What do you think of duality?

[Expat]

i wonder if there has been any research done on married couples or couples in long term relationships in the socionics community and whether there is any data correlational or otherwise on the success of different types of relations in marriage. if there was, it could explicate the question of validity on the relational aspects of socionics theory.

That was Augusta's original work, and I have seen updates -- I think there were links in Lytov's site. There was indeed a much higher proporting of successful happy dual couples, but the problem is that someone has to have typed them, and the is always a margin of error.

[Exodus]

SM makes a lot of good points.

Analyze every conversation and interaction to see how it fits in socionics and therefore not behave naturally and therefore scare off potential partner, who might even be dual

Yeah, I think of it (knowledge of socionics) more as something to keep in the back of my mind at all times. The opposing side of this limitation is that it unfortunately can't help you resolve all conflicts in unfavorable relations, either. The ability of the average person to use socionics is limited - and in a sense that's one of the lessons of socionics, that you can't control everything as well as you might like.

I must add, though, that the "might-have-beens" that made the most impression were all duals.

Heh, I've similarly realized that a good percentage of the crushes I've had were on duals.

[Jarno]

i wonder if there has been any research done on married couples or couples in long term relationships in the socionics community and whether there is any data correlational or otherwise on the success of different types of relations in marriage. if there was, it could explicate the question of validity on the relational aspects of socionics theory.

That was Augusta's original work, and I have seen updates -- I think there were links in Lytov's site. There was indeed a much higher proporting of successful happy dual couples, but the problem is that someone has to have typed them, and the is always a margin of error.

yes i've also read that Augusta claimed that 30% of the random investigated couples were duals. But later works have claimed higher or lower percentages.

30% seems pretty high to me.

[ataronchronon]

Thanks for the replies everyone.
I should say yes, I have a decent understanding of how duality works. My only real problem with it is that the two people can be so different. The idea seems counterintuitive to me and evidently most other people who don't know or accept socionics (see www.intpcentral.com). It seems to me that most ESE's are very traditional, while my thoughts tend to naturally align themselves against tradition, so I can see several clashes between me and any ESE on what is morally acceptable and things of that nature. It also is my understanding that relations only work if "external factors" such as traditional values are kept as neutral as possible, so if I constantly argue with my dual about things like religion, politics, etc. then it wont work out. For example, I hate holidays, but they are hugely important to the normal ESE from what I've read and seen for myself.

So that is my problem. An ESE is my dual, but my values have somehow become aligned against those of a normal ESE, who values tradition and other community values (I don't). Would this make me incompatible with my dual, or am I just not looking hard enough?

Also, I agree with the SM. It seems like a person who already has trouble dating (like myself) would use socionics as an excuse to avoid dating people even more, while a person who has already "played the field" would use it to find more of the right kind of people. I think I've found either an identity or a mirror (not sure exactly), but if all things go well we may end up dating. I've convinced myself not to "hold out" for my dual and just roll with it for now. I'm not good enough at typing people yet. I don't really think about what type someone might be until after I've talked to them for a while. Again, thanks for the responses.

[Rick]

It seems to me that most ESE's are very traditional, while my thoughts tend to naturally align themselves against tradition, so I can see several clashes between me and any ESE on what is morally acceptable and things of that nature. It also is my understanding that relations only work if "external factors" such as traditional values are kept as neutral as possible, so if I constantly argue with my dual about things like religion, politics, etc. then it wont work out. For example, I hate holidays, but they are hugely important to the normal ESE from what I've read and seen for myself.

I think stereotypes like these are part of the reason there are so few ESEs on this forum. No one wants to be an ESE because it sounds anti-intellectual. I know a very insightful guy with lots of life experience and enthusiasm who speaks 12 languages, and he is ESE. He just finished a degree in language acquisition at Cambridge. Other ESEs I know are in theater, the arts, law, or just doing whatever normal people do.

From your description of ESEs, it sounds as if they are insistent and rigid in , which would indeed be a source of conflict with types. But in fact, they are mostly indifferent to and believe that the most important thing is to be happy and excited about life. They pick up new theories and ideas with interest and make them a source of fun and discussion. ESEs, being leading types, are very sensitive to what other people like or dislike, so if they are aware of your hatred of holidays and formal occasions, they will find other ways to have fun that you will enjoy.

