13 replies to this topic

[Ashton]

Identical

Socionics.us: Two like-minded partners who strive to occupy similar social niches. Understand each others motives and goals and easily become jealous of each other's successes, especially if partners have the same social status. Good for occasionally touching base and sharing experiences, and for teaching purposes — if one partner is older and more experienced. Difficult for doing multi-faceted tasks together; partners quickly tire of each other, and cooperation tends to break down if they have the same status. Partners tend to talk only on subjects related to their mutual strengths and avoid other topics. They are not able to help solve each others' real problems and can only offer general advice and relate personal experience. In group settings identity partners who are already personally acquainted tend to avoid one other.

Socionics.com: These are relations of complete understanding between partners but with an inability to help each other. Identical partners see the world with identical eyes, identically work out received information, come to identical conclusions and have identical problems. Identical partners usually experience sympathy towards each other, trying to support and justify each other. Identical relations have a negative side too. Interaction with an Identical partner may quickly become boring unless partners have common interests, working on the same project, or if one partner has sufficient preponderance in knowledge so a teacher and student situation can develop. Usually when partners do not receive any new information from each other they find no use in such interaction and their relations can become neutral. However, periodically even neutral relations come alive for a short period of time. It happens when partners discover new things about each other. If Identical partners feel a mutual attraction to each other their relations can be really loving and caring. In order for Identical relations to last, one partner has to take a role of the Dual as if it was a Duality relationship. Usually it happens naturally. If the two are introverts, one often subconsciously attempts to take care of the extroverted side of things, if the two are thinking types, then one would try to fill the resulting emotional void etc. Different backgrounds and function developments of Identical partners could help in this case, however as with any other relationship there has to be a driving force behind it to keep it going. The result of Identical relations is self-development, because these relations can help you to look at your own abilities and disabilities from a different angle. Identical relations can be compared with watching a video of oneself. In conclusion, only these relations can provide a person with correct self-evaluation.

Wikisocion.org: Identity is an intertype relation between two people of the same type. For example, an ILE and another ILE would have an identity relation. Members of such relationship are called "Identicals".

Relations of identity are characterized by a very rapid "getting to know you" process and the ease of communicating information to each other. Identity partners can easily relate to each other and offer sympathy and understanding, but rarely solutions. When interacting together on a daily basis, both people tend to want to take responsibility for the same areas, making cooperation difficult. Often one partner is left to idle, which makes the relationship less cohesive than others. However, since identical partners share the same quadra values (in the same ways), they will take a similar aspect on life and how to approach it. Such similarities tend to take the focus off of a competitive mindset between the two (more than, say, kindred relations), since they can reflect on their identical strengths & problematic aspects of their lives.

If identicals have shared interests, they can provide a great deal of stimulation to the other's activity. Identicals also make perhaps the best role models, since they represent how one can realistically develop one's strengths and thus gain personal fulfillment and societal recognition. In contrast, complementary relations gravitate towards direct interaction, where their benefits are the most profound.

In contrast to other symmetrical relations, which divide the socion into 8 pairs, and asymmetrical relations, which divide the socion into 4 rings of 4 types, 16 identical pairs are possible. See Mathematics of socionics for a more comprehensive explanation.

[Ashton]

Duality

Socionics.us: Generally very enjoyable and rewarding relationship, especially if partners share common values and interests. Partners strive to shorten the psychological distance and enjoy simply being around each other and doing a wide range of activities together. Effective cooperation takes place automatically, with each partner taking on what he is best at. If partners share common interests, they also have productive discussions where they help each other see things from different complementary viewpoints. Partners relax each other and help release pent-up thoughts and emotions, but seldom feel like straining themselves and doing hard work together. Duality is by far the best relationship for restoring emotional equilibrium, developing spontaneity and natural personality traits, and overcoming fears and complexes.

Socionics.com: These relations are the most favourable and comfortable of all intertype relations providing complete psychological compatibility. Dual partners are like two halves of a whole unit. They usually understand each others intentions without any need to say a word. Dual will naturally protect your weak points and appreciate the strong ones without asking for anything in return. Interaction with your Dual allows you to be yourself without the need to adjust to your partner like in other relations. This often saves both partners a lot of energy which they can use for their own interesting activities. Conflicts between Duals are very rare and if there are any, they are normally short lived and solved without pain. Your Dual partner will love you just for what you are and if there is such a thing as true love then it could probably only occur in relations of Duality. However, let's not idealise these relations too much. Although theoretically relations of Duality are the best of the best, practically not everybody who is your Dual will make your dreams come true. The reason for this is that we are usually so twisted up during the course of our lives that our already formed and stable views and attitudes can affect our relationships quite heavily. In fact, younger people have more chance to succeed in the quest for their perfect partner than older people. But the chances are always there. There are at least two conditions to be completed for a successful relationship between Duals. Firstly between the partners there has to be at least a minimal mutual attraction. Secondly and most importantly is that the partners are truly striving for the same or similar things. This may include common interests and/or life goals. Partners that are both seriously thinking about building a family are a good example. Logically saying: two halves of the same whole must not repel or move in the different directions, otherwise the whole will break into pieces. Relations of Duality also go through several stages. The first stage sometimes can be really tense. It is like a new engine that requires a "run in" first. If relations crumble it normally happens in the first stage. The more stages completed by Duals the more unbreakable their relationship. However, nature has played a little trick on us. It is difficult to notice your Dual partner among all the other types and even easier to pass them by. Usually during first contact extroverts think about their introvert Dual as ordinary and simple, therefore not deserving their personal attention. In return introverts consider their extrovert Dual to be too good for them and therefore unattainable. Both positions usually belong to people who had a lack of Duality interaction during childhood. The magnetic effect of Duality becomes obvious when partners do not see each other for a while. Only after being together for a fair amount of time do the partners start realising how much they need each other. Finally, these relations are most suitable for friendship, marriage and family life. To have a Dual partner is irreplaceable if you have to compete or survive in a socially dangerous environment.

