Super-Ego: most well rounded couple?

[krieger]

i've been thinking about this...

a dual couple is all about reaching a balance in terms of function strength by helping out the other person by covering their weaknesses and receiving the same treatment in return. however, this leaves both persons relatively un-dualized in terms of function values. in fact, the relation will likely reinforce any biases and comfort-zone constricting dogmas that may exist in both persons on this front.

a super-ego relation is relatively tolerable in terms of compatibility and absence of conflict and potentially comes with many of the strength balancing benefits of a duality relation. in addition it DOES bring balance and moderation in terms of function values.

of course there is one major pitfall: super-egos don't balance each other on the introversion/extroversion front, nor on that of rationality/irrationality.

thoughts?

[Saberstorm]

The Super Ego pair has the creative function lined up against their partners PoLR. They would either have to give each other space, or they would serve to stifle each other, or they would end up bickering with each other, when using their producing functions.

That does not sound that good.

[Saberstorm]

I think business partners might balance each other out better. They have the same PoLR, (all producing functions are the same) but different lead functions. They would (with the same cautions) approach problems with complentary skills.

[Nowisthetime]

Is this a pure technical question? Duality brings fulfilment and happiness in a way that super-ego never can. We don't go into relationships in order to be well-rounded from a technical perspective, we want someone to be happy with.

[The Ineffable]

I disagree. The Dual is in many ways opposite - first of all I can't see how we could call someone Static to + someone Static a completeness, which is the case of Super-Ego. I think the solution to this is to match up as higher as possible to the complete socion. Like: Duality -> Quadra -> dual Quadras -> Socion. By Dual quadras I mean Aristocratic or Democratic, IME in groups they go to together this way (must have an explanation, too). So yeah, if you want total completeness, I don't think a group of 2 will suffice.

If you think in terms of IA dichotomies, Duals are fully complementary - their all fundamental dichotomies are set as opposite. Rationality is emergent and irrelevant here. But this is your problem, you reject this convention that is paramount to understanding this theory [1]. Only when you will acknowledge that in Sicioncs the three IA dichotomies are fundamental you will be able to understand why Duality is perfect harmony in cognition at this level of two peers, and all the rest. All activities are contingent, they have nothing inherently to do with the type.

Also, you cannot have the mutual adjustment that you are looking for (i.e. "not reinforcing biases"). First of all, Duality does not reinforce ones biases (which I view as entailing not only weakness, but also strength), but dualization facilitates them reinforcing themselves, protecting the psyche from contradictory information in daily human life [2]. Then, the adjustment you are talking about makes sense only seen as changing someone's type, destroying the integrity of the type that has these weaknesses you're focussing on. I see no point in this, if it is possible, you just exchange one drawback for another.

In Model A, a type is not only some sort of pattern personality, but also a manner of dealing with information. They are discreet and coherent, the allusion of the possibility to address the blind spots is one that demands to either just exchange this monolithic configuration (one's type) for another, even temporarily (pointless by the reason of this problem), or affect the coherence of the concrete information that ideally belong to this type. That is, a tattered worldview patched with contradictions that, instead of being good to everything, is rather useful for nothing.

There is a reasons why a Swiss army knife is not one universally-shaped tool, but an aggregate of different implements. If you want full completion, go for the full Socion of 16 pals, Duality is no silver bullet.
---

[1] - because you don't understand that the traditional four Jungian dichotomies are, in Socionics, emergent, all of them.
[2] - conceptually, they do not affect each other. They *are* one single concept, like a coin, which has two sides.

[krieger]

Is this a pure technical question? Duality brings fulfilment and happiness in a way that super-ego never can. We don't go into relationships in order to be well-rounded from a technical perspective, we want someone to be happy with.

i think my post covers the technical issues already and i'm more concerned with hearing about people's personal experiences when it comes to super-ego relations.

[Beautiful sky]

Eweeeeyyy, NO absolutely not. Super-Ego relationship for me between myself and LSI is just outright emotional terror for me. I don't accept incoming criticism which the LSI gives and they want me to receive it. So where does that leave me in terms of being happily satisfied? Nowhere. The only time it can be manageable is if their criticism isn't directed AT me by at something we both see as morally incorrect and unjust.

[Korpsy Knievel]

No

[Gravolez]

Me and my father are super ego. It is not very good. I know other of the same type and I mostly don't like them.