[discojoe]

Do you "hold out" for your dual?

Uh, no.

Would you dump someone who isn't your dual for someone who is?

Same as Expat.

Do you try not to think about who is and who isn't your dual and just go for it?

Yes.

Do you try to affect the dual seeking of others?

What.

If someone who wasn't your dual asked you out, would you decline?

No, which was good for me when I was single because I never asked girls out--they always asked me out, although I declined most of the time.

[Khamelion]

Do you "hold out" for your dual?

Clearly not.

Would you dump someone who isn't your dual for someone who is?

Situational. If we weren't getting along as a result...or it seemed pointless.

Do you try not to think about who is and who isn't your dual and just go for it?

Yeah. I used to be like Scarlett a bit..and btw, its a bad idea to talk to them about it. Plus, a lot of ESTp's won't care. And if you go and tell them you are "duals" it can freak them out.

Do you try to affect the dual seeking of others?

I manipulate yes. But I know what I'm doing most of the time, and I do it with friends more than potentional lovers because lovers hurt more when the novelty of pretending and maniuplating wears off.

If someone who wasn't your dual asked you out, would you decline?

Depends. If I was certain they were a Ixfx type, probably would decline, unless they were rational. Basically, as long as they were rational and not a wuss.

[Joy]

Do you "hold out" for your dual?

No, you "hold out" for someone who you're compatible with. There's a lot more to compatibility than just intertype relations.

Would you dump someone who isn't your dual for someone who is?

No, I don't dump people for other people. That's so cheap.

Do you try not to think about who is and who isn't your dual and just go for it?

That's what I've done in the past, yes. If I think we'd be good together and the relationship makes sense and the timing is right, there's no reason to get all hung up on some theory about what "types" people can be.

Do you try to affect the dual seeking of others?

I try to treat people in a way they'll respond to. It makes sense.

If someone who wasn't your dual asked you out, would you decline?

No matter who it is I'll decline. And probably proceed to avoid that person as much as I reasonably can.

I'd also like to know how much "faith" you have in duality.

There's a lot more to compatibility than just intertype relations. If someone is your dual and you're compatible with that person in other ways, then it kicks ass. My faith is in that person though, not "duality".

I say faith because the concept is somewhat counterintuitive. How can someone so different be just the right type?

You say this because you do not understand the most fundamental concepts of socionics.

I personally don't think of there being 16 types, I think of there being 8 dualities. I wrote a thread on it a while back. If you're interested I can try to find it, but I'm not sure if it was deleted or not.

Do you really think your dual is the best possible type for you in your personal experience?

Definitely.

[speakeasy]

Do you "hold out" for your dual?
Of course not. Though I sometimes wish I did.

Would you dump someone who isn't your dual for someone who is?
No. It would take several more factors for me to dump a girl. It should be a bad relationship nearing its end; my dual would have to be physically attractive; etc.

Do you try not to think about who is and who isn't your dual and just go for it?
Hells yeah!

Do you try to affect the dual seeking of others?
No. I don't discuss socionics with others irl. In fact, i barely think about it.

If someone who wasn't your dual asked you out, would you decline?
Of course not. I would only decline if the girl was real ugly or overly obnoxious.

[IcEPiCk]

I keep my duals locked in the basement where its nice and cool

[Rick]

I keep my duals locked in the basement where its nice and cool

Do you refrigerate them?

[Exodus]

Do you "hold out" for your dual?
Of course not. Though I sometimes wish I did.

Would you dump someone who isn't your dual for someone who is?
No. It would take several more factors for me to dump a girl. It should be a bad relationship nearing its end; my dual would have to be physically attractive; etc.

Do you try not to think about who is and who isn't your dual and just go for it?
Hells yeah!

Do you try to affect the dual seeking of others?
No. I don't discuss socionics with others irl. In fact, i barely think about it.

If someone who wasn't your dual asked you out, would you decline?
Of course not. I would only decline if the girl was real ugly or overly obnoxious.

So, have you found your dual yet?

[FDG]

A question that has always lingered in my mind: isn't dual a very ineffectual relationship to actually get things done/work hard towards a goal/etc? Even the description itself mentions that the partners seldom feel like straining themselves when toghether. It would then seem that duals are best kept separated when some important task requiring concentration has to be completed.

