Toggle Light / Dark / Auto color theme

Toggle table of contents sidebar

Duality Relations INTp and ESFp by Stratiyevskaya

Warning

This page or section needs work

Partial translation – needs further translation work.

Written by Vera Stratievskaya: original blog entry.

Duality observations

1. ILI-SEE. Correlation of programs.

SEE’s main program: the power of “goodwill”, the power of “the forces of good”.

SEE’s program is evolutionary, democratic, positivist. It is aimed constructively and represents the power of the ethical system of organization of social relations: “The strong person is in the right if he is benevolent and proves this by his actions.”

SEE’s position: “Give the power to those who are strong, kind, and successful (to those who have earned it) - let him be the leader, let him humanely and positively transform society and protect it against all possible hostile attacks.” This program is extremely difficult to realize, first of all, because it is logically contradictory, and consequently it is only temporary, as well as deleterious and self-destructive. This is conditioned by the Asking trait of this TIM, which provides for embedding of a certain measure of dispersal, lack of focus, “loosened”, splintered structure in SEE’s program, as well as rather naïve notions about the humanistic nature of this program, which can be summarized as: “Good people, stand up and unite to fight the evil! We will defeat the dark forces!”

Populist ideas of this program allow it to be successful during the initial stages of its implementation, when power is being swayed, and retains its popularity until its seemingly simple and accessible “recipes” for “universal happiness” start to disappoint with their contradictions, which become more and more conspicuous over time and turn into major troubles for the society and may even lead to catastrophic consequences. In process of dismantling all that is “old and obsolete”, SEE undermines the foundations of the system that is outdated in his view and destroys its positive achievements and establishments alongside the negative ones. That is, SEE throws the baby out with the bathwater: in rejecting the outdated ways and order of the previous system, SEE also discards anything within it that was beneficial and good. He hopes to achieve something better in its place, something more positive and progressive, however, due to this problematic white logic in this he usually does not succeed – creation of systems that are almost flawless in every respect is not his strong point. In the beginning, SEE can involve and inspire his compatriots with encouraging promises and captivating prospects, radiant bright rhetoric, and ambitious plans. In the future course of events, he will have to hurriedly come up with explanations and reasons for why he wasn’t able to implement and enforce all that was conceived and promised by him.

In short, SEEs program holds at peak popularity for as long as it doesn’t start to sabotage and discredit itself.

ILI’s program is the power of prudent pragmatism and the priority of prescient methods: [I]if one takes up doing anything – one needs to be certain of its future success[/I]. It is a program of pre-guaranteed successful pragmatism. This includes rigorous substantiation and validation of all steps and methods that are to be taken or adopted, as well as ability to balance on the verge of that which is available, possible, and desirable in everything that relates to personal gain.

Sometimes, under the influence of authoritarian administrative systems that limit or punish any unauthorized incentives, ILI tries to suppress his entrepreneurial drive and holds himself back, taking on the role of a bystander: “If the one who doesn’t do anything is the one who doesn’t make any mistakes - then it is better to not do anything to not be the “guilty” party.” Under such circumstances, his creative (entrepreneurial or political) function enters a period of stagnation, abstaining from any significant development of the situation and becoming forcibly fixed in the same position (despite its necessity and contrary to the common sense).

With the onset of democratic changes, when the strict framework of regulations and jurisdictions begins to “thaw” and “soften”, everything changes. The “people’s initiatives” (which sometimes take the form of a kind of natural disaster), the democratic “people’s projects” (in which anyone willing can participate though not everyone will be able to capture the main jackpot), inspire and activate the ILI. Finally, his time has come! - a time of great political and economic changes. From these changes he can extract his benefits, working a consultant, or broker, or the organizer of the pyramid schemes, and further spur the creation of new financial systems, companies, and one-day trading firms. The time of reforms is the time of change, the time of great hopes and great promises, the time of new projects the realization of of which requires new investments, new “goals” requiring collection of money, which emerge under the auspices of the grand and the promising public or commercial projects that ambitiously promise to enrich everyone – all those who only yesterday were poor and barely getting by, today have become entrepreneurs and businessmen involved in start-ups and businesses of their own (though they still know very little about all this).

ILI can successfully play an almost honest game with an infinite count of almost honest methods and approaches to expropriating money: he knows how to bluff, he can protract the “game” to any arbitrary period of time, or within a short period greatly speed up its pace. One way or another, for his dual he will find the funding at the right time ; the great transformations will not be left without a financial and material backing; the desired sums will appear as if by magic. And just as magically they will disappear when the time comes of having to hurriedly close down one company and open up another one in its place.

The time of trouble and change of social and economic structures, the era of social “perestroikas” and economic changes, during which supportive administrative systems are dismantled while various temporary companies and associations emerge is the grace period for this dyad. Where SEE moves with his victories, there goes his dual ILI with his calculations and extracted benefits – for any forward-looking, wide-ranging social project needs a significant and worthwhile material reinforcement and support. This is especially true of the large, ambitious, and wide-reaching projects which are usually undertaken by the SEE, who prefers to get engaged only in big projects of significant extent and scope, not feeling satisfied by anything lesser.

2. SEE-ILI. Values and priorities.

Despite the fact that this dyad, which “opens” the third quadra, is the “social successor” of the dyad EIE-LSI, the representatives of these sociotypes hold to very different values and worldviews. SEE as an evolutionary, asking, objectivist type, and the successor of EIE, shows an unconscious desire to destroy all social systems that are alien to him in the name of creating systems that are even more elevated and advanced. This is reflected not only in the social self-actualization of SEE but also in his personal relationships.

In what way is this expressed? SEE can be called the unintentional “wrecker” of “old” (in his view) social relationships, of conservative logical structures, of enclosed self-sufficient systems, etc. In his personal life this may be expressed as a disregard for other people’s deep-rooted connections and relationships, of their well-established habits, conservative traditions, of another’s world or another’s family structure, all of which have no value in this democratic, irrational, objectivist dyad.