[Galen]

of course there is one major pitfall: super-egos don't balance each other on the introversion/extroversion front, nor on that of rationality/irrationality.

Or any valued IEs or temperament, which would be the important parts.

[d1ffe7]

what? i don’t understand why you think superego is more well-rounded than duality. they both have intuition, sensing, thinking, and feeling, but superegos can't work together as well because they don't understand the other. in my experience, superego is a better relation than any other in which the other person has your polr in their ego block. your polr isn’t their first function, so it’s not constant direct polr hits, and their first function isn’t yours, so their isn’t too much competition.

anyway, you asked for personal experiences. my roommate is sei, and it’s okay. we don't care about any of the same things. when at home, he likes to watch dramatic tv and gossip and wants me to hang out all the time and talk about everything and expects reactions from me. i'd prefer to stay in my room most of the time and read/get on the internet and am more private. we don't care about each other's humor or interests. there are no huge conflicts but also no growth and little compatibility.

[krieger]

Or any valued IEs or temperament, which would be the important parts.

valued IEs are helped through the ID block.

i think a case can be made that building up a familiarity with the unvalued, weak functions is no less important than developing valued/weak functions since the former are potentially much greater obstacles in life.

[d1ffe7]

well you could probably make any case about socionics because it's just a system composed of abstract concepts that most people don't know about. in the same way, building up a familiarity with "functions" which are impossible to understand anyway is definitely not an ideal approach to self-improvement and will probably just make one crazy.

[Absurd]

Socionics-wise, not really. Same with conflict, closer the distance - shit hits the fan.

[Exodus]

Personal experience-wise, superego is not a really bad relationship for normal work or acquaintance-type interactions. The main issue is miscommunication.

Same with conflict, closer the distance - shit hits the fan.

Yeah, basically.

[krieger]

well you could probably make any case about socionics because it's just a system composed of abstract concepts that most people don't know about. in the same way, building up a familiarity with "functions" which are impossible to understand anyway is definitely not an ideal approach to self-improvement and will probably just make one crazy.

i don't think its part of the conventional interpretation of socionics that non-valued are "impossible" to understand. it's just less comfortable to get familiar with them. i'm not claiming for this to be the most "fun" coupling. just the one that gives a person the greatest boost in terms of self-development IF it can be made to work.

no pain, no gain. who expects the path with the optimal outcome and the one easiest to walk on to be coincident?

[Galen]

valued IEs are helped through the ID block.

i think a case can be made that building up a familiarity with the unvalued, weak functions is no less important than developing valued/weak functions since the former are potentially much greater obstacles in life.

Sure it would be important to understand different ways of understanding the world for the sake of clearing up or avoiding possible miscommunications between people, but attempting to better grasp the thought mechanisms of unvalued IEs in a real-world practical sense would eventually be more stressful than it's worth.

[d1ffe7]

i'm not sure i understand what you're saying. do you mean that it's important to be able to work with people of your superego? i agree with that. i don't agree that you should try to approach problems with both your ego functions and your superegos functions because they conflict each other.

[Absurd]

well in theory it's not easy not easy to be comfortable with your duals first two functions either, but it does compliment your first two functions. the very idea of unvalued functions is that it conflicts with your ego functions.

Exactly.

[Absurd]

Mwahahahaha.

[717495]

I have a different outlook on types. I tend to see quadra being the main function of Socionics.

So generally when you say super-ego relations, I think of two types that fit comfortably into the same role of their quadra, that often find some likeness and stability of temperament, a kind of back-and-forth room-mate feel... but in actually understanding one anothers' thought-process on a deeper caring level, without the lasting neglect and lack of enlightenment, you're going to want someone in the same quadra.

[golden]

What poli said.

Also sex. Lousy ime.

[Ningyo]

Weird... I actually know a handful of super-ego couples who seem to really like it, and I actually sort of like super-ego relations myself, though there is a lot of walking on eggshells involved. Usually the ones I know describe it as being really fun in general, at times a huge pain in the ass, but never boring which is why they stay in it. I know an ILE who's been off and on with an SEE and claims it was the most fun he's ever had. I also know an IEI who's off and on with an SLI and the passion there is off the charts. She's walked out on an SLE, an LSI and an EII before the SLI.

