Socionics Q&A: Fi dual seekers, what is it in your dual that you seek?
--
In testing out Medium, I’ll start with a simple response to a question posted on a Socionics forum. I type as LSE (ESTj, TeSi) in Socionics, with the delta quadra rational dual of EII (INFj, FiNe).
Consistency. In one word, that’s what it comes down to. Related to consistency is, as one EII (or INFj) friend put it, “continuous processing” of the relationship and relational elements; I even said “that’s hot” when they mentioned it. Someone who monitors all of that and is vested in making the relationship work, especially grow and become more effective, fruitful, etc, that’s wonderful.
Personally speaking, I’ve been considering whether EII or IEE is ultimately more compatible for me in practice (as opposed to in theory), but I’ve come to see how even the most introverted of ENFp still have the EP dynamic and the 4D Fe…. INFjs are a much more rational, feeling more constructive, adding one piece at a time meticulously, rather than EP broad brush strokes and the sort of dancing around it entails.
Also of significance, INFj emotional expressions are dictated by Fi being more dominant than Fe, and that’s a big deal; that’s not to say ENFp “value Fi less”, no, but from my perspective, I find 4D Fe somewhat obscuring or harder to interpret. I have issues with people using emotional expression to convey their inner feelings or emotional states, to manipulate or induce certain things. Fi dominants are too “bound” by their actual sentiments (Fi > Fe) to commit a lot of statements or expressions that aren’t backed up by rational choices or beliefs, and that is extremely soothing and comforting to me.
To further compare EII and IEE, or even, having 3D Fe vs 4D Fe, I think it’s useful to see how IEE (or SEE) have a dual with Fe POLR, where as I have Fe as a Role function, to speak in terms of Model A. IEEs seem a bit more in tune with their ability to be emotionally demonstrative or lead people into desired emotional states — yes, both in terms of Fi as a creative function but also because of the strong, 4D Fe. When this meshes with my Fe Role function, in a general setting, it can further along the sense of closeness, be very inviting, and further the energetic nature of an extroverted set of activity partners. But when it gets down to feeling comfortable in terms of trusting or interpreting deeper feelings, there is tension about following leads — and because my Fe is “weaker”, I tend to take the backseat.
There is a sense of following and trying to respond to emotional cues from IEE, and while that kind of directing might be more appealing to an IP type or someone with 1D Fe, it puts me in a particularly awkward position of not wanting to step on someone’s toes, but also feeling a lack of congruence, like two people trying to lead in a classical ballroom dance. As I became healthier and more emotionally literate, this seems like less of a problem, but earlier, and more raw, this was definitely a source of tension.
On the other hand, EIIs seem to apply Ni in a more directive way, in terms of interpretation or positioning the development of the relationship. Fe is more a byproduct of both (4D) Fi and Ni being appeased first, and for me, that is actually more comforting. Talking to an EII friend about these differences, they have a sense of how IEEs perhaps aren’t as intentional as EIIs concerning certain developments, the implications, or how things unfold — whereas EII are particularly conscientious of how implications for certain actions relate to their overall Fi program; going back to classic IJ temperment rationality and one-brick-at-a-time approach, versus the more nebulous nature of EP intention.
So again, consistency is the word. But not a consistency in rooted in action, it is much more a consistency in evaluation, interpretation, and organization of what things mean within the context of a relationship. I am a suspicious person by nature, and even one that doubts the ability of relations to endure or someone’s reasons for feeling a particular way to not be sporadic or careless. In that way, the rational approach of Fi dominance quells my concerns better than other dominant information elements, speaking within the theory at least.
-Jesse