Wikisocion.org: Duals are on opposite poles of the extrovert/introvert, logic/ethics, and intuition/sensing dichotomies, but on the same pole of the rational/irrational dichotomy. This accounts for duals' common rhythm while taking responsibility for opposite aspects of reality.

Duals can interact on many levels and in a variety of ways, which creates a sense of fullness and variety in the relationship. Duals almost always bring something unexpected to the relationship for the other person and end up affecting them in ways they did not expect.

This is because duals see certain abilities, problems, and traits in each other person that the other person is not fully aware of. However, duals must remove psychological barriers in order for expectations to be met completely. Otherwise, they will be unsatisfied.

In dual relations one partner's ego functions (1 and 2) fill the expectations of the other person's Super-Id functions (5 and 6). Likewise, duals' Super-Ego and Id blocks, though less important to the individuals' lives, interact with each other in complementary ways. Duals help each other to face their super-ego troubles in a healthy way, usually indirectly.

Descriptions of duality often assume that the relationship is romantic and between people of the opposite sex. But it should be noted that dual relations occur between same-sex partners, in non-romantic friendship, in various settings, (e.g. at work,) and between people with different backgrounds.

[Ashton]

Activation/Activity

Socionics.us: Partners are good at helping solve each other's real-life problems and are able to be open with one another without causing misunderstandings. Thus, discussing life and solving problems is very rewarding and productive. When doing complex projects together that require lots of planning and commitment, however, partners discover that they have different rhythms and that minor misunderstandings constantly arise. Partners tend to take each other too literally and act on each other's recommendations too quickly, leading to disappointment when the other doesn't follow through or makes changes to his plans. Also, communication tends to be either too intense or too slow. Partners rev each other up mentally and physically and then need to increase the psychological distance to relax and return to a state of equilibrium.

Socionics.com: These relations are the easiest and quickest to start. Activity partners do not experience any visual difficulties when starting relations which can be surprising to them at the beginning. Partners stimulate each other into activity. Interaction with an Activity partner becomes really satisfying especially if both partners feel a mutual attraction. However, with continuous interaction over a long period comes overactivation which normally results in an overall tiredness of each other (a good example is when you watch a comedy that is so funny that after half the film you do not have the energy to laugh anymore). When this happens Activity partners need a short rest from each other, after which they can enjoy a positive interaction once again. This pattern repeats itself giving these relations an oscillating character. If partners cannot take a break from each other, it can cause negative stimulation to take the place of positive. Although overall interaction between partners is nice and easy, when it comes to fulfilling everyday duties and matters together, partners usually meet with many problems. Instead of solving the problems, Activity partners tend to give advice to each other on how to solve these problems, often affecting each others weak points. The advice of an Activity partner is always useful as it can strengthen your weakness, but not so much that it will ever become your strength. The other problem with these relations is that information between Activity partners always needs some adjustments. One partner may think of it as too foggy and not concrete enough, whereas for the other partner it is too unrefined. Collaboration is also difficult, because partners cannot predict each others behaviour and actions in what seem to be ordinary situations. Because of this, partners cannot rely or count on each other in full. Most of the problems that arise during Activity relationships are because one partner is always Perceiving and the other is always Judging, meaning that they live in different life rhythms. These relations are excellent for leisure, but not for day to day activities. When two Duality pairs gather together (forming a complete Quadrable) they experience a feeling of elation. The reason for this is that when two Duality pairs interact with each other, the two introverts (one from each Duality pair) and the two extroverts (again, one from each Duality pair) interact with each other as relations of Activity. Introverts in relations of Activity become slightly extroverted and more open, whereas two extroverts will often calm down a little.

Wikisocion.org: Activation is an intertype relation between two people that belong to opposite poles of all basic dichotomies except for extroversion and introversion (e.g. SLI, which is irrational, introverted, sensing, and logical, and EII, which is rational, introverted, intuitive, and ethical). Activation partners belong to the same quadra and thus find it comfortable to let down their guard around each other, making this relationship very easy to start.

Activation is a very common relationship for friendship. Activation is similar to duality in that each person provides those kinds of information that the other most expects, however, the emphasis is always somewhat different than subconsciously expected. Partners are able to provide each other with an abundance of useful information and assistance, but lead separate lives and make decisions based on criteria that don't seem too important to the other.

Activation partners who become close and discuss their strivings and personal worldviews often are struck by how radically different they are, despite the relative ease and benefit of communication. As opposed to duals, who tend to strive for the same things but from differing, though compatible angles, activation partners' approaches to achieving their goals tend to be fundamentally incompatible, due largely to the difference in rationality and irrationality. This means that while activation partners can talk and share their common hobbies with ease, they tend to view each other as separate entities with separate lifestyles and plans.

[Ashton]

Mirror

Socionics.us: Partners can be themselves around each other without causing misunderstandings. Partners have a correct intuitive understanding of each other and are rarely surprised by anything the other does or says. Arguments are very rare. They always have things to say on the same topics and easily come to a consensus, but at the same time put opposite emphasis on things, creating a revisionary effect. These relations are highly verbally oriented, with partners discussing their hobby topics (and avoiding most others) and revising and adding to each other's views. Partners tire from the discussionary nature of the relationship and try to separate for work and rest. Partners immediately liven up when someone else shows up who is the dual of one and the activator of the other partner.