My first boyfriend was an SLI. There are a lot of things I admire about him simply because we're so different. In the end, though, he was kind of an ass. One of my current friends/work buddies is an SLI and has had a crush on me for a while, actually tried to convince me to leave my IEI bf a few times. He's a sweet guy and part of me has no problem whatsoever with the idea of spending many a lazy afternoon drinking beer and playing video games with him, but I know I'd get bored. It's difficult not to see all the draws, but ultimately it's just not what some people want.

Eta: another uncomfortable aspect of superego is it often feels like you're sort of making fun of the other person without trying by trivializing the stuff in your superego block which is their ego block. Guess how both people deal with that depends on their maturity. My first boyfriend hated it, but my current SLI friend seems not to mind. Doesn't take terribly well to many forms of NiFe-tomfoolery though whereas the SLE guy I know eagerly joins in.

[willekeurig]

Also sex. Lousy ime.

I don't know about LSI sex, but the two best massages I've ever gotten were both given by LSIs

[mu4]

I think superego relationships are even more prone to covering each others weakness and forming a comfort zone in order to make the relationship to work. Once that comfort zone is removed, the relationship can quickly collapse.

Duality is a relationship where the ego functions of the duals are the most unconscious and weak part of the psyche. It is not a area one feel one comprehends. Duality shouldn't be viewed as disagreement free, but rather as unlikely to evolve into feelings of contempt and disgust. A lot of what your dual will say will seem new and fresh even if they're not in agreement, as these are not conscious areas of processing.

The super-ego is different it's an area of duty, social responsibility, moral thinking. In this area individuals are conscious and even if it is not values at least conscious of the pain. When a individual meets a super-ego who is attractive, similar in many ways and want to be friendly with them, it may form a quick relationship where both partners are mutually attracted to this strength in a area of conscious weakness. This may lead to the partners to engage in behavior in order to help each other in these conscious areas. When individuals are covering for each other, this relationship may work. However when the two individuals cooperate, both will want to assert the ego which leads to incompatible modes of behavior and communication, However because these the functions between super-ego pairs are conscious, it is quickly apparent to each partner the nature of these disagreements and feelings of contempt and disgust can develop easily. Without staying in some mutually agreed comfort-zones, super-ego relationship will collapse.

I think social development is heavily influenced by asymmetric(Benefit/Supervision) relationships, while partnerships of productivity is more where duality comes into play.

I think one danger of duality is a relationship with a deceptive or unhealthy dual who is simply not a good partner for an individual.

[Radio]

I've thought about this, too. I think, on a completely different level from intra-quadra relationships, there's a certain pressure of expectation from super-egos that can be constructive in keeping you attentive towards alternatives that you might not otherwise consider, or in nudging you towards being more articulate and verbal, rather than presuming the other person should understand you, for instance (as connotations don't often translate well to the opposing quadra). It's different from duality in that you don't help build each other up, but you chisel away the weakest part and allow something stronger stronger to grow back.On the same page -- like an amplified version of your inner critic -- it can make you neurotic, paranoid, and angry, or make those conditions worse. It doesn't surpass duality in terms of comfort and ease of communication, which is what most people by default look for, but it's far from the worst intertype relationship (complementary club + same temperament + same CogStyle).

[On that note, the worst is probably quasi-identical, or mirror, for a romantic relationship.]

[silke]

In parent-child relationships of this type my impression has been rather negative. From what I've seen and experienced, the parent tends to view the child as somehow broken, not the way they are supposed to be according to the parent. Ex: one of the SLE guys I've met had an IEE mother who would publicly declare how unlikable he was and comment how nobody would hire or date him; he was utterly flawed in her eyes. I had a similar experience with a SLI relative, who thankfully was a somewhat distant relative so my interaction with her was limited. I felt like she was often attempting to re-make me into some image of what a perfect child would be like in her eyes, and there was no way I could fit that image. I would imagine that being in superego relations with one's mother may even corrode one's self-esteem.

In relations where people are on an equal footing, from what I've seen both of them will make demands of each other to be a certain different way, and then grow frustrated that those demands aren't met. This led me to think of Superego as relations of mutual Supervision - each person is trying to reinvent the other, thinking that the other is being difficult on purpose. There is certainly an element of competition in these relations that keeps people on their toes and motivates them towards self-advancement, but this happens at expense of emotional well-being.

i don't think its part of the conventional interpretation of socionics that non-valued are "impossible" to understand. it's just less comfortable to get familiar with them. i'm not claiming for this to be the most "fun" coupling. just the one that gives a person the greatest boost in terms of self-development IF it can be made to work. no pain, no gain. who expects the path with the optimal outcome and the one easiest to walk on to be coincident?

