Toggle Light / Dark / Auto color theme
Toggle table of contents sidebar
Quasi-identity
¶
See also
Quasi-identity observations
Back to
Intertype relations
Introduction
¶
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 under-appreciated 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.
Descriptions by various authors
¶
Valentina Meged, Anatoly Ovcharov
These relations are well suited for friendships or partnerships, but
they are not very favorable for very close relationships. There is a
desire to understand your quasi-identical partner, to aid him, to
provide him with your advice. His views and methods seem rather unusual
and interesting. This inspires to many discussions and also
disagreements, however, there is usually a desire to find a compromise.
Upon closing of the distance, a minor quarrel can quickly upset these
relations, especially when someone’s personal interests have been
threatened. Quasi-identical types often have the same sphere of
interests but see things from different angles. There are difficulties
in understanding and inability to acknowledge interests of one another.
In collaboration, differences in approaches lead to a desire to move
away from your quasi-identical partner and do everything in your own way
separately from him. Each partner prefers to go his own way, without
accepting opinions and experiences of the other. Due to this, both of
them start feeling that they cannot fully rely on one another. It seems
your quasi-identical partner can easily leave you in a difficult moment,
but usually these suspicions are unfounded.
I.D. Vaisband, publications on Socionics
Quasi-identical partners are often interested in similar kind of
subjects and converse about similar topics but they approach them from
completely different viewpoints. There are rarely serious quarrels in
these relations, but plenty of minor arguments that are never productive
because it is impossible to prove anything to one another.
O.B. Slinko, “The key to heart - Socionics”
In contrast to the identical partner, one’s quasi-identical doesn’t
evoke sympathy. It seems that he is already protected, that he will be
alright. This person seems very similar to yourself and at the same time
subtly different: he goes through life not following the same path, but
a path that runs parallel to yours. Quasi-identical partners are able to
find common topics for conversation, understand each other to sufficient
depth, but they remain perceptive of mutual “otherness”, which brings to
these relation a tint of awkwardness and hinders full understandings and
agreement. Despite the apparent inability to reconcile life positions,
these relations are characterized by softness: quasi-identical can’t
seriously offend, even deliberate attacks don’t hurt much and can be
easily foregone not leaving behind much unpleasant residue. Contact
between quasi-identicals occurs easily and passes smoothly.
R.K. Sedih, “Informational psychoanalysis”
“Adult”  “self-confident teenager”. This interaction resembles mirror
relations. Attempts to correct partner, though frequent, almost never
reach the degree of complete “discrediting”. Partners can argue
sometimes for hours, not coming to a consensus, but, nevertheless,
obtaining some interesting information along the way, and thus they
become imbued with respect for each other. This happens not always but
often enough. Cooperation is easy, partners often help each other out.
Quasi-identicals are usually positively predisposed towards one another.
Though they lack the ability to see each other’s point of view, this
rarely leads to serious conflicts. Their behavior towards each other for
the most part is quite amiable. “Unsure teen” - “child.” The second
seems a bit rude sometimes, but rarely malicious and selfish. If
partners are not dualized, their relations are, of course, more
difficult. Problems in this scenario strongly resemble the interaction
of extinguishment, though there is less of a desire to find fault with
each other.
Laima Stankevichyute “Intertype relations”
These relations are characterized by the fact that living together or
interacting closely it is virtually impossible to have serious fights.
However, this type of relations gives rise to many smaller disputes
which take up a lot of time and energy and are futile, but can last
indefinitely. There is never a winner in these disputes. In this type of
relations, it is impossible to prove anything to each other. When this
type of relationship transpires between two ethical types, their lives
will be full of stormy emotions and passion, while between two logical
types these relations are more calm, but also full of of tension and
insincerity.
A.V. Bukalov, G. Boiko, “Why Saddam Hussein made a mistake, or what is
Socionics”
Their interests are analogous, but at a closer distance
misunderstandings arise. If ILE talks about more abstract, hypothetical
theories, LIE talks about more practical and actual topics. One famous
LIE mathematician said that he doesn’t need mathematical formulas, that
a person must know how to derive certain parameters. Collaborative work
with delimitation of spheres of activity can be quite successful in this
pair. With regard to family life, these relationships are not the worst,
but also not the most favorable.
Victor Gulenko “Criteria of reciprocity”
Discussion Tuning
Communication has a formal tone. The information received from your
quasi-identical partner often doesn’t quite meet your expectations. It
will be necessary to adjust yourself to the style of conversation to
have a balanced discussion. It is very difficult to understand each
other on the spot  meaning of the statements made by your
quasi-identical partner is going to be disclosed over a long period of
time, when you will come back again to the same problem. The same
thought partners articulate in different ways. Because of the inability
to prove anything to each other, misunderstandings and unproductive
debates arise. As a result partners tend to underestimate and devalue
each other.
Binary signs of intertype relations
Quasi-identity is good for public debates. In presence of a receptive
audience, partners usually support one another, pick up and develop each
other’s ideas. Bold, far-reaching projects are proposed. However, in a
narrow circle it becomes more difficult to understand each other: an
impression forms that the partner doesn’t really understand what you’re
saying.
Quasi-identical relations are stable when partners first agree on
positions before taking on anything serious. Otherwise, there will be
little benefit from mutual support. Being unprepared and not tuned into
working together, it is impossible to get a useful result in these
relations.
Quasi-identical relations develop pragmatic logic of both partners. A
lot of prospective ideas come to mind. Emotions are relevant only upon
successes or failures in their implementation. These relations also
promote a sense of humor and give rise to optimism which is not always
warranted.