Socionics.com: These are relations of mutual correction. Mirror partners have similar interests and ideas, but a slightly different understanding of the same problems. Each partner can see only half of one problem. Therefore the partners always find what the other partner is thinking interesting. Usually partners quickly realise that they are very like-minded. The area of confidence of one partner is always the area of creativity for the other partner. What one partner considers solid and final appears incomplete and changeable for the other partner. This difference may often puzzle the partners especially when they fulfil their mutual plans. It seems for them as if the other partner simply misunderstood the main concept. Therefore partners attempt to correct each other's understanding but usually fail, because each partner acts from their confident side. For the same reason, Mirror partners can be involved in really hot disputes and can even come to blows in the name of their opinion. However, Mirror partners are often very good friends. When they work together on the same project, their mutual correction and adjustment becomes a constructive criticism that is usually accepted as useful. The main discomfort in these relations is caused by the difference in Judgement and Perception between the partners. Mirror partners generally agree about setting near future goals, but disagree about global aims. Mirror relations usually lack warm atmosphere between partners. This situation normally changes in presence of a third person who is Dual to one partner and an Activity partner to the other.

Wikisocion.org: Mirror is an intertype relation of intellectual stimulation and mutual correction. The pair shares common interests, but differ slightly in thought process and methodology.

Initially, Mirrors find plenty of things to talk about. They easily understand each other's philosophies (and usually find that they agree) on basically all issues. They are surprised to find that the other can provide a subtly different outlook and recognize valuable things they themselves would tend to overlook. As the relationship gets closer, their differences become more of an obstacle. When everything is apparently all said and done, one Mirror will point out something they consider to be a loose end. This perplexes the other, because the point appears to them inconsequential and a distraction from the main point of the process. They may even think the other is intentionally derailing their efforts, because of their otherwise understanding attitude. This perpetual sense of almost understanding leads to some frustration between mirrors, despite it being a generally positive relationship. Any tension is easily resolved by creating some distance; confrontation is almost never necessary, and if it happens is quickly forgotten.

Perhaps more than any other relation, Mirrors can stimulate each other's creativity and work in tandem on the same project, but this interaction is primarily intellectual (i.e. work-related) and does not result in a feeling of closeness or needing the other on a more instinctive level. While they may find the discussion interesting at first, too much of it can lead Mirrors to have a sense of emptiness and disappointment about the relationship. They complement each other within their shared strengths, leaving an entire half of the informational world essentially neglected. They reinforce each other's attempts to engage the Super-id, but these usually remain half-hearted, continually returning to the comfort zone of the Ego.

The intellectual stimulation and surprise involved in Mirror relations make it quite durable and friendly even over a long period of time. Thus, Mirror is a common relationship among friends.

[Ashton]

Lookalike/Business

Socionics.us: Partners are interested in many of the same areas, but approach them in completely different ways. Partners are generally impressed with and value one another's strengths at a distance, but find it difficult to get any practical benefit for themselves from these strengths. Partners cannot form anything more than a superficial relationship with each other.

Socionics.com: These are relations between equal partners which can be called acquaintances rather than friends. There are no visual obstacles in the development of these relations, partners can talk easily almost about anything. Look-a-like partners do not feel any danger from the other partner. The strong sides of the partners are different in the such a way that almost any conversations between them always fall into the area of the confidence of only one of the partners. Look-a-like partners also have similar problems which makes them feel rather sympathetic towards each other instead of being critical of each other's vulnerabilities. Understanding between partners is usually good. Collaboration between them may be very fruitful especially if partners feel a mutual attraction. When partners loose their feeling of sympathy for each other through anger or any other reason, they can apply pressure to their partner's vulnerabilities. This can sometimes be really unexpected and unpleasant for both partners. Arguments in Look-a-like relations are not common practice. The partners usually try to help each other, or at least feel when their partner requires some form of assistance. However, in many cases the help is not effective enough because partners have similar problems. Look-a-like relations have an average degree of comfort. Partners do not have anything against each other but also nothing for which to struggle. These relations can normally bring a feeling of satisfaction from interaction with an equal and not boring partner.

Wikisocion.org: Business relations (also known as Look-alike relations) are similar to identity and kindred in that partners have half their functions in common — in this case, all the even-numbered ones. This provides a certain commonality of methods and approaches and somewhat similar communication styles. Business partners rarely have serious problems understanding each other and don't need much time to get to know each other and find common ground (or define their differences). The psychological distance is naturally large enough that partners do not generally seek to know each other deeply. Rather, they are content to pal around with the other on a relatively superficial basis. A change in location or life circumstances is usually enough to interrupt the friendship.

Business partners do not tend to view each other as serious threats or competitors. Their preferred spheres of influence, their basic attitudes and purposes — defined primarily through the leading function — are very different, diminishing potential competition. Furthermore, neither partner can easily stimulate the other's vulnerable function, meaning that partners can loosen up around each other. However, the fact that the first function of each corresponds to the third of the other can make time spent together feel like a challenge and an effort. Each becomes a bit more like the other and a bit less like his usual self.

[Ashton]

Semi-duality

Socionics.us: Similar to duality in providing meaningful psychological support and important insight along with an element of mutual fascination. However, complete unity and balance are unattainable. Partners are drawn to different groups of people and internally are not as committed or devoted to each other as might be implied during their moments of resonance and self-disclosure. Partners tend to talk much and do little, as if avoiding a common area of weakness.

Socionics.com: These are relations of deficient Duality. Semi-Duality partners usually have no problems in understanding each other or each other's objectives, at least when these objectives are only on paper. When it comes to fulfilling joint plans, partners often fail to co-operate. The extrovert partner hardly listens to the introvert, concentrating more on the sound of their own voice. However, the introvert partner does not get upset about this and they often seem to find a way to adapt to it. Semi-Duals usually have many topics for conversation and these conversations do not seem to be boring. Semi-Duals, especially if they are different in gender, can show interest in each other, which is multiplied if in addition they find each other attractive. However, when they feel like they are half way to complete understanding, one of them usually does something, not deliberately of course, that ruins all established harmony putting the partners right back to where they started. This is how incomplete Duality manifests itself. Semi-Duality partners cannot stay upset with each other for a long time. After partners have calmed down, they attempt to get closer to each other again which unfortunately leads to another stumble. For the observer, these relations may seem really passionate and loving. Relations of Semi-Duality can be compared with the moth and the flame. If not taken seriously, these relations can produce a little periodical shaking, keeping the partners "awake". Relations of Semi-Duality are also full of contrasts: from being happy to see partner again to sudden disappointment and bewilderment.

