, STREET SIDEWALKS, AIRPORTS, GYMS, etc.

but I guess I have never browsed libraries, chess clubs, or science/computer classes (Booo-ring haha)


anyway...there's my two cents.



patiently waiting...

just kidding HAHA, I will ACTIVELY GO OUT AND FIND YOU DAMN INTPs
if it kills me



btw, aixlesyd, I personally DO feel mundane and alone. however, when I'm in relationships or dating/courting, I can quiet that overwhelmingly lonely feeling temporarily by having lots of sex. But then I usually get bored, or the relationship crumbles and leaves me emotionally wounded and sad. then I usually go through a period of self-destruction by drinking, or doing drugs, or partying.

GOD I GET SO SICK OF PARTYING SOMETIMES. haha.
I think if I found true love, I could give up going outside IN GENERAL. I would just stay in (for a long time) with my lover (possibly INTP) and just give them the most amazing sensations EVER. (hint: sexual)

and then play them songs, and write them songs, and then sing them songs. (I'm a musician)
and then joke a lot. I'd be like a happy dancing monkey.

oh and I noticed my style of sex (TMI, I know) is naturally very caring and nurturing. TONS of sensations are exchanged.


ok ok I'll stop.

good bye!

[The Exception]

I'm only speaking from my own experience here:

1) Dual
2) Activity
3) Identical
4) Mirror
5) Semi-Dual
6) Illusionary


13) Comparative
14) Super Ego
15) Being Supervised
16) Conflictor


The top 6 have been generally favorable relations; the bottom 4 mostly unfavorable. The rest could go either way.