Isn’t this a rather serious accusation of the representatives of this type? First of all, lets examine the root causes for such characterization. In SEE’s model, willful confrontation is one of the main values. Sensing aspect is his first, base or program function, while the aspect of ethics of relations, which includes all the discerning (capable of telling good from evil), restrictive and isolating operations, is his creative function (+Se -Fi). From this we can see that the sensing aspect has priority, while his ethical aspect is only secondary or supportive. This means that SEE gives priority not to ethics, but to sensing: a person with most potential in this aspect is the one who is most right and has the most chances of winning the recognition of his partner and keeping his respect. Lets not forget that SEE dualizes with a “victim” intuitive type, who needs to be “won over” and then efforts must be constantly invested by his partner to hold him, continually proving one own superiority over other potential rivals or partners.

SEE is considerate of the social and ethical norms and values, but only in relation to that which he considers to be “his property” or territory, his sphere of willful and ethical influence, an already existing relationship with his partner.

For example, a young woman SEE has brought up a story from her personal life for public discussion, which involved fighting off her current husband from his lawful wife and thus destroying their marriage. She felt the necessity to do so because from the very first meeting she understood that this man is fated for her. This meeting took place about half a year before his marriage, when he first met his first wife. So why hasn’t she started a relationship with him back then? It turned out that it was from this moment that she started building her strategy of getting close to him (SEE is a strategic type), and part of this strategy was allowing him to marry another woman.

Couldn’t she lose him by allowing him to enter another relationship, to form strong bonds with someone else, or at least create insurmountable obstacles for herself? Let me remind the reader that other people’s established personal and social ties do not hold significance for this dyad. It was precisely for such newly emergent obstacles that this whole strategy was created. To complicate the situation even further, she started dating a close friend of the man she has “chosen” and kept resorting to this “tactic” all the way until his wedding day. It was only after the day of his marriage that she decided to take action. At this point she started looking for any chances and opportunities to meet with him, to establish a close and trusting relationship with him, and to make the most favorable impression of herself. She was constantly searching for ways to advantageously distinguish herself from his current wife and make herself look as the “winning” opposite to her in everything. In her own words, this is how it went:

“I’ve always tried to distinguish myself from her in the most beneficial to myself ways. Even at a wedding when the bride was dressed in all white, I came in a spectacular black dress. As soon as I arrived, other guests at the wedding started asking one another: “Who is she?” His friends and relatives came up to me and said, “Oh, what a pity that you aren’t by the side of the groom. You are so beautiful!” And then I again thought to myself that he must be made my husband.”

Since that day, such “winning contrast” became the main behavioral style of this young SEE woman. When after half a year the young husband realized that all her efforts were directed at him, he was able to appreciate this and divorced his wife to marry this woman. That’s how easily she has attained her success.

So why invest all these efforts? Why didn’t she start dating this man when he was still single? Why did she allow him to marry another woman at first? Why did she start seeing one of his friends if she already knew that she was going to leave him? This is what the public did not understand and condemned her for this. Meanwhile she even took offense at the public censure (isn’t it a pity that her strategy wasn’t appreciated?), since she invested all this effort exactly so that she would be correctly appreciated, such that assessing her actions her partner would develop certain feelings that would correspond to her priorities and that would allow the relationship to take forms that she was most comfortable with.

Obstacles in this case were necessary in order to overcome them, as this is the necessary and indispensable condition for dualization in this dyad. Let’s not forget that in the third quadra, just as well as in all democratic quadras, evolutionary irrational aspects (with a “+” sign) dominate. In particular, the third quadra is dominated by the aspect of volitional sensing (+Se) – the aspect that accumulates and mobilizes forces for the following contention, for a forceful and massive breakthrough, for overcoming of the obstacles.

3. SEE. The program of the onslaught and overcoming.

In the third quadra, and especially the dyad SEE-ILI, the ability to show one’s own willful superiority, to demonstrate one’s advantages in power and capability, to favorably present one’s own qualities, to persistently broadcast one’s will to contend, to impose this on others and come out on top, that is, to use any and all opportunities to demonstrate your ability and willingness to get out of any situation as the prizewinner (even if it earns everyone else’s condemnation) are all valued.

How is it possible to show one’s will, determination, drive, if there are no obstacles? If there are no obstacles - there is nothing to overcome. And if there is nothing to overcome, then there are no opportunities to interest your partner, and other people, in yourself.

However, in our previous example, the man has preferred another woman at first. Why would this be? Most likely because she has shown considerable initiative in winning him over at first, while our SEE heroine got busy creating new obstacles for herself by starting a relationship with his friend. When our SEE heroine entered the scene in the role of contender, a major opportunity opened up before her to show in full that she is capable and determined - to get out of her situation and break up another’s relationship would require much effort than her competition had the opportunity to demonstrate. By creating all these obstacles, she has seized a major opportunity to prove that she is “stronger than the strongest”.

Unfortunately, the “audience” did not understand this SEE woman and appreciate her “heroic feat” for its true worth, despite the fact that she was absolutely certain in her own right to so forcefully achieve her happiness. “The strongest wins and the strongest leads away” – such was the conclusion of our SEE heroine who felt quite offended by the fact that nobody else has supported her in this opinion.

Doesn’t she feel ashamed of such attitudes? The person is typically not ashamed of the values of his EGO functions. What feels shameful is departure or deviation from these values. Thus the SEE may feel ashamed if she has demonstrated weakness, or if she wasn’t able to seize an opportunity and come out as a winner in this situation. But when SEE is showing his strengths and capabilities, he or she is not betraying his main values.

And for this purpose the SEE allows herself to take away what belongs to someone else? If what belongs to someone else is better than what SEE has, and if it is already gravitating towards her, the SEE considers that she is simply taking what is rightfully hers. In the realm of human relations, first the SEE feels that she is a more suitable partner for somebody else than their current partner. Later, if she does indeed turn out to be stronger than her competition, this indicates that she will be able to do more for her partner than his previous match, and therefore her love is stronger.

Piling up of obstacles could be called a kind of “courting ritual” of this dyad, or, more accurately, a part of the interplay of their dual relations. Our SEE protagonist might not have been so successful in her endeavors if it wasn’t for the fact that her choice fell to a man of sociotype ILI, suggestive in Se and therefore is easily persuaded by her actions on this aspect. If this SEE woman would have tried win over a partner of some other sociotype, perhaps her strategy would not have worked so quickly and successfully. Although, if the will is there, SEEs are capable of breaking up almost any relationship. It is difficult to endure and counteract their onslaught and determination. The author knows of several stories where well-established dual relationships have been broken up by a SEE who couldn’t calmly live in presence of someone else’s happiness.

