I'm curious if any of you knows such couples or has personal stories to tell.
EII-EII identical relationships (INFj)
I'm curious if any of you knows such couples or has personal stories to tell.
Well if I were in a relationship with EII I couldn’t never make him laugh because we both would be too serious and we probably would have bad long term financial planning. My LSE husband secures our financial plan and he gives me hope and love. I give him motivation, support, encouragement. I would do the same for EII but the TeSi stuff we would lack. We would lack relaxing and fun experiences. My LSE husband is the muscle. I am the brains. We would have two brains and probably lack sexual passion because my husband is the approacher. He’s the sexual passionate one. And I am shy but receptive to his gentle flirting
-
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
Full of mutual understanding.
In the long-term, may feel like they are stepping on each other's toes.
Ok... How about an EII-Fi with an EII-Ne?
Every same type follows the same patternOriginally Posted by Marep
Dual type
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
I don't find subtypes useful for describing interpersonal relationships (I only find them of some interest when considering my own personality).
Generally, with mirror types (i.e. EII and IEE), each individual gives the other a certain amount of vigour they would not get from a relationship with an identical.
You might find my comments (and those of others) in this thread of some interest (I can't recall exactly what my self-type was at that time, but that probably does not matter):
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...t-Interactions
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...Stratiyevskaya
Dual type
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
Now I wanna see an LSE-LSE one.
You might have to wait a while for that.
Have fun
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fsocionika-forever.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F03%2Fblog-post_29.html&sandbox=1
Mutual sympathy that has arisen on the basis of common interests will quickly run out if two representatives of this psychotype unite in a married couple.
Problems will arise on the basis of collisions on sensory and logical aspects: everyone will have their own indisputable opinion on how life should be arranged in their family, what should be the order of things and what should be the budget. Everyone will have their own idea of practicality and expediency, each will view their home as their own fortress and will rebuild this “fortress” in their own way. And although in many respects their views will coincide, nevertheless some differences will certainly exist and everyone will insist on their point of view, considering it to be the only true one.
Two Stierlitz in one family - these are two tough, inflexible leaders. Each of them will be difficult to convince the partner and it will be unpleasant for everyone to listen to objections from the side. Representatives of this psychotype do not like very much when they are objected. In a dispute, they quickly lose control of their emotions - and this is another reason why it will be difficult for them to peacefully coexist with each other. Each of them, being himself extremely vulnerable, will plague a partner with its rigidity, sharpness, lack of tact, which is especially unpleasant, since each of them subconsciously orientates us with the peace-loving and compliant ethics of his dual Dostoevsky.
In addition, in view of many ethical difficulties, a close partnership between representatives of this psychotype may not be formed at all. Faced with the sensory aspects (at least in the aspect of volitional sensory), trying to impose their will on the partner and having received a fitting rebuff from him, they can either spoil or end the relationship with each other altogether. The same will happen in the case of confrontation on the program aspect - each has its own pragmatism, its own thriftiness and it will be difficult for everyone to sacrifice their business interests.
And of course, everyone will be tormented by their fears, doubts and suspicions, since each of them will suffer from a lack of support on intuitive aspects. It will be equally difficult for each of them to make forecasts, foresee changes. They will torment each other with pedantic punctuality combined with unjustified haste. Each of them will be difficult to work out for themselves the optimal mode of time consumption, each will suffer from excessive fuss and physical overload.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
it seems like EII-EII relationships are: one party professing the other's extraneity to their cognitive functions, one party ignoring when the other talks, misunderstanding, jealousy, and ad hominem appeals to one's superiority... overall, lots of fun!
I have seen such interaction or lack thereof. They don't seem to communicate much at all except when they absolutely must and when they do, they seem to argue about rearranging the furniture rather than discussing the actual furniture. Perhaps, this is simply a T-type's superficial perception of what's going on......
a.k.a. I/O
Try another relationship dynamic there
Dual type
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
When two EII meet “rejoicing at having so many shared views and entrusting each other with their innermost secrets. ”
Dual type
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
"They eventually part as "brother" and "sister", and everyone understands that the need for further interaction has disappeared in itself."
everyone knows...
Only when they discovered they cannot help one another with Te
Dual type
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
see how things taken out of context can be a bit misleading? good.
Predictable LSE is predictable lol. Thanks for the source though, didn't even know a description of this existed.
Any relationship pair can work, yes even identicals. Socionics cannot prove any of its theoretical relationships predictions. That is because it is a dogma, not a science. Connect with whoever you fucking connect with.
Thanks, @Troll Nr 007. Stratiyevskaya continues to amaze me. My mother and one of my sisters are both LSE, and this description describes their relationship very, very well.
They fought all the time over issues of control. My mother is violent and hit my sister in the face with a hard-heeled shoe and broke her cheekbone and refused to take her to the hospital “because she wasn’t hurt that bad”, and my sister eventually married a male IEI because the conflict that they continuously experienced felt just like home to her.
Dual type
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
My papa was EII-Fi and we had a wonderful father-daughter relationship. We could do anything together and be relaxed and authentic with one another. Not a relationship of many words, but of great understanding and connection.
Sucks to hear. Wish nothing but the best for your sister. The following is my take, not at all an indictment on her:
Had sh*tty relationships myself as a teen. Spent next few years communicating but actively avoided "getting close" to people. Enabled me to sorta view others as individuals rather than how they'd personally relate to me.
I figure the parent/child relationship as largely unequal & probably not the best template in choosing a partner
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
