Toggle Light / Dark / Auto color theme
Toggle table of contents sidebar
Duality Relations INFj and ESTj by Stratiyevskaya
¶
Written by
Vera Stratievskaya
:
original blog
entry
.
Duality observations
1. EII-LSE. The dyad of yielding, evolutionary types.
¶
Unlike in the involutionary dyad of ethical and pragmatic
“reconstructors” ESI-LIE (-Fi and -Te), another direction of development
predominates in the in EII-LSE dyad  an
evolutionary
one (+Fi and +Te), which is
associated with the ethical and technical improvement, polishing and
perfection of the existing conditions. Members of this dyad don’t strive
to change anything. They don’t seek to uproot or break down anything or
remake anyone. Reconstruction is not their calling. Instead they focus
on improving and perfecting that which already exists. They accept the
conditions and circumstances that have already folded around them, they
take on the “material” that is already present, and then develop and
polish it and take it further to the next level that seems realistic,
desirable, and necessary for them to achieve. In this respect, both
members of this dyad can be very assertive, stubborn, and uncompromising
they are very principled and do not back down from their demands (that
may be quite high).
Then why are members of this dyad considered to be “yielding” by Reinin
dichotomies? “Yielding” types have the aspects of +Fe and +Te located in
the inert mental block of their informational model (that is, in Program
or Vulnerable functions). These are dyads ESI-LIE, EII-LSE, SEI-ILE, and
IEI-SLE. “Yielding” Fi-dominant types (“moralizers”) and Te-dominant
types (“pragmatists”) do not make excessive demands of a person
initially. At the beginning, they can be quite tolerant and forgiving,
and and try to avoid making “sharp” evaluations whenever possible. As
the interpersonal distance shortens, they become more and more demanding
and uncompromising  they “present a bill” for their previous
concessions and additionally they “take revenge”, trying to overtake
everything that they have previously lost and given up (preferably with
extras). This is one of the defining features of “yielding” types.
If representatives of the previous dyad, ESI-LIE, taking note of a
person see glaring deficiencies and weaknesses that require active
intervention and efforts aimed at radically reshaping and
“reconstructing” this person (changing his or her attitudes, fixing
mistakes that were committed in previous years of life, eradicating
detrimental habits, eliminating negative influences from his
environment), then representatives of the dyad EII-LSE will consider any
new individual as a potential student or apprentice who needs to be
steered towards the right path, instructed about the “good works”,
directed towards the right attitudes, developed in his current skills
and talents, and in general encouraged in the development of his
potential. Their “apprentice” needs to acquire an interest in aesthetic,
artistic, ethical, and creative self-development and strive to achieve
higher standards in ethics and beauty.
1. EII-LSE. Strengthening of bonds. Decreasing the distance.
¶
Evolutionary development of their program functions means that in the
EII-LSE dyad, unlike in the previous one (ESI-LIE), partners are not
interested in searching for alternatives and spare options. Evolutionary
orientation encourages them to strengthen their existing bond. Their
partnership is received by both of them as almost a predestined or
predetermined event, as a kind of a starting point for sharing their
life paths, in course of which both of them can positively influence
each other’s lives and their existing life conditions, which they create
and improve for one another. From this originates their loyalty and
dedication to their partnership, which form the foundation of their dual
relations: “Here’s your life companion (who may have been pre-chosen for
you). Have a long and prosperous life together, be happy and seek to
improve your relations with one another, and by this investigate and
develop various methods of personal betterment and intervention, using
punishments and rewards, concessions and demands, and so forth.” In this
dyad strict measures alternate with kind and rewarding ones. Under
“strict” what is understood here is some kind of austere but still
humane measure of influencing one’s partner, required for his or her
personal, ethical, or physical development.
Representatives of this dyad enjoy discussions of everything that is
positive and beneficial. They try to steer the conversation away from
anything that is viewed as negative or deleterious for themselves, to
their relations, their success, and their well-being. Intuition of
possibilities (Ne) dominates in this quadra, which here is understood
not as missed opportunities, but as a possibility to ruin something that
is good, something that has already been achieved, such as for example
one’s current reputation or measure of influence, or the current
standards of living and level of prosperity. The other dominant aspect
is involutionary sensing of experiences (Si) which is the creative
function of LSE  on this aspect the LSE strives to not let in anything
that may destroy the already existing order, harmony, and way of life;
he wishes to distance from physical and and psychological irritants, to
preserve the wholesomeness and beauty of relations, of the person, of
the world around him. If harmful elements are brought up for discussion,
they are usually mentioned as something that needs to be eliminated from
one’s environment, and eliminated from one’s personality and one’s
relationships.
As a creative intuitive type and as a strategist, the EII doesn’t miss
an opportunity to become close to the people and quickly bridges the
interpersonal distances. As a declaring type, who is sure of his/her
rightness and oriented at close spatial-temporal relationships, and as a
positivist and an evolutionary type, the EII uses any opportunity to
become close to others, to introduce positive notes into their
relations, and to show him/herself off in the best possible light.
Towards this goal, EII’s creative manipulative intuition of
possibilities comes up with a myriad of approaches and techniques,
helping the EII to quickly become liked and gain positive consideration
of others. In this respect, EII’s creative Ne works as a “set of master
keys” which allows him or her to find an individual approach to almost
anyone. The EII is almost always able to spot something positive,
interesting, and attractive in a new person and will use any occasion to
say something pleasant and complementary, to show his/her own emotional
sensitivity, judiciousness, and prudence, to receive and welcome the new
person, to offer them help, services, or needed information. Sometimes
the EII as a constructivist type may resort to logically framing his
intentions in order to get close with someone.
Quite frequently Dostoyevsky ends up imposing his/her friendly and
welcoming attitude and services on other people in the process. And
towards which purpose does the EII do this? As a positivist “program”
ethical declarative type, the EII seeks to establish strong,
long-lasting relations with those around him. Being surrounded by
friends and people who hold him in positive regard elevates the EII’s
self-assessment on the aspect of +Fi  every new friendship, every new
positive association the EII can view as something that is actively
positive and beneficial for him/herself.* As a pragmatist-objectivist
of Delta quadra, the EII doesn’t miss out on opportunities to strike up
and acquaintance and is potentially beneficial for him/herself. Towards
this purpose, the EII aims to tell of something that is pleasant and
agreeable, to reward others with a compliment or kind word seemingly out
of nowhere and for not much at all, to be of service, to bestow a
“generous” advance, for which, however, the EII will later expect
reciprocity.
[translator’s note: Hence the impression that EIIs often impart on
others that they are as if trying become the most liked person in a
group, to be favored by everyone, however, if they are directly asked
about this they will say that this is an unrealistic thing to strive
for.]
This orientation at “imposing” gratification with the following
expectation of reciprocal services, concessions, or compensation is a
general feature of yielding types. It allows the EII to bridge the
distance with the right persons, to earn