[IcEPiCk]

Duals dont strain each other because they can act themselves when around each other... I think thats what they meant.

The most comfortable=the way you can be yourself=your biggest strengths come out.

[vague]

A question that has always lingered in my mind: isn't dual a very ineffectual relationship to actually get things done/work hard towards a goal/etc? Even the description itself mentions that the partners seldom feel like straining themselves when toghether. It would then seem that duals are best kept separated when some important task requiring concentration has to be completed.

This has been my experience. When I've worked with ESTps I got along with, we had the tendency to distract each other from work and alienate other co-workers.

In response to the subject of the thread, even before I learned of socionics, my dating history has almost exclusively consisted of Se ego types. I do not base relationship decisions on the theory but rather, the theory matches personality types I find attractive/unattractive in real life which is why I am accepting of it. I do not really see myself being attracted to a non-Se ego type in a long term relationship.

[Expat]

I think FDG's and vague's point is applicable to some dualities, not all of them. I work very well with an ISFj colleague.

[Rick]

I think FDG's and vague's point is applicable to some dualities, not all of them. I work very well with an ISFj colleague.

That's an interesting possibility. The idea that duals "relax each other" might be out of the mouth of the Alpha Quadra. It works in my case as well. But that's because people are reverting to their primary functions and states of mind and throwing off all that is superfluous. From my experience with and types, this might not be the case at all, since "straining themselves and others" is something that is absolutely natural for types.

[FDG]

Personally, it happens that:
if the dual is a friend/co-worker, then I can work with them
if the dual is more than a friend/dating/romantic/etc, then it becomes increasingly harder to avoid going straight to the bedroom

[Rick]

Personally, it happens that:
if the dual is a friend/co-worker, then I can work with them
if the dual is more than a friend/dating/romantic/etc, then it becomes increasingly harder to avoid going straight to the bedroom

Do you strain yourself as you're doing this?

[Expat]

That's an interesting possibility. The idea that duals "relax each other" might be out of the mouth of the Alpha Quadra. It works in my case as well. But that's because people are reverting to their primary functions and states of mind and throwing off all that is superfluous. From my experience with and types, this might not be the case at all, since "straining themselves and others" is something that is absolutely natural for types.

Ah, great point. I think that's totally right.

if the dual is more than a friend/dating/romantic/etc, then it becomes increasingly harder to avoid going straight to the bedroom

Sure, but I thought you meant it the way vague interpreted it.

[Jarno]

By reading in most posts that duality isn't something to strive for, i must conclude that most people fall into one or more of these categories:

- they don't believe duality is a better relationship.
- they don't believe socionics works at all.
- don't need to "win the first prize" but settle for something less, that's "not bad"
- are hypocrites and would like to have a dual relation, but don't like to call there own non-dual less fine.


oke, i probably don't sound really nice, but i'm just curious how you react and if i'm right.

[Expat]

I disagree with the premises of your question, and the options you listed.

I think your disagreements with most other people in this thread can be seen from this reply:

Would you dump someone who isn't your dual for someone who is? YES FOR SURE

Your options are too black-and-white. I think that for other people (at least that's my case) there is an awareness that, as far as types are concerned, duality is the best relationship; however, lots of other factors are involved. If I am with someone - of whichever type - then it's because there is something good going on, otherwise I wouldn't be in the relationship in the first place. I think Socionics works, also as far as duality is concerned; however, I also believe that a good relationship that's already working - probably intra-quadra, or perhaps semi-dual - is not something to just cast aside, even if you meet your dual. There are other factors.

[Jarno]

Maybe it would be better to define the question about dumping another for your dual.

I would say sure, if i was in a relation for just some weeks. If i met my dual, i would surely dump the nondual.
But I can ofcourse imagine that if you are married for 3 years, you wouldn't do this.

So if we put some timelimit on it probably more people would say they'll want to switch for the dual partner.


although i do think that many people underestimate duality. Like the oldfashioned way of thinking that a relationship can be built by your own efforts. That is just the opposite as what Socionics stands for namely unchangable function compatibility.

[Exodus]

It seems like people are trying too hard to dispel misconceptions about duality. I agree with Jarno for the most part.