"By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher." - Socrates. I see what you did there

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Oh come on. You can get almost anybody to understand you if you both speak the same language you just have to try and get over your narcissism. Granted it's not worth it if you are giving yourself up and they are not doing the same, but all it requires is selflessness and truly putting yourself in somebody's shoes.

Now if somebody wants to be pointlessly difficult/complicated/convulted just to be an ass or to see how flowery/pretty they can categorize words that's a different story. I view it as our attempt to make life interesting, alive, and exciting. But then if you do that and then complain about 'nobody understanding you' or that you blame your own poor interpersonal skills on other people instead of yourself, I have to go: =/.

[golden]

old thread but
@labster you asked about personal experiences, and I would say I find it easy to come into alignment with my superego relations, I often appreciate them, and for some reason I am interested in their point of view. I feel sympathy for them; I find myself trying to understand them, it's like being hooked on a little mystery, but it's frustrating in that I can never really solve that mystery. I don't find the relationship resilient enough; it's too hard to recover from conflicts. There's not enough opportunity for growth, it's like both people have to remain a bit frozen in order to make it work. There's also a feeling of competitiveness in it, like it's not clear who the leader is going to be, because it's somehow not possible to take turns leading, as both people are trying to cover or control the same territory in life, but not in the way that would help or support the other person. There's also not enough usable correction--i.e., the feedback coming from the other person doesn't stick, doesn't seem workable or usable.

I find I have a similar work ethic and pace to my superegos and so we can be pretty efficient together, or present a good image together, but that's not deep enough for the relationship to be truly well rounded. It looks better than it feels, ime. It feels parched.

[Jenna]

I dated a Te-SLI for a couple of years. I had said otherwise here (because he would read my posts) but I was miserable most of the time. It didn't make me well-rounded in any sense, I was much more neurotic then. I hated all of the Si caregiver bullshit. Are you comfortable? Are you hungry? Etc got old fast. If I'm uncomfortable or hungry I will fix it myself! Even worse was the constant Si language, declaring his physical state all the time (cold, hot, hungry, tired, sore, describing smells or bodily sensations). I can understand every once in awhile if it's really annoying or whatever but he would never stop. I also hated that he was so inert. I'm already very inert. I need someone who can get me up and going, not someone who likes to lie around all day because it feels good.

I disliked how he reacted when I would get mad at him. I could never really pinpoint it until now (since now I'm with someone with Se in ego block). Whatever the subject may be, if I were upset his reaction was to get me to calm down. It's not unreasonable at all but I didn't like it, it never worked and always just made me feel annoyed. NOW I understand that I actually like when the person I'm with stands up to me when I'm upset. I know it sounds really weird and possibly bad but it's really not. After they show a bit of anger at me in response, I immediately stop caring about why I was upset and focus on making them feel better instead.

I don't really know how he felt about my ego block. I hardly ever expressed my dissatisfaction about his, because I knew he had good intentions and it was just the way he was. He didn't seem super annoyed by me, he never responded negatively but certainly not positively either.

I also find Si base types to be a bit effeminate. Why care so much about how you are physically feeling? There are more interesting things to focus on. Although I also find pretty much all intuitive men effeminate. It just feels like they are lacking something, that forceful and masculine energy that only Se types have. And, I just have to say... The sex can't compare lol.

[InvisibleJim]

As ever an insightful post @labster I have often thought that the yielding/obstinate renin is the best measure of this and I know of quite a few super-ego pairings.

Like any relationship the partners need to be especially aligned in compromise for this to work. It is also more likely to be a problem if one partner is yielding and the other is obstinate. EII yielding with LSI obstinate; LSI doesn't understand why EII can't just stick to what they say, EII doesn't understand why LSI keeps criticising them

Two obstinate partners can be very productive if their ethics are in good alignment as both partners are consistent e.g. ESE and ILI

Two yielding partners may find they feel that their life becomes static and dull due to the inability to make progress unless their careers and fortunates are aligned.