SEE is not always consciously aware of the full impact that his EGO functions have on the people and environment around him. He can strongly influence others without noticing this himself and without actually wishing to cause any harm – he simply strongly wants to achieve something, to win someone over, to attain something for himself. The more the person resists – the more the SEE intensifies his efforts. In our example, the man hasn’t put up much of a resistance so our SEE had to create obstacles of her own – allow him to marry another woman and start another relationship herself. Since all of this possibly transpired with his silent agreement, it can be even said that it was both of them who have created these barriers.

4. SEE. The destruction of the system.

The desire to enter into a family – a good, stable family – and somehow exert a destabilizing influence on is very typical of SEE. The author can recall an example of one young man (a representative of this sociotype) who was sufficiently financially well off, and who has publicly declared his wish to take care of certain young and happy, but childless, couple. He was even ready to hand over his cottage to them, if only to be accepted as one of “their own” by this family, and he would get a chance to watch how they live, what is happening with them, and so on.

What could be the reason for such a wish and his offer? For SEE, it is very important to have a sense of somehow being related to something good, some good deeds, achievements, discoveries, records, to someone’s happiness, including family happiness. And, of course, he will feel upset or even offended when something good transpires without his relation to it or participation – if someone is doing well without him being somehow connected to it, or when something good doesn’t become even better for some objective reasons (for example, a “good partner” doesn’t go to the “best hands” – such a partner simply must go to the most deserving).

If other people resist SEE’s “involvement”, then he may start a ruthless “war” against them. There is one known example of a charming young SEE woman, who upon moving to a foreign country has decided to stay over with a family of newlyweds with whom she was barely acquainted. She moved into one of the rooms of their house while she was searching for a work and a place of her own. Further, the events unfolded according to a rather simple scenario. First, she became friends with the young wife and then became involved in household chores and activities. Second stop - nightly advances on the husband, who would sometimes go out for a smoke, personal intimate conversations that ended in stormy meetings in the kitchen, one of which has eventually woken up his wife. When this young SEE woman was shown the door, she, wanting to have the last word, decided to accuse the husband of sexual harassment. Due to the laws of their country, he ended up spending time in jail while the court case progressed. Even though he was acquitted in the end with the help of a very good lawyer, while the SEE woman confessed in making false accusations and retracted her statements, for him and his wife this story did not pass by without aftereffects.

What was the cause of this SEE woman’s vengeance? A sense of disappointment that the contention never took place, and a sincere offense that her feelings, which may have been honest, have been rejected. SEE can expand her efforts honestly believing that she can bring happiness, her love and warmth, to a potential partner. This form of relations is inherent to the ILI-SEE dyad: to give away personal warmth, without thinking of the consequences, believing that everyone is free to take as much love and warmth as he needs. It is no accident that an ILI compares the love, care and attention generously bestowed upon him by his dual SEE with the warm rays of the sun. ILI needs a partner who would love him boldly, without fear, without shame or reproach. As an irrational type, the SEE woman could have sincerely fallen for the husband, sincerely been a friend to his wife, sincerely wanted to help them with household chores, and honestly want to compete for him with his wife. Getting too caught up in the moment, she could have honestly felt offended for being “misunderstood” and even forced out of their territory, which she has already considered her own (since she was helping to manage it). This young SEE woman could have easily felt on equal footing with the young wife: as was shown by the investigation materials, after becoming the mistress of her husband, she behaved herself rudely, talked back and acted as if she’s the hostess of the household.

5. SEE. The fight for that which is one’s own and that which belongs to another.

Infiltrating a “system” and forging his own relationships within it, SEE often becomes too engrossed in the process: he protects his relationships, defends his personal rights, and destroys the “logical” sensible ties that have existed within the system (due to his Ti-PoLR). With similar kind of egoism the young SEE woman viewed the already existing relationship within this family: there was no married couple for her – only she, her chosen man, and some “other woman” who does not yet realize that she is the “odd person out”. And when the existing relationship ties within the family were re-affirmed and the girl was asked to leave, “pushed out” of the system, it was certainly a “blow” to her logic of relations (-Ti) – she was reminded who is who. For SEE, it is quite aggravating to have to return what belongs to someone else which he already assumed to be his own: this could be a sufficient reason for retaliation.

Being forced to return what he has expropriated for himself, SEE can take revenge in various ways, but he won’t simply let go of anyone or anything without a fight, even if he doesn’t really need this person, thing or property. SEE may consider: Why return anything? What if it becomes useful or needed in the future? Why should it be returned “just like that”, when one can demand something in return or compensation? There indeed have been such cases. For example, one enterprising representative of TIM SEE having attained relations with a married man after some time contacted his wife with an “offer” to “buy out” her husband for a certain sum of money that she would have needed to start a new life with another man. Even though at this point he was a hindrance to her, a barrier to moving on with her life, she wasn’t ready to simply let him go: “If you want to return the father to your children, then pay me.” – such were her conditions. The poor wife has started to collect the money, seriously intending to buy out her own husband. She could have as well ignored these demands. It is possible that this extravagant demand was nothing less than usual audacity of a confident of her impunity and own superiority obstinate SEE, who like all Obstinate types, knows how to intimidate and is always strong in dealing the first blow and the first attack.

SEE as a “program” sensing type certainly loves money and other forms of material kickbacks, and does not hesitate to openly declare this. He also loves power, loves to exercise this power with impunity, loves to revel in it. He is able to find “weak spots” in the behavior of others and knows how to use them beneficially for himself. However, when he encounters greater power and resistance to his will, SEE instead attempts to “bargain”, to compromise, to yield, but then may go completely against his own word. SEE is strong by virtue of his sense of self-entitlement and his arrogance, so the best thing that can be recommended in such situations is to withstand the first blow, to not become frightened and back down, especially if the person is fighting for something that is rightfully his, such as the happiness of his own family.