Wikisocion.org: Relations of semi-duality are one of incomplete or "deficient" duality, when both parties are usually in agreement and on friendly terms. Semi-duals, especially if they are different in gender, can show great interest in each other, which is multiplied if they also find each other attractive. Unfortunately, harmony can dissolve quickly when one of the pair makes a blunder of some sort, be it socially or etiquette related. Fortunately, semi-dual partners often have much to talk about in their conversations and these conversations do not seem boring to the participants. There is the added benefit of the inability of the pair to stay angry with each other for long.

Some leading socionists have quipped relationships of semi-duality "the moth and the flame". The couple is invariably attracted to each other, but repeatedly "burned" by each other. To some onlookers these relations may seem especially passionate and loving.

[Ashton]

Supervision

Socionics.us: Asymmetric relationship. One partner (the recipient) feels like he is being watched closely by the other (the transmitter) and becomes overly self-conscious and defensive or apologetic. The transmitter doesn't appreciate most of what the recipient does and underestimates his abilities and personal qualities, which hurts the recipient's self-esteem and can lead to long-lasting scars. The transmitter is surprised by the recipient's sensitivity and doesn't know what to do about it. The recipient feels like he can't take any initiative when he is around the transmitter, who wonders why the recipient doesn't do anything on his own. Difficult relations for a close or medium psychological distance.

Socionics.com: These relations are also asymmetrical as are relations of Benefit. One partner, called the Supervisor, is always in a more favourable position in respect to the other partner who is known as Supervisee. Relations of Supervision can give the impression that Supervisor is constantly watching every step of the Supervisee. The latter usually feels this control even if the Supervisor does not say or do anything. The explanation for this is that the Supervisee weak point is defenceless against the Supervisor's strong point. This makes the Supervisee nervous and expect the worse. Although the Supervisor can seem self-satisfied, petty, faultfinding and narrative, the Supervisee pays attention to their actions and considers the Supervisor as consequential. The Supervisee normally wants to gain recognition and commendation from the Supervisor. However, it may seem like the Supervisor always undervalues the abilities of the Supervisee. This stimulates the Supervisee into proving their own worthiness with various actions, yet there is little chance that they will succeed. The Supervisor sees the Supervisee as quite interesting and capable, but incomplete and therefore in need of some help and advice. The Supervisee does not respond to this aid as expected and this will often increase the Supervisor's attempts to change the Supervisee. Because the Supervisee naturally does not understand what it is that the Supervisor wants from them, this may irritate the Supervisor, who thinks that the Supervisee simply does not want to understand. In relations of Supervision it may also appear as if the Supervisor patronises the Supervisee, which can be quite obtrusive for the latter. When there are more than two people present, the Supervisee often attempts to release themselves from the control of the Supervisor by starting arguments for the sake of it or by attempting to manoeuvre themselves into the commanding position. Unfortunately, these attempts lead nowhere. The Supervisor may think instead that the Supervisee simply requires more attention. Supervision partners often look like good friends. The reason for this is that in these relations both partners can sense their social value: the Supervisor as a "guardian angel", without whom the Supervisee will get into trouble, and the Supervisee as the object of attention.

Wikisocion.org: Supervision is an asymmetric relation (like relations of Benefit) in which one partner, the Supervisor, is in a more powerful position psychologically than the other, the Supervisee. This is due to the correlation of partners' functions, which allows the Supervisor to put more psychological pressure on the Supervisee through his leading function than vice versa. Typically, the Supervisee feels somewhat wary or careful about his words when approaching a Supervisor. This innate wariness can develop into a full-fledged supervision "syndrome" if given the right conditions, or it can remain at a manageable level if neither person is in a position of power over the other, and partners do not overstep the natural bounds of the relationship.

Common ground between supervision partners is usually attained by the Supervisor resonating with the leading function of the Supervisee (which is his creative function). The attitudes expressed as absolute values by the Supervisee are worthwhile to the Supervisor, but are seen as a by-product of more important pursuits. Common ground can also be reached through the suggestive function of the Supervisee, which is the valued mobilizing function of the Supervisor. However, both are weak in this area and tend to only discuss their pursuits rather than actually doing them together.

The Supervisor is usually interested in what the Supervisee does and says, but at the same time feels like it is often in need of modification or reformulation from the point of view of his leading function. Because this reframing of issues corresponds to their vulnerable function, the Supervisee may often feel frustrated with the Supervisor's statements. If the Supervisee begins to argue with the Supervisor, the differences of viewpoint may quickly become more personal when the Supervisor points out perceived 'flaws' in the Supervisee's thinking style or way of doing things. Such comments are usually not intended to be damning criticism from the Supervisor's point of view, but may well be interpreted as such by the Supervisee, due to the inherent sensitivity of the vulnerable function. If they live together, the Supervisee may find he can never live up to the Supervisor's expectations or achieve his genuine appreciation. For a working relationship or friendship to work, the Supervisor must exercise discipline and avoid commenting on the Supervisee's weak points as he sees them.

Though the Supervisee's discomfort can become quite intense, it is often not evident at first glance. He will usually only talk about it with closer friends, finding it difficult to express to the Supervisor without sounding childish. To the Supervisor it will appear that the Supervisee is overreacting. In the romantic sphere, the Supervisor often finds the Supervisee's use of his demonstrative function alluring, but will ultimately be unsatisfied with its sporadic nature. The Supervisee in turn sees the Supervisor as an admirable but somewhat bewildering persona.