Yielding types
Resources are 'sacred', but ideas are freely shared and manipulated.
Easily aware of the boundaries between their and others' interests.
Protect their resources to the point of conflict, and their reaction may be unduly strong.
“If I know I can't do something, I won't and will forget all about it.”

Obstinate types
Ideas are 'sacred', but resources are freely shared and manipulated.
Easily aware of the boundaries between their and others' resources.
Guard their interests from intrusions, and their reaction to such intrusions may be quite sharp.
“I won't abandon my interests just because my resources are inadequate, but simply work towards improving my resources until they ARE adequate.”

[JWC3]

I think the practical manifestation of duality is less about physiological balance or completeness. So you are correct in that assertion. Rather it is in fact about psychological comfort and ease of communication. What that means in its real world manifestation is that you are able to freely exchange ideas and trouble shoot problems without psychological or relationship repercussions.

Basically, interacting with a dual will allow you to troubleshoot your personal problems without fear or having to jump through any hoops. When it comes to self improvement I.E. behavioral/intellectual/interpersonal development duality would likely be more beneficial than other inter-type relations.

[717495]

I think the practical manifestation of duality is less about physiological balance or completeness.

I think duality is much about balance, a flowing composition of two elements that fuel one another at the rate of which the composition is fulfilled.

[Absurd]

I think duality is much about balance, a flowing composition of two elements that fuel one another.

A box of matches in my pocket.

[FDG]

Well-rounded implies the ability to execute successfully the largest amount of activities; in the case of super-ego, adding the skills of the partners would likely lead to the largest amount of cumulated skills. So, trying to construct a dynamic game, we could say that at time t=0 we start with two pairs, one dual and one super-ego; at time t=1 and setting

x central type

y supergo type

z dual type of the central type

x(t1) (skills of type 1 at time 1) + y(t1) (skills of superego at time t1) > x(t1)+z(t1)

but! x(t1)+y(t1)+y(t1)x(t1)< x(t1)+z(t1)+x(t1)z(t1) which implies that x(t1)z(t1)>y(t1)-z(t1) i.e. the higher skills of the super-ego relationship do not make up for the synergetic characteristics show by dual relationships.

[JWC3]

I think duality is much about balance, a flowing composition of two elements that fuel one another at the rate of which the composition is fulfilled.

I was more insinuating that the balance existed externally through the application of a partner with complimenting functions rather than internal realization through super-ego relations. Or rather that assuming it was about internal balance, which I agree is the case, than an environment where you're free to practice using such functions without fear of admonishment would be far more beneficial.

It's less about something inside you that you realize and more about having a relationship or environment that you are free to be bad at certain functions in for the sake of your own development.

So duality may not be balanced, though it does produce it. It's less important that one partner is much better at certain functions than it is that they don't mind when you are bad at those same functions. So my emphasis is less on the existing balance and placed on the comfort instead as more beneficial though both likely play some part in creating that comfort.

EDIT: @polikujm I'm responding to the assertion that the two relations could be equally balanced by saying that it's important to remember that one is still more comfortable and that may produce balance quickly even if the other is innately 'more' balanced.

[Olga]

I guess we need to look broader at the relationships because of many factors involved and on the differences within the people of one type ( influence of subtypes?). I am in the relationship Super-ego for nearly 10 years and the time flew very quick. I am happier than I was in the dual relationship or mirror relationships. Every relationship have got difficulties of different types but it is not necessarily difference in types which is the reason for maintaining happy relationship. I look around and see not rarely conflictors in the relationships and still people manage to live with each other and be happy or at least they manage to find some sort of harmony within the relationship and to deal with conflicts and difficult parts of the realtionships.

[Bethanyclaire]

Super-ego might actually be your one true love. There are loads of dual couples in my opinion, at least quite a few. True love is surely rarer than that!

I think I know an EIE and LSE couple and I also know an ILI, SEI couple.

[aixelsyd]

I'd rather not have my partner be responsible for my personal growth or whatever.

[Northstar]

Super-ego can be useful in having opposite strengths but same temperaments. The activity levels are same so in case of two extroverts a lot can get done quickly.

That being said, it is psychologically uncomfortable and has constant misunderstandings that spark conflict. Again, in case of two identical extroverted temperaments, both want to ”lead” and the power struggle cannot be resolved. Fundamental values and interest areas are opposite even if the way of approaching life is similar. Compared to duality, discussions are uninteresting and fruitless unless restricted to practical shared projects.