It’s not easy to reclaim “your own” from an SEE. This sociotype is strong not only by his (truly unlimited) willful pressuring, not only by his audacity and stubborn persistence, but also by his ingeniousness and sometimes exceptionally well-targeted and tried-and-tested strategies, his cunning, his manipulations and maneuvers, his ploys and intrigues, his requests for help, blandishments, flattery and promises (“we won’t tell anyone”, “no one will know”), by his capability for blackmail, libel and slander, as well as his artful insinuations and allusions. Using any methods possible, SEE persistently achieves his goals, destroying old connections and established relationships, making other people dependent on his will, entangling them with his influences, newly created relationships and ethical obligations, to which most people concede because SEE manages to find their weak spots through which he manipulates them until he has completely used up the person and gotten enough from him. Here the principle “if one claw got stuck – the bird is finished” is embodied into life.

What about ILI? SEE soon grows tired of manipulating the sluggish and apathetic Balzac. ILI extinguishes and suppresses activity of SEE; his suggestive sensing is like a black hole for the exuberant energy of his dual. It is only on the surface that it seems like SEE is manipulating ILI and claiming all the victories. In fact, ILI is constantly provoking the initiative of his dual, making him chase himself, exhausting him in tactical games, cooling down his passions, extinguishing his fierceness, knocking down his ambitions, taking away some of the “harmful”, “destructive” energy of his dual. Once ILI manages to “calm down” and “humble” his dual, he builds a relationship with him as an equal. He can take on a generously patronizing tone that, most interestingly, the SEE will hold up and support. Strategically SEE can get caught up in the “lethargic and apathetic” tactics of Balzac, who slowly and good-naturedly lures him into various traps, from which, as a rule, he is unable to get out. ILI “locks in” SEE onto himself, graciously accepting all of SEE’s care and allocating his strengths for himself, such that much less is left to be applied to others. For example, having won over an ILI in a prolonged and difficult struggle with his previous wife, a SEE woman has sent her own son to a boarding school and wholly devoted herself to the care after him and her stepson (who remained at home).

6. ILI. The program of searching for a partner.

Is it possible that ILI within his program of looking for a partner is also oriented at that which belongs to other people? Let us start with the fact that the historical prototype of this TIM - Honore de Balzac – devoted more than twenty years of his life to courting another man’s wife (Countess Evelina Hanska) and did not rest until she became his lawful wife. However, ILI’s orientation at “another’s property” is only a supplement to the program of SEE (a kind of an “offprint” from SEE’s program). In accordance to his program, ILI divides people into those who are able to lead others away, and those from whom partners are led away. The husband of Countess Hanska was of course the type of the person “from whom partners are led away”. Intuitive, logical introverts try their best to not fall into this category of people (let us only remember how angry one literary personage of this TIM, Pierre Bezuhov, became when he learned that his wife has taken up a lover, with whom he had to have a duel.)

Subconsciously oriented at dualization with the “winner in principle”, the ILI cannot allow himself to be one of the “losers”, to be the kind of person from whom partners are led away. For instance, one female ILI has decided that she will never marry because she did not want to be potentially left by her husband. At the same time, she easily courted married men to be “the one who leads partners away from others” – that is, to come out as the best, as the “winner” in this situation. Unmarried men did not interest her – to her it seemed that the mere potential of a marriage would threaten her relationships and introduce strain into them. Thus the most comfortable situation for her was the one that held no potential of marriage.

As with SEE, for the ILI it is convenient to be either among the “winners” – to be the one who leads others away – or to be the one who is “won over” and is led away – that is, to play the role of the “valuable prize” for which others must fight, throw themselves onto each other’s spears, enter into competitions and duels, while he, “so be it”, will go to the winner of these contests. In the previous dyad this role is taken on by the IEI, another tactical, suggestible by sensing type, who, in our previous example, has provoked two women to vie for him. Similar “courting contests” are practiced by Balzac, who maintains relationships with several partners at the same time and praises one for the “edification” of another. This “trap” is intended for his dual, the SEE, who will not allow for any unfavorable comparisons and will almost immediately try to prove that he is better than his “competitors”. Resorting to this technique, ILI kills two birds with one stone: on one hand he increases his own “worth”, and on the other – he “initiates” his tactical program which stimulates the activity of SEE and provokes him to new feats.

For successful dualization of SEE and ILI two conditions must be met:

Existence of some kind of barriers or obstacles that must be overcome to prove one’s determination. Presence of competition on the background of which one can demonstrate one’s own superiority and capabilities.

If SEE does not create these conditions, then they may be benevolently created by the ILI to give a person an opportunity to prove himself or herself.

As the reader can see, the scheme is quite simple and is largely founded on various psychological traits and values specific to this dyad, but in real life it can manifest in a rather veiled and obscure form – the partners themselves would not be able to explain why they are “playing” in accord with this particular scenario. Each dyad, similarly, has its own scheme according to which their dualization unfolds. These programs unfold in particular forms, as for example, SEE’s quite natural drive to contend and to test his qualities against someone else’s.

7. SEE. Courting ritual of obstinate confrontation.

SEE, as the democratic type of the third quadra, recognizes the right of each person to freedom and independence of actions, and believes that everyone must decide for himself or herself on the question of choosing a partner. If a person changes a partner, this means that this partner is in some way better than the previous one. In Gamma quadra – the quadra of decisive, democratic types – and especially in the irrational dyad SEE-ILI, it is considered that any person has the right at any time to seek the best options for himself or herself, that everyone has the freedom of choice. Therefore, if someone break-ups another’s relationship, this is not shameful for the “aggressor”, to the contrary he have proven himself to be the more worthy partner and it should be shameful to the person who has lost out and shown himself to be “worse” than the contender.

Willful antagonism in ILI-SEE dyad is a kind of “pre-marital ritual”, whose traditions date back to the days of militant matriarchal nomadic communities. The precedence in such communities was given to the females, and only in rare cases gender equality was upheld, which was perfectly consistent with the “militant” and “contentious” spirit of gamma quadra – quadra of democratic and warlike “nomads”, where a woman could be endowed with the same rights as a man. Many ancient myths and legends contain references to “female warriors” who choose their husbands through matches with potential competitors.

In Russian folklore, this motif is reflected in the stories of women-heroes who wandered across the steppes in search of an opponent with whom they must fight three times and defeat him thrice to recognize in him a worthy partner and make him marry them. One example of this is the epic tale of Nastiushka who recognized in Dobrinia Nikitich as someone worthy of her, and therefore immediately offered him to take her as his wife. Dobrynia did not take her proposal seriously, so she “grabbed him by his curls”, tied him to her war-horse, and dragged him around as a prisoner across the wilderness, even forgetting about him for a while, but then she remembered about him and again asked him to take her as his wife. He declined again so she grew angry and said to him in earnest, “Get off the horse and fight, or I will make a barley pancake out of you”.