[speakeasy]

Do you "hold out" for your dual?
Of course not. Though I sometimes wish I did.

Would you dump someone who isn't your dual for someone who is?
No. It would take several more factors for me to dump a girl. It should be a bad relationship nearing its end; my dual would have to be physically attractive; etc.

Do you try not to think about who is and who isn't your dual and just go for it?
Hells yeah!

Do you try to affect the dual seeking of others?
No. I don't discuss socionics with others irl. In fact, i barely think about it.

If someone who wasn't your dual asked you out, would you decline?
Of course not. I would only decline if the girl was real ugly or overly obnoxious.

So, have you found your dual yet?

Perhaps I have. I don't really know since I don't/can't type everyone I meet.

[Exodus]

So, have you found your dual yet?

Perhaps I have. I don't really know since I don't/can't type everyone I meet.

What I was trying to ask is, have you decided on a type for yourself?

[FDG]

Maybe it would be better to define the question about dumping another for your dual.

I would say sure, if i was in a relation for just some weeks. If i met my dual, i would surely dump the nondual.
But I can ofcourse imagine that if you are married for 3 years, you wouldn't do this.

So if we put some timelimit on it probably more people would say they'll want to switch for the dual partner.


although i do think that many people underestimate duality. Like the oldfashioned way of thinking that a relationship can be built by your own efforts. That is just the opposite as what Socionics stands for namely unchangable function compatibility.

Look. If I were in an happy relationship, it's likely that I wouldn't even think about dumping the other person. That's all we're saying, really.

[ScarlettLux]

Yeah, I find that ESTps could care less about Duality and the whole notion of it =[

[FDG]

Yeah, I find that ESTps could care less about Duality and the whole notion of it =[

Again: if in an happy relationship, it's pretty normal not think about dumping the other person.

[speakeasy]

So, have you found your dual yet?

Perhaps I have. I don't really know since I don't/can't type everyone I meet.

What I was trying to ask is, have you decided on a type for yourself?

I guess ESTj is fair enough.

[Exodus]

Crap, I was confusing you with someone else. Never mind.

[Going B. Zerk]

- I'd also like to know how much "faith" you have in duality. I say faith because the concept is somewhat counterintuitive. How can someone so different be just the right type? Do you really think your dual is the best possible type for you in your personal experience? An ESE might be great in my case, but maybe a little boring after a while. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. -

Well, I had an ENFp class mate a couple of years ago, so it was really cool. We got along really well. I wish I had stayed in contact with her cuz, it was awesome, we just got along so well and I felt unusually comfortable with her.

I believe any types can have a good relationship if they’re healthy and have enough things in common. And duality doesn’t always work as well cuz there’re more things that influence the relationship other than type.

Fortunately, this ENFp girl and I had many similarities, so that helped the quality of our relationship.


- Do you "hold out" for your dual?-
No.

- Would you dump someone who isn't your dual for someone who is?-
No. Maybe I have a good relationship already, and maybe the dual doesn’t meet up with my standards. Besides, EVEN IF the dual is everything I ever wanted, I’d never dump someone for that sole reason.

- Do you try not to think about who is and who isn't your dual and just go for it?-
Usually. But it’s fun trying to figure someone’s type out.

- Do you try to affect the dual seeking of others?-
hmm?

- If someone who wasn't your dual asked you out, would you decline?-
Hell no! I’m always up for a date... erm, if I know them well enough anyway (more than just a couple of hours of drunken interaction).

[Rick]

BTW, all the SLIs I have gotten along with best have been quite similar to me in many ways. They just happen to be leading rather than leading .

[Rick]

BTW, all the SLIs I have gotten along with best have been quite similar to me in many ways. They just happen to be leading rather than leading .

[Expat]

That's because you love yourself, Rick --

[Expat]

That's because you love yourself, Rick --

[Rick]

That's because you love yourself, Rick --

???

[Rick]

That's because you love yourself, Rick --

???

[Expat]

Uh, a joke that fell flat?

You said:

BTW, all the SLIs I have gotten along with best have been quite similar to me in many ways.

[Expat]

Uh, a joke that fell flat?

You said:

BTW, all the SLIs I have gotten along with best have been quite similar to me in many ways.