[Ashton]

Comparative

Socionics.us: Like-minded partners with similar views and thinking styles but with different emphases within their common spheres of interest. Generally enjoy discussing their views, but rarely are able to arrive at a complete consensus or make decisions jointly. Less competition and avoidance of each other in groups than identity partners, but also less teaching potential. Partners tire of each other after a couple hours of contact. Cooperation is possible if formalized and if partners are able to maintain their autonomy.

Socionics.com: These are relations of deceptive similarity. Comparative partners talk about similar things, have similar interests, obey the norms of politeness and hospitality towards each other but they never really show an interest in each others problems. After a while these relations can become boring and stagnant. When comparative partners are on the same level in a hierarchy, they can coexist quite peacefully. Once one partner becomes superior to the other, they may have serious disagreements and conflicts. Comparative partners look at the same questions from very different angles. One partner feels as if the other is in their opinion trying to solve the same problem in an impractical manner. Moreover, partners are not happy to acknowledge each other's different point of view. This may cause great misunderstandings between partners, especially when applied to methods of working and as a result partners usually try to compromise. When in company, Comparative relations can improve a little. The reason for this is that the behaviour of one partner in respect to other people usually appears to the other partner as interesting and worthwhile. Moreover, partners have a good chance to learn from each other how to better improve their social interactions. When Comparative partners ask each other for advice, the adviser often finds their own advice quite useful for themselves. As a result the person who asked for advice usually leaves with nothing. Comparative partners may view each other as selfish and egoistic, however they do not try to clarify this point to each other. In a family environment these relations are very heavy, as they can create a mistrust between partners and do not allow them to feel their own significance.

Wikisocion.org: In Kindred or Comparative relations partners have the same leading function, but opposing creative functions. The common leading function makes establishing a connection and understanding the other person easy, while the different creative functions reflects different ideas about how knowledge and skills should be applied. Spending time together intensifies partners' leading function behavior, which is enjoyable at first, but can lead to exhaustion if goes on for too long. Kindred partners typically find each other engaging company for occasional focused conversations or intense interaction (which may not necessarily appear intense externally, especially for leading Si or Ni types). Partners typically find that their primary goals in life are alike in many respects and respect the other person's basic attitudes, which are quite like their own, even if the details differ.

In an atmosphere where work and cooperation are not expected these relations can develop into friendship, but if forced to work too closely together these types could end up in a battle of equals; they will find the other to match them point for point, and outsiders, try as they may, will have little effect on the ensuing conflict, since the kindreds have almost no communication difficulties and thus will likely know exactly what the problem is. Kindreds have very little pity for each other in general, but when getting along they can connect, finding fondness through the suggestive function and even help the other out a little using their demonstrative function, though they will eventually tire of the demands made on it, if they are not sufficiently polite about it.

[Ashton]

Illusionary

Socionics.us: Partners are able to provide meaningful assistance in each other's areas of weakness, often making for fruitful cooperation in getting things done. Partners find each other useful, but almost never fascinating (i.e. someone who you would want to get to know deeply). Thus, partners tend to do more and talk less.

Socionics.com: These are relations of growing laziness. There are no other intertype relations that can deactivate partners so much as Illusionary relations. Illusionary partners find it comfortable being relaxed together, discussing different subjects. What one partner is talking about is always interesting, but in order to understand the partner better the other partner needs to force themselves. This difficulty in making an effort also makes achieving goals together almost impossible. Mutual business or other activity is complicated, because Illusionary partners do not understand the reasons and motives of each other's actions. Whatever one partner tries to achieve usually appears insufficient and worthless to the other. Because partners expect different kinds of activity from each other, they become negative and may criticise each other's intentions and objectives. For an observer, this misunderstanding between partners can appear to be humorous. The introvert partner usually tries to free themselves from the attempts of the extrovert partner to impose their opinions. The introverts seek independence. The extrovert partner wants to make their introvert partner into what they consider to be a "normal person". Both partners are distrustful of each other abilities. Disagreements in these relations are usually short because partners are drawn to each other. From time to time Illusionary relations become really warm and caring. It normally happens when partners work together but not on the same task. Partners may feel inspired with the result of a successfully finished project, however when they try to start a new project, they again meet the same difficulties in co-operation.

Wikisocion.org: Mirage relations (also known as Illusionary relations), like semi-duality, are similar to duality in that many of each partners' functions directly correspond to the unconscious expectations of the other. In relations of semi-duality partners' odd-numbered functions match those of the other person's dual, while in mirage it is the even-numbered functions. That is, partners' use of their 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th functions more or less meets the other's expectations, while the rest are the opposite of what is expected for comfortable interaction. In practice this translates to a perception that the other person can be useful in solving practical issues that arise, but partners do not find each other fascinating — as they do duals or semi-duals — due to an absence of suggestion through their 5th function.

At a distance, mirage partners may experience a wide range of attitudes to each other — from like to mutual mockery — but this is generally true of most intertype relations. In closer contact, partners find they can be of practical assistance to each other in a variety of ways, even if they are not driven to become close emotionally. Leadership duties are divided naturally between partners, one of which is extraverted and the other introverted, and who both share a common rational or irrational approach to living. Despite this significant underlying compatibility, prolonged interaction leads to a dissatisfaction with everything about the relationship that is related to the other's leading function. Partners unconsciously expect the other person to accept their general sentiments about things and build upon them, but mirage partners inevitably present their own completely independent worldviews that are somewhat at odds with the other's. Partners' worldviews, central values, and general approaches are similar in that they focus on similar kinds of things, but they are hardly compatible in practice. Where one sees opportunities that must be developed immediately, the other wants to wait and do nothing for the time being. Then, the tables turn and the other person suddenly feels it is time to do something, while the other believes that there is nothing to be done at the moment.

Mirage relations occur between two types, each of which has the other's hidden agenda (6th) function as their creative (2nd) function. However, one's leading (1st) function is the other's ignoring (7th) function. This means that the two are like a dual couple on how they interact with the world, but not on how they view the world. Mirage relations tend to appear close or compatible from an outside perspective, but the partner's themselves may not get along. The closer the relationship becomes, the more strained it gets. A parent-child mirage relationship may be turbulent at home, but will be more natural, relaxed, and mutually beneficial when on vacation together.

Mirage relations range from apparent compatibility, offset by the occasional small, short argument to mutual understanding and tolerance of the other's quirks to complete aversion and disregard for the other's lifestyle. The relationship usually progresses smoothly, but it depends on how close the partners are, what terms the relationship started on, and which of the two leads the relationship (usually the older, more experienced partner.) A lack of understanding of the other's lifestyle seems to be the biggest cause for upheaval.

According to Filatova, the one in charge is important - if it is the more positive of the two, or the one more that is more of a natural psychologist, then the relation will run smoothly. (Out of the four mirage cases Filatova offers, two have the same types, but the one in charge is reversed. In the more successful relationships, the only dichotomy shared by the three types in charge is static. IEEs, which she says are life-loving optimists, are negativists.

[Ashton]

Benefit

Socionics.us: Asymmetric relationship. The Benefit (-) person finds they are constantly trying to solve Benefit (+) individual's problems and is overly emotionally involved in their life — always waiting for a reward from the Benefit (+) individual. The Benefit (+) individual, on the other hand, is largely unaware of this and wonders why the Benefit (-) person is so dependent and so sensitive to the things the Benefit (+) individual says.

Socionics.com: These relations are asymmetrical. One partner, called the Benefactor (+) is always in a more favourable position in respect to the other partner who is known as Beneficiary (-). The Beneficiary (-) thinks of the Benefactor (+) as an interesting and meaningful person, usually over-evaluating them in the beginning. The Beneficiary (-) can be impressed and delighted by their partner's behaviour, manners, thoughts and their ability to easily deal with things that the Beneficiary (-) conceives as complicated. When partners are together, the Beneficiary (-) involuntarily starts to ingratiate themselves with the Benefactor (+), trying to please them without any obvious reason. In the worst cases this starts from little things and then becomes bigger until the Beneficiary (-) realizes the foolishness of their situation. The Beneficiary (-) can see the weakness of the Benefactor (+), wishing to help their partner to strengthen themselves. Because the strongest point of the Beneficiary (-) is the weak and unconscious point of the Benefactor (+), the Beneficiary (-) is convinced that they are able to help. However, when the Beneficiary (-) tries to help, the Benefactor (+) usually refuses the help without any good explanation. The Beneficiary (-) usually listens to every word the Benefactor (+) says but there is no feedback, the Benefactor (+) can not hear the Beneficiary (-). This may be sometimes unpleasant and even irritating for the Beneficiary (-). The Benefactor (+) accepts the Beneficiary (-) as somebody who is lower in rank or social position and often undervalues them in the beginning. The reason for this is that the Benefactor (+) feels that the Beneficiary (-) needs something from them, that special something that only the Benefactor (+) can provide. Therefore the Benefactor (+) naturally finds themselves in an advanced position in respect to the Beneficiary (-), but are at the same time willing to encourage and take care of the Beneficiary (-). Relations of Benefit may appear even and conflict free. Usually it is the Benefactor (+) who initiates the contact. Partners can even feel some kind of spiritual connection between them. However, relations last only as long as the Benefactor (+) has something to give and the Beneficiary (-) has need of it. If this major condition is no longer fulfilled, relations enter quite an unpleasant stage of their development. The Beneficiary (-) may begin ignoring the Benefactor (+) completely or they may start to accentuate too many of the Benefactors (+) inability, provoking arguments and quarrels. Finally, when the Benefactor (+) is in a superior position to the Beneficiary (-), it can work quite well, but not when it is the other way round!

Wikisocion.org: Benefit, or request, is an asymmetric relation in which the type with the higher status is called the Benefactor (or Request transmitter) and the type with the lower status is called the Beneficiary (or Request recipient). There is usually some kind of initial attraction going on, though not always mutual (the beneficiary will usually admire the benefactor's abilities from a distance), but after a while the Benefactor realizes that he is supporting the Beneficiary without receiving anything in return, and starts to criticize the Beneficiary for not holding up his end of the relationship (and so issues a "request"). Meanwhile the Beneficiary is irritated that the Benefactor feels he has the right to interfere in and try to mold the Beneficiary's behavior. If too close a distance is maintained both parties will ultimately feel unfulfilled.

If this relation occurs in a work setting, the Beneficiary will strive to help out the Benefactor, and to comply with his expectations. If the Benefactor doesn't offer the Beneficiary some praise for his efforts, the Beneficiary will feel inadequate - rather similarly as the Supervisee in a Supervision relationship. However, a Supervisor will take more of a clear leadership role, dominating the exchange, whereas the Beneficiary feels no obligation to the Benefactor to hang around once their contributions have been slighted. The complementation between the Beneficiary's First function and the Benefactor's second function also makes for a more caring and less competitive relationship than Supervision (in fact all relations of repulsion have a greater element of competition in them).

[Ashton]

Superego

Socionics.us: Each partner is the embodiment of many qualities the other wishes he had and tries unsuccessfully to develop in himself. Talking about these respective strengths can be enthralling if partners find interest in each other. If partners have a common mission, they cover each others' weak areas, making for a powerful team. However, close cooperation and ironing out details is difficult, as partners can't agree on principles. Conflicts and disagreements between super-ego partners are out in the open and are usually discussed very vocally, at times causing heated arguments without a clear winner.

Socionics.com: These are relations of mutual respect between partners. Super-Ego partners may think of each other as a distant and slightly mysterious ideal. They often show interest in each other's manners, behaviour and thought composition. Both partners experience a warm feeling towards each other, but for the outsider, these relations may look cold. If Super-Ego partners cannot find common interests, their interaction can become very formal. Partners normally think more about expressing their own point of view than listening to their partner. This expression comes from the confident side of one of the partners reaching the unconfident side of the other partner. The latter tries to defend themselves by projecting their confident points in return. Partners normally show interest and respect to each other if they do not know each other well enough. When partners start more close interaction, they start experiencing many problems. Super-Ego partners may think that they understand each other well. However, when it comes to day to day matters or co-operative activity, partners start thinking that their partner is deliberately trying to do everything wrong. Super-Ego partners are not interested and do not make each other aware of their intentions. Therefore their actions may look exactly opposite to what was expected. Although the hope and the feeling between partners may remain as before, it does not prevent the conflicts penetrating their relationship. When both partners are extroverts, one of them usually feels more unsatisfied with their position. The explanation for this is that they believe that the other partner does not pay as much attention to them as they should and are too occupied with their own matters. Between two introvert partners, one is always thinks about the other as being too obtrusive and clingy. In any case, friction usually begins when partners shift to a more close relationship.

Wikisocion.org: Super-Ego partners usually think of each other as mysterious and curious individuals. They are usually intrigued by each other's manners, behavior and thoughts. Both partners might experience interest in each other, but to an outsider spectator, these relations may look cold for some inexplicable reason.

If Super-Ego partners cannot find a common interest to discuss and ponder, their interaction can quickly descend into strife. The partners would rather express their own points of view than listen to the other partner's point of view. The latter tries to defend himself by projecting his own confident points in return. This can easily devolve into a vicious cycle. Partners normally show interest and respect to each other if they do not know each other well enough. When partners begin to close their psychological distance, they start to experience many problems understanding each other.

Super-Ego partners may think that they have each other figured out. However, when it comes to the two collaborating on a group project, they can easily begin to believe that the other is trying to ruin the project. Super-Ego partners do not make each other aware of their intentions. Therefore their actions may look exactly opposite to what was expected. Although the hope of better collaboration between partners remains as before, it does not prevent conflict penetrating their relationship.

It is said that when both partners are extroverts, one of them usually feels more unsatisfied with their position as partners. The explanation for this is that they believe that the other partner deliberately does not pay as much attention to their point of view as they should and are too occupied with their own matters. Between two introvert partners, one partner is preoccupied that the other as being too obtrusive and clingy. In any case, friction begins when partners shift to a relationship of a closer psychological distance.

[Ashton]

Contrary/Extinguishment

Socionics.us: Partners feel a strange draw to each other that seems to promise much but never delivers. Partners seem to be interested in the same fields and have similar yearnings, but they describe things in a strange and fascinating, but ultimately unfathomable way. Expectations that go beyond having an interesting conversation are almost never met.

Socionics.com: These are relations of an unstable psychological distance. Both partners experience difficulties in establishing and keeping a stable psychological distance between them. The only chance Contrary partners have to get on together well with each other is if they are left alone. In other cases partners usually compete over their strong sides. The reason for this is when somebody else is present, each partner tries to capture the attention of the listener by showing off their strong side. Contrary partners may like some elements of the other partner's behaviour. This often helps the partners to begin a more close relationship. However, when they are in company, their interaction can change dramatically. The introvert partner usually becomes distant, relations lose warm feelings and become formal and cautious. Both partners may start regretting that they became too trustful. The extrovert partner normally gets the false impression that the introvert partner is deliberately acting against them. This can bring a great deal of misunderstanding and surprise into these relations, as both partners are convinced that before everything was fine. The introvert partner usually starts suppressing the activity of the extrovert partner and may reproach and criticise them. The extrovert partner in return can behave in the same way. The most vulnerable position in these relations belongs to the extrovert partner, who may feel as if they are being betrayed. As a result the extrovert partner could start to worry excessively about their next step so as not to make any mistakes and may therefore become very suspicious. Unfortunately the extrovert partner cannot see that their introvert partner is not as bad as they have begun to imagine.

Wikisocion.org: Extinguishment is an intertype relation between members of opposing quadras. Extinguishment relations are also known as Contrary relations.

Relations of extinguishment are characterized by an interest in the same kinds of things, but partners approach it in a fundamentally different and often incomprehensible way. Many people note a certain draw in these relations, as if the other person possessed some dual-like qualities, but never materializes into a dual. In trying to close the distance and get to know the other person closely, partners are very often frustrated and thwarted in their attempts by the other person's unexpected and out-of-sync reactions. In these relations it is very hard to maintain an organized and stable relationship, due to the promising, but continually frustrating interpersonal dynamic.

Where these relations can become especially unstable is in the case of a third person/party being involved in the relation. What happens is both Contrary partners attempt to exude their strong sides, which are in opposition to each others' strengths.

In many cases the Introvert partner becomes cautious and distant in formal interaction; the Extravert partner becomes especially vulnerable, taking careful notice of his/her own actions, and thus becoming highly suspicious about the entire relation. This disoriented sense of communication tends to build more and more as Contrary partners continue to interact together.

[Ashton]

Quasi-identical

Socionics.us: Partners seem to share broad areas of interest in a way that is similar to identity or kindred partners. However, the language they formulate their thoughts in is hopelessly different and hard to digest at a close psychological distance. Moreover, partners are drawn to opposing social groups where the other partner does not feel comfortable. Partners are unable to provide meaningful support and have to strain to reach a mutual understanding.

Socionics.com: These are relations of major misunderstanding. Quasi-Identical partners can interact with each other in a more or less peaceful manner if both partners are Thinking types. If they are both Feeling types however, they are likely to have an argumentative relationship. Also, as in the other relations, personal attraction can be very crucial to the peacefulness in their relationship. An absence of personal attraction may cause unnecessary internal tension resulting in conflict between partners. However these arguments do not often last long. After both partners have released their internal tension, the Perceiving partner is usually the first to show the initiative in reconciliation. A positive aspect of these relations is that Quasi-Identical partners do not underline your weak points and therefore are not viewed as dangerous by each other. Neither do they see each other as equal. Each partner sees the other as less capable than themselves, hence less talented. However, Quasi-Identicals mistakenly believe that their partner is achieving more than they are. This is perceived by both partners as injustice and may hinder the ambitions of both. In these relations partners always have difficulty understanding each other in full. Quasi-Identical partners always need to convert each other's information in such a way that it corresponds with their own understanding. This conversion requires much energy and does not bring the desired satisfaction. Books written by your Quasi-Identical are impossible to read. The creations of your Quasi-Identical look monstrous. Conversations with your Quasi-Identical, although not heavy, do not bring any satisfaction either. One partner may think that the other partner complicates simple things and simplifies the important points, trying to deliberately confuse and mislead them. Both partners are convinced that whatever their partner was trying to say, could be explained in a different and more understandable way. Quasi-Identicals normally have no difficulties in finding topics for conversation or discussion. When it comes to solving problems together, Quasi-Identical partners begin to understand that they are both thinking in very different ways. Soon Quasi-Identicals may start regretting the time that they have spent together, believing that it was just wasted time. Quasi-identical relations are very fragile and normally break without regret as there is usually nothing to resist their disunion.

Wikisocion.org: Quasi-identity is an intertype relation between two people from opposing quadras who have similar, but not identical functions, and no suggestive influence over the other. Partners typically have a lot to say about the same kinds of topics (as do, typically, any members of a single "club"), and their conversations gravitate to these common spheres of interest, but they take entirely different approaches to every subject. They both take note of the same phenomena, but describe and analyze them in completely different terms that the other finds interesting, but completely unsatisfying. This is because the language and approach of one partner's leading function corresponds to the strong, but undervalued demonstrative function of the other. Each partner tends to be impressed with the other's skillful use of his leading function, which they perceive more as a "performance" (due to their own attitudes toward their demonstrative function) than a sincere and honest expression.

In closer interaction, partners' instincts are to want to correct the other person's approach and redefine the issues in completely different language. This leads to a feeling of being underappreciated by the other. Partners are easily drawn into quite personal conversations because of the sense that the other person can relate to them, but this psychological intimacy can easily disappear without a trace when aggravation about something the other person does finally boils over and partners allow themselves to express dissatisfaction with the other. This can lead to disappointment and a feeling of betrayal of trust or lack of loyalty when partners suddenly don't want to be around each other or maintain the relationship anymore because it drains them.

While generally sympathetic towards each other and sharing many of the same weaknesses, quasi-identicals are almost unable to offer meaningful assistance on a personal level, and quickly become annoyed with each other's expectations, if any. Furthermore, the solutions to their emotional or personal problems are always radically different. For instance, an EIE must "get himself together" and stop being idle or hesitant, while an IEE needs a change of pace and some new diversion. If each tries to implement the other's recipe, nothing comes of it.

[Ashton]

Conflictor

Socionics.us: Both partners seem to monitor each other's weak areas. This prevents conflicts from coming out into the open, since both partners feel too unsure of themselves to discuss their relationship effectively. As a result, conflicts stew beneath the surface — causing pain and long-lasting offense (if partners expect anything of each other) — without any hope of resolution. Initially partners may attract each other from a distance because they are such opposites, but their language and thought patterns are hopelessly difficult to digest at a close psychological distance. At best partners may have occasional rare moments of resonance when both are in a strange mood and begin to talk about life without focusing attention on one another.

Socionics.com: These are relations of constantly developing conflict. Conflicting relations have the worst compatibility between partners among all other relations. However, it does not seem to be so obvious, especially in the earlier stages of development. Conflicting partners appear rather attractive, interesting and with impressive abilities. Both partners are usually convinced that they can coexist and collaborate quite peacefully, but soon it becomes apparent that something is always going wrong, making their relationship problematic. Both partners may mistakenly think that the cause of these problems is minor and easily fixed and that all they need to do is to show a little bit more effort in understanding their partner. Unfortunately, these attempts to continue pushing their relationship any further will soon provoke an open conflict between the partners. When conflict starts, partners hit each other with arguments exactly in the direction where they can cause maximum pain. In return, the other partner may counterattack even more aggressively. With every conflict these relations become worse and worse. Although Conflicting partners show confidence where their partner is unconfident, they are unable to protect and take care of each other's weak points. This regularly brings disagreement and disappointment into these relations. When after several fruitless attempts to establish a stable relationship the partners give up and break the relationship, they feel saved and released.

Wikisocion.org: Conflict is the intertype relation considered to be the least comfortable and fulfilling psychologically. One's conflictor is the quasi-identical of one's dual, so they may seem similar at first glance, despite being polar opposites in terms of psychological compatibility.

At a distance conflictors may find each other interesting, but as they become closer are sure to notice a fundamental difference in their motives and point of view. They can only sidestep this by limiting their relationship to the most formal and superficial interaction possible in a given situation (the most natural psychological distance for this relationship is very long). When interaction is unavoidable, uncomfortable misunderstandings or, most often, a sense of awkwardness and ambiguity usually result, even when both partners have the best of intentions. When actual conflict occurs, conflictors tend to repeat themselves over and over without ever making themselves understood; thus, they are often not even sure why the conflict exists in the first place.

Conflictors can have known each other for a very long time without having the slightest understanding of each other's motives. This makes true collaboration and intimacy difficult.

It is quite common for conflict partners at work or in other formal situations to make a point of being civil and friendly to the other and openly demonstrating their good will. In the process of doing this, they usually end up trying to engage one another's vulnerable function, but this only makes the other suspicious and withdrawn. Compare this to the suggestive function, which one readily allows others to engage and support.

Because of their disparate life goals, conflictors seldom have the same interests, but when they do discussion of these interests can provide a means of interaction formal enough to not impeded by socionic factors.