Quasi-identical partners tend to test their ideas in practice, however,
they do this not by gradual realization but by bold implementation.
These relations move partners towards taking risks, awaken their
entrepreneurial spirit, instill optimism. Quasi-identical pair can use
what has been tried and tested in the past, restore positive traditions.
These relations can offer great dynamics. They are oriented at
adventure, push partners into risky behaviors. In these relations plans
often change, new projects get put forward, tried and tested. It is
impossible to stop and take a breath. In a static environment,
quasi-identity breaks down rapidly.
In quasi-identical relations, at first you don’t feel tension. Hope
persists that your partner will understand your point of view and join
in. However, this does not occur. The longer both work on the same
problem, the more they diverge. To preserve unity, both have to pretend
that they are of same mindset. This won’t save them for long and they
will have to come up with something new or go back to the past pending
issues.
Advice on getting along
Quasi-identical relationships have pronounced differences of opinion.
The longer you talk, the more difficult it becomes to understand the
point of view of each other. Understanding based on logical level is a
stumbling block in this relationship. Relations tire, but fatigue is not
felt right away. Some time after communication both partners experience
an elevated mood.
It is recommended to invite quasi-identical to solve difficult,
previously not encountered problems. Tension of these type of relations
alleviate by engaging in enterprising and productive activities. Avoid
haste in making important decisions, because these relations are lacking
a sense of reality.
Democratic attitude, sense of humor, optimistic outlook on life
strengthens these relations. Seeming lack of problems is deceptive.
Quasi-identical pair is well suited for risky or adventurous operations.
Static environment, peace and quiet, are not advised. Frequently travel,
learn about the world. Show interest in novelties and try to create
something new yourself.
V.V. Gulenko, A.V. Molodtsev, “Introduction to socionics”
This is a relations of coexistence in complete misunderstanding of each
other. This coexistence can be peaceful if the partners are logical
types. If the partners are ethical types they will have to often discuss
their relations. Of great importance is the coincidence of subtypes.
With mismatched subtypes there is more tension in quasi-identical
relations and condemnation of actions of your partner. This, however,
can pass, when the partners are united by same goal and have to depend
on one another. The first concession is usually made by irrational
partner and rational partner accepts it. Quasi-identical partner, as a
rule, does not hurt your weakest spots. You do not feel a threat from
him, but neither do you feel equality either. He seems to be less
capable, but on issues where you have failed he achieves much more for
some reason. Because of this self-esteem of both suffers: this situation
is perceived as unjust. The most unpleasant thing in these relations is
inability to understand a person fully. There exists a need to always
“translate” his information to your own language. Writing of
quasi-identical is almost impossible to read. Deciphering his
information takes away a lot of energy and this seems wasteful and
useless. Creations of quasi-identical partner are always found lacking.
Conversation with him though is never heavy, does not bring
satisfaction. It seems that he is on purpose confusing, making things
overly complicated or too simple, straying to the side, which same thing
could have been stated differently, in understandable language.
Quasi-identical partners can find common topics of conversation, rally
over the same issues. But they see different solutions to difficult
situations. Sometimes there is a sense that you are wasting time.
Because nothing in particular unites quasi-identicals, these relations
break up easily, without regrets. Rather colorless relations, which are
described well by a proverb: “You have your own wedding, and we have
ours.”
Ekaterina Filatova “Art of understanding yourself and others”
Here, partners have cross-contact over weak functions. In their major
blocks functions are identical, but have a different positions and
different direction, therefore they are united by common interests.
However, often it seems to each as if another is inferior to him in some
way, even if he does some things better for unknown reason.
Since there strong functions do not have an outlet to the weak ones,
conflicts in these relationships are rare. If in the future co-operation
is not required, partners easily part. If there is a sense to cooperate
- just as easily establish a contact.
Eugene Gorenko, Vladimir Tolstikov, “Nature of self”
Partners differ on the scale of rationality-irrationality. In general,
understanding between them is decent, interests are similar. However,
the relationship is not very strong. If there is no need to continue
communicating, partners can easily part. These relations can be
characterized as sufficiently favorable.
Sergei Ganin
Homoverted - Symmetrical - Arrhythmical
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.
Quasi-identical pairs
¶
ILE
and
LIE
SEI
and
ESI
ESE
and
SEE
LII
and
ILI
EIE
and
IEE
LSI
and
SLI
SLE
and
LSE
IEI
and
EII
Theoretical properties of quasi-identity
¶
Quasi-identical types are on the same side of all
Jungian dichotomies
except Rational / Irrational
dichotomy. One partner in these relations is always of a rational type,
and the other of an irrational type.
Model A
¶
Functions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 reflect on functions 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3,
2, 1
Functions of
Model A
¶
Partner 1
Partner 2
base function
demonstrative function
creative function
ignoring function
role function
mobilizing function
vulnerable function
suggestive function
Reinin traits
¶
As with all non-identical types, qusi-identicals have exactly 7
Reinin traits
in common, with the remaining 8 not in common.
In Common
:
extraversion and introversion
·
sensing and intuition
·
ethics and logic
·
carefree and farsighted
·
yielding and obstinate
·
democratic and aristocratic
·
positivist and negativist
Not in Common
:
rationality and irrationality
·
static and dynamic
·
tactical and strategic
·
constructivist and emotivist
·
judicious and decisive
·
merry and serious
·
process and result
·
asking and declaring
External links
¶
Quasi-identical relations
by
Sergei Ganin