In general, SEE feels himself as the best of the best, thus he presents claims only for the best in this life. If his partner does not understand his own happiness, SEE will prove it to him in power clashes where he will show off his superiority and his abilities as superior to those of others.

8. SEE. The difficult choice between what is necessary and what is sufficient.

Increasing his activity with the increase in resistance and in number of obstacles, overcoming difficulties, striving to attain the unattainable, SEE very conspicuously realizes his EGO program of competition of wills, of the advancement forward and overcoming of the barriers. Another thing is that not every representative of this type sets such high goals – sometimes SEE’s “trade” them for fulfillment of their short-term momentary wishes. The satisfaction of these wishes, however, SEE expects to obtain at any cost, which is characteristic of his strong-willed approach.

One of the misconceptions of women of this type is that they need a strong and powerful partner, who is capable and well-to-do in all respects, while the matching partner for them is the one who is simply very well aware of his capabilities, and therefore one who has the potential of becoming successful in all respects, if this is required of him (which is the typical life position of ILI).

For SEE, however, this is often not enough. The problem of the representatives of this sociotype lies in the fact that they are never fully satisfied with what they have. What others have often looks more lucrative to them than their own. And SEE always needs that which is the best, the brightest, the most brilliant. Among other things, SEE is attracted to other people’s prosperity, success, attractive appearance, how established they are in life. A colorless bachelor who doesn’t “belong” to anyone looks unkempt and poorly settled in life (which often happens with “feral” ILIs who haven’t been looked after by someone).

ILI has litte with which he can attract an SEE besides proving himself to be a more cunning and clever partner. Realizing his tactical program, ILI ignores all of SEE’s “brilliance” and resists his attempts to subordinate himself to SEE’s will, and he does so quite naturally without expanding excessive effort. In this he is helped by his program function, intuition of time (+Ni) which allows him to foresee and to calculate in advance all the actions of SEE, to know how to awaken his curiosity and provoke him to activity. With this knowledge, ILI can manipulate the curiosity of SEE. He can adroitly maneuver around and slip away from the SEE, thus raising SEE’s interest in him, presenting himself as someone to be reckoned with, and forcing the SEE to accept him together with his most unattractive qualities. Thanks to this clever tactical defense ILI holds victories over SEE without making much effort. It’s a different situation when the partner does not fall for his tricks and take his bait – this is what makes Balzac nervous. In case of romantic pursuits, such turn of events is quite disappointing for the ILI, such that he may even start contemplating about his lonesome future. He may even try to revise something in his “program of dualization”, but even then he will come to the conclusion that the initiative for forming relations should not be his but his partner’s, and his role is only to accept or reject this initiative. He comes to this conclusion solely because this part of his “program of dualization” is dependent on the Reinin aspect of Strategy / Tactics, which is based on the deepest instinctual programming, in accordance to which ILI can only allow himself a certain number of techniques and tactical moves, acting beyond the scope of which is not possible for him, since this would contradict his other traits or his system of values which are determined by his model of information metabolism. Maximum that ILI can afford himself within the framework of his tactical program is to impose his game of chase on the SEE, to tease and provoke him, to intrigue him and make him chase himself, while externally demonstrating utter indifference to what is happening. ILI is that very ” Mahomet ” who can make the mountain come to him.

9. ILI-SEE. Opposition over sensing and intuition.

If the “mountain” doesn’t come to “Mohammed”, then the ILI will consider that this is the “mountain’s” problem and convince himself that it wasn’t him who has lost out on anything – it was her loss. Even with weak sensing and modest appearance, representatives of this type usually possess an elevated sense of their own value. If only one has a working head on one’s shoulders – everything else will follow. That is why they allow themselves to be negligent or careless with their appearance (even though their duals don’t like this in the least bit). This problem is more characteristic of non-dualized representatives of this TIM. As one of them has stated, “It doesn’t matter what you look like. It matters who you feel yourself to be. You can feel yourself young and charming, and proudly carry the extra pounds on your stomach as if a banner.”

Sensing for ILI is the suggestive function, thus he is very suggestible with anything that concerns the physical forms of objects and people, including the physical organization of his own body. In accord to his own or another’s suggestive program, ILI will accept the kind of physical organization that he considers to be the norm for him. This norm he can determine himself, or orient by some conventionally accepted standards, by something he’s used to or familiar with, by something that he deems acceptable due to some reasons.

Representatives of this type aren’t always endowed with attractive or impressive physical features and not always sure of their attractiveness. Attempts to make their appearance more or less decent and appropriate sometimes costs them an incredible (as it seems to them) amount of effort.

This creates major problems for dualization. There are plenty of cases of ILIs with underdeveloped sub-normative sensing whose dualization attempts have fell through. After all, everywhere and in everything, the SEE attempts to beneficially stand out in contrast to others. Thus he evaluates the potential candidates for partnership from point of view of how effective the person will look next to him and of this individual’s prospects in terms of social realization. SEE is one of those people who judges a book by its cover and considers that “clothes can make a man”. Contact made over 3rd and 7th functions is the first step of dualization. If there is a problem here, dualization will not proceed further. For ILI-SEE dyad this involves the aspect of sensing of experiences. The issue here isn’t simply in clothing. For SEE it is important that his partner has a developed aesthetic taste, as well as his partner’s physical and sexual attractiveness – that is, he places value on having a physical and aesthetic awareness of his partner, since SEE is very attentive to his own sensory and physical experiences, basing on which he can proceed to build the ethical and personal links behind his relationships.

So what can an ILI do to attract the attention of his dual? First of all develop his sensing to normative levels, which ILIs usually do for as long as they don’t lose hope to arrange and settle their personal life. Secondly don’t waste opportunities. ILI’s base function of intuition of time (+Ni) can let his down here. A person with such base function doesn’t hurry anywhere, considering that he still has plenty of time and interesting things ahead, but this doesn’t prevent him from taking note of each year that passes into the past and noticing all the opportunities that have passed him by on his observing function of intuition of possibilities (-Ne), mulling over the fact that he could have done something differently and utilized each opportunity. As a dynamic type with intuition as program function, ILI can hurry and not hurry at the same time. He knows how to wait (or at least he thinks that he knows), but the lack of results and absence of what he had expected will eventually start to disappoint him.

Therefore the success of dualization in this pair is largely dependent on the activity and determined pressuring of SEE, from the pace of development of relations as set by the SEE, which ILI can either accelerate or slow down depending on his own judgement. But the lack of any initiative on the part of his partner is not acceptable for ILI under any circumstances. He can view such a situation from the very beginning as a collapse of a relationship. ILI would also be concerned by the lack of interest in him from the SEE. This is why it is so important for him to constantly stimulate SEE’s interest, to slip away, to intrigue him, and create obstacles and challenges for his dual.

10. ILI-SEE. The interactions of the strategist and the tactician.

In order to pique the interest of his partner, ILI above all will resist his attempts to get close to him physically. And this is understandable: his dual SEE is given to quickly close physical distances. ILI subconsciously expects and accounts for such course of conduct. To increase the distance, he can, for example, cancel a date pretending to be sick, and he will do this in such a way that it is clear that he is only pretending, or he may bring other people to the date and devote them a larger portion of his time than to his partner. ILI is very adept with these kinds of “inventive” approaches – through his creative logic of action he sees many different possible courses of behavior.

Even then, allowing his partner to overcome all barriers that he has set up, ILI slows him down at the very last front or creates even more obstacles. For example, offering his impassioned partner to stay over for the night, he may prepare his bed completely separately, thus showing his utter lack of interest in physical intimacy. So how should his partner act? This is what ILI is testing for. If during the night territorial boundaries have not been transgressed, ILI will consider himself misunderstood. Then he may either immediately try to provoke his partner to explicit activity or lose interest in him. What if his partner has declared his intentions to be “the possessor” and violated these “territorial boundaries”? What then? Here everything depends on how the partner asserted his wishes. If he spent half the night pondering, and another half trying to unsuccessfully engage the ILI, then in the morning ILI may consider that he no longer wants to see this person again. And he will be completely right in this – with such a partner he will never feel himself assured and secure.

ILI is inclined to gloomy predictions regarding the future, and thus he will tactically test and re-test his partner to assure himself that in the future this person will not let him down. Only an individual who is exceptionally enterprising, who readily takes initiative, who is “ethically brave” and able to love “without fear and regret” and “gift” others with his love as the sun shines its rays upon the earth, only such a person would be able to counter and dispel ILI’s doubts. The ILI “blossoms” receiving such love. This love, first of all, brings pleasure to the SEE himself, and ILI greatly values this trait in his dual. ILI hates accusations. This is major issue for him in relations with program ethical types - ESE, EIE, EII, ESI - all of whom, and each in their own way, at some point start to reproach him using their own concern and love: “You don’t spare my feelings!” “You don’t appreciate my love/care!” “I have opened up my heart to you, but you …” – this is something that is not received well by the ILI. For him love is an element of nature – if you love, then love, and don’t demand anything in return. Whoever finds it necessary will thank you for your love and care. One should not expect anything extra in return, or try to blame or guilt anyone else.

Due to the above, often ILI makes an impression of an ungrateful person who receives care for himself as granted (and this also applies to other members of the third quadra). But ILI, first of all, regards care and love as investment of force and efforts (that is, good well-intentioned efforts), which SEE always has in excess (+Se). The more efforts SEE spends on the receptive ILI – the more there remain. And, therefore, by ILI’s logic accepting such kind help and service the person affords pleasure to the ones who provides them. Accordingly, ILI will deeply resent any care and kindness done with a pragmatic calculation or for the purposes of bribery, as well as any demands for one’s good services (including ethical ones).

Does this mean that ILI can have a happy marriage only with a psychologically compatible partner, the one who can pass his tests? ILI can unite his life with whomever he wishes – as it usually happens – but to protect himself from the obligations that this entails, from the troubles, expenses, and experiences, he tries to control the situation, if not ethically then at least intuitively controlling the pace of development of his relations. He is obliged to adopt such a defensive position as a tactical type. For SEE is very impatient in achieving his goals. Thus, ILI has to teach him patience, restraint, and endurance, by creating situations of intended expectations and imposed uncertainty of relations. ILI opens up before SEE his “sense of time and pace” and SEE accepts it, being highly suggestible in this aspect. This another instance of coordination of their program functions (1-5).

How can SEE, with all his energy, vitality, lust of life and engagement sit around and wait for the ILI while he “ripens” for the necessary “ethical condition”? Good question. When faced with uncertainty of his personal relationships, which with ILI can last up to several years, SEE wouldn’t even think of restricting himself to a single partner. Fortunately for himself, and his partner, SEE can open up a second relationship front … And for ILI – where is the happiness in this? Subconsciously oriented at ILI’s vulnerable ethics of emotions, SEE is afraid to resolve those relations which are most dear to him. He feels uneasy exerting excessive emotional influence and pressuring on his partner. Thus, to re-distribute his excessive interpersonal energy he frequently finds himself a “spare option”, which distracts him and makes him less dependent on the main source of his interest.

In addition, in the process of dualization partners quickly coordinate their emotional regimes. In this dyad, it falls on the aspect of ethics in functions 4 - 8. For SEE it is natural and easy to adapt his emotions to the mood of his partner, which makes things easy and convenient for the ILI. And since ILI, as any irrational person, always listens to his senses, he most readily communicates only with those with whom it is easy and pleasant to communicate, which includes his dual.

However, pleasant communication and certainty of existing relations are two different things. One can communicate “pleasantly” as much as one wishes. For ILI, who is inert in his relations, perhaps this is even comfortable. Doesn’t SEE wish to formalize their relations? Such consideration arises not only in SEE, but also with the pragmatic declarative type such as ILI, who treats such a question very seriously. Here, both ILI’s intuition of time and logic of actions manifest – then he won’t delay any more and slow down activities of SEE and will allow him to take on the necessary actions.

An example: A 68 year-old ILI and a 23 year old SEE have started up relations. Both of them were not “free” – both were married and had children from other partners. The period of testing of their relations lasted 5 years, during which their legal partners assumed the “secondary” roles. It was only after the ILI became a widower (his wife was ill for a long time) that his SEE partner divorced her husband. Though she has promised her husband to continue their relations after the divorce … Why might this be? The presence of a lover is allowed in any dyad, rational or irrational, for this is permitted in nature and is the residual effect of the instinctive program of “group marriage”. Alternative options don’t always destroy the partnership; in some cases they strengthen partnerships and unions allowing to compare one alternative to another. Thus the presence of the third “extra person” is permitted in any dyad for as long as this is comfortable for both partners and does not introduce much confusion into their mutual plans and inhibit the development of their relations. In the above case, the SEE woman soon grew impatient with her ex-husband and denied his further “services”.

There were also property claims involved in her divorce. But the young SEE wife quickly settled them. She went into debt, bought off the condominium from the children of her ex-husband, paid compensation to them, meanwhile taking on a huge emotional and financial burden onto herself – and yet, she is very happy now, together with someone whom she loves and who satisfies her in every respect.

11. ILI-SEE. Risk Factors.

- And how often do in a dual relationship are successful mesalliances?

- Mesalliances - it’s always a risk. And marginal marriages - too. As a rule, they destroy the dual relationship, where as partners must meet both culturally and intellectually, and in terms of age and personal experience. People of different ages, but the fate of the complex and rich personal experience can mutually enrich each other - it would be only a desire to help! Nevertheless, a large difference in age - too big a risk, even for dual relationships, which are known labile and is largely dependent on the existence of favorable conditions, on environmental factors, many of which affect the objective and subjective reasons.

It might seem like may cross the fate of two people if one of them - no longer a young man (Balzac), lead a very private and secluded life, and she - the dazzling beauty girl with a very difficult life. (As a child, she left home early to escape the forced cohabitation with a sadist - stepfather. As a teenager, its share fell out “dangerous tour” the cities and villages, worked as “a thief of trust” in the various criminal gangs. Steal it started with a 14 - years.) That’s what she told me about it:

“I do not mind people were - they acted with me and I with them. Although one thing I still regret and sleepy already thrown out of the cab, but not robbed … I could easily come to a man and say, “Well, chase the coin, and that now his whistle! ..” And they gave me the money, and where to go? I so often did: we need money - Come and get it! .. And then I got to prison: my partner in crime was poured. But I did not spend long there - just nine months, but the math of them spent six months in solitary confinement, was standing knee-deep in the water … Then he was treated for a long time … Different Diseases showed up. I was even told that I would never give birth can not … “

At the time of the meeting with dualom, she was only 20 years old. Along with a criminal past, she was also a drug addict with a record. But with such a dowry and she broke into a lonely bachelor life …

- … Who sat day - the livelong and waited for happiness itself to his house to come …

- Something similar happened: the escape from the chase, she called the first door he opened, ushered her into the apartment - and took their acquaintance:

“When I met him, I do not think they got carried away - it is a plain, thick, pale face, sleepy, bloated. It is even shorter than me. But the eyes are good, you know - very good eyes! .. Well, I started to come to him … At first we just talked to him. I told him not immediately tell everything about yourself … It then everything he had learned. But he’s so good! Thick shorty - they are all good … He saw my hand, all injections … And sorry for me. He tried to persuade me to leave it all. And I laughed - me like no one has ever talked. Once I told him that would move in with him - that’s right, and suddenly wanted to say! And he suddenly agreed. But I felt it for a long time - a saw, walked recklessly! Drunk came to him. And he endured and I re-educated … Funny that! And I said to him, “What do I bring up? But you look at yourself in the mirror! Check out who you are and who I am … “Well … Now I already do not think so … Now I live without it I can not! .. If you knew what a wonderful person! .. We were all - still married. But not too soon. He has two years I felt, all the jokes, “We’re married, when you stop to give birth!” And every year I gave birth to a child by him. When stopped, so we just with him and signed. All turned out, he said. So now we have two children. Possible - they do! And while giving birth, I had learned in the courses, studied to be a photographer - designer. Now I think his studio open … And walked enough, it’s time to engage in business … “

12. Dualization in “reverse sequence”. A rational and pragmatic approach to dualization.

- Well that ends well … One problem: it was, it hurts dualizatsii complex scenario in this dyad … - reflects reader - And can it be like - something simpler and approach the process of dualization rational? .. Just a test of man and form with it a dual dyad …

- So - how is it? - To say to each other: “We’re the duals, so we can arrange a happy dual pair. So, let’s do this: today we Dualizing (a couple - three hours), and tomorrow we go with you to the registrar. Remember to take your passport with you! ” - So - to?

Such attempts at an early stage of development of socionics also undertaken. In fact, it turned out that the shortest and most efficient way in the process of dualization is the longest, confusing, and sometimes does a dead-end.

- From - for what? From the - errors in the testing of DW?

- By this thought sometimes also come those who control such rationally streamlined process dualization and directs them, advises duals along the way, adjusting their attitudes and actions. But then a “consultant” as a rule he first makes sure that no error in the determination of TIMs both partners do not. The mistake is the very unnatural dualizatsii mode, in which all relationships do not develop in a certain environment and programs TIM order, and the order in which, for reasons of pragmatism and benefits, offer and impose on each other duals themselves (or their “leader - Consultant” ) starting dualization with its laws (as they all seem to) end.

- And it’s like, solving the problem, adjust it to account, written-off from the book of problems, or anything like that to take the exam on the cheat sheet - so?

- And even worse. Because nature abhors a dangerous experiments (and even more experimentation affecting people’s lives and life).

Gone are the days when it was thought that duals can reconnect with each other, like two halves of a torn photos (simply because they fit together “like two halves of a torn photo”). In fact, the comparison with a torn photograph was very unfortunate. On the one hand it has inspired many of his apparent ease: the two “halves” with the help of tests have found each other ushers, and they “healed”, and went through life hand in hand to meet its overall dual happiness. On the other hand, this comparison and alarmed many of its apparent ease: it is one thing to reunite the two torn photos (five minutes of work on the “Photoshop”), the other - to reunite two people - even compatible with each other on what - what parameters, but endowed with a complex and multifaceted psychological filled with complex and multifaceted hard-won experience of previous errors and conclusions of previous experience adverse developmental relationships, partially strained their innate information model (TIM structure) and the destructive influence current system of values ​​and priorities.

Back to the man himself (to his innate values ​​and priorities) just helps to naturally evolving (and researched by both partners in the natural conditions of life, in real time, in the order laid by nature) dual scenario. Only in this case, both partners can get at least some - that a real understanding of the business, possibilistic, intellectual, ethical, psychological and moral potential of its co-player (which is important!). Can find out whether he is able to heroic act, a friendly service to exploit the victim. Or he is not ready to sacrifice anything, but only able to consume and take.

The image on the torn photographs lies entirely in one plane. Dual relationship between the partners are developing in real environmental conditions (sometimes less than ideal) in real time, taking into account the negative experience of past mistakes and outlined ambitious plans for the future and pragmatic perspectives in an infinite set of psychological space and the plane informational aspects and psychological signs of TIM, each of which has consistently and alternately expanded and developed as a complex and multi-faceted program with the many psychological, environmental and dialectical patterns in the data, socially, politically, environmentally (badly - poor) organized space. The dual scenario, dictated by the nature and intuitive guesses the both of Douala, in this context, is a reusable calibrated, time-tested natural and shortest way of the favorable development of relations.

- It follows that … - … A rational scenario dualizatsii to pick irrational dyad is not recommended.

Example could be. In the early 90s, one of the cities in the Far abroad among the Russian-speaking population (who constitute a large part in this city), a young and energetic sotsionikov (Gabin by psycho, a biologist - a botanist by profession) has been actively engaged in the popularization of Socionics, tested all of their friends and offered many disadvantaged young families to their services as “family psychologist.” Among his acquaintances was a very inquisitive young man (SEE, Caesar). He is extremely carried away socionics itself has been tested and tested his wife, with whom he still can not build relationships. Tests showed that his wife is psycho LSI, Maxim.

“Ah, that’s why we have it is not going well! She inspects me!” - Guessed spouse. And then, without delay cases in the closet, and went and sued for divorce. Wife’s opinion on this matter was not interested in any way, “If we are not compatible - then have to break up!” - He insisted on his own. In court, they divorced, and they settled in different apartments. However, their common child remained with his ex-wife. The young, divorced Caesar opened brighter prospects. It remained only to find the dual partner and you could start a new and happy life, in which, according to his assumptions, there would not be and could not be the same place of family turmoil.

Suitable for age and mentality of the dual partner was found very quickly. But in a strange family. She was married (for someone who does not even bother to Protestants; ented), and she had children. But this obstacle did not stop the young and energetic Caesar. He was not going to find out the suitability of his future partner of her current husband. He did not begin to ponder about whether or not to take away from her family, or better left as it is. He decided just to measure themselves against the current of her spouse just to come to his house and it is taken from him. If the husband will not have resistance, so he - “wimp” and a wife does not deserve. And so he did: came into the house and retook his future wife, though plainly before even familiar with it was not. He showed up to the owner of the house and told him bluntly that his wife to him (Caesar) is more suitable than his current wife, but because he (Caesar) intends to pick up the lady with him (of course, after the couple divorced.) In conclusion, said that in response to objections will not tolerate, because it takes “their” instead of “alien” - takes what he owed. Well, that and who “want”, outraged husband immediately with their fists and pointed. The dialogue took the form of “marriage fight,” got into a fist fight, and Caesar, feeling in his element (in the power struggle hard to defeat him), he led the game is to “home,” and by his own rules: so, and the victory went to him. On the Rights of the winner, he took with him “due to him” dual partner and took her to his house. Very soon they were married. Gabin - sotsionikov (“Consultant of the Family Court”) at the wedding was also …

- Honey … - beer drinking …

- And in what - the time he ran into his ex-wife of his friend - Caesar - the same one LSI, Maxim, which is still very much grieved at their gap (as it first seemed to be very strong) family relations. “Consultant” sympathetically listened to her and offered his help as a family psychologist. He tried to interest her in socionics, tried to comfort and reassure her. He said that for her, and all is not lost: it, too, if he wants to be able to find a partner, and the dual will be happy in the future. Assuming that this will also have to destroy what - something someone else’s family (a family for Maxim, like any, has developed historically and traditionally, it is vitally important, ecologically necessary system - a “temple”, is something sacred and inviolable, that’s what can not in any way destroy - not for the sake of a whim or just for fun, or, especially, for the sake of a scientific experiment), the injured and lost her husband a woman attacked socionics - Gabin with a barrage of accusations and recriminations that he then quite a long time, no one of his services (and even more in the form of fundamental methods of solving family problems) are no longer offered. “How can this be like this, simply grab the man and take him away from the family, deprive women of her husband, to deprive the child’s father! ..” - She was indignant. Socionics on it that she could not - or argue …

- What is he used to think that “consultant botanist family court”? He apparently believed that such issues can be solved with the move? I thought that all of this is as simple as transplanting a plant with flower beds to the flower bed? .. This is not some kind of square dance with the change of partners - that’s life! It’s different scale of responsibility! ..

- … And the bride and groom in the meantime continued to form a happy dual dyad. But how to judge the experience of observation, he had no idea how to look happy dualization in their family. Model relationships with their spouses previous, they are automatically transferred to the new dual relationship. And before you had better know each other, have lost interest in each other (and not having really interested in each other). Recalling the commitments to their children, they often have to go to their previous family, and gradually each of them was actually living for two families (two “platforms”). For those who watched them at the time, gave the impression that they are living together and just because someone is firmly persuaded them that this partnership represents for them the best option. But he who is inspired, probably not the best studied Reinin and lost sight of the fact that Caesar and Balzac did not subjectivist and objectivist. And for them is not as important an ideal logic (or ratio) as well established ethical attitudes, minimally traumatic for them and their associates in the moral and morally. To live with such a burden of guilt before his children and ex-spouses, they were very, very difficult. If they had with their former partners went because love each other (so much so that to live without the other would not have been able to), then the gap (and any related restructuring) would have in their eyes somehow Excuses . And so, they both felt guilty to the former and their families both felt themselves complicit in a crime. Both felt that they create their own happiness on someone else’s misfortune and bring this sacrifice on the altar of a new, emerging and as yet little understood them science.

- A science needs of victims?

- That’s just a new casualties socionics and needs. Enough of them, and it was up to her, all the previous stage of the development of human relations. It’s one thing to correct and model relationships for the future, the other - to break what has already taken place.

However, in this issue, each sticking to his opinion, everyone is looking for its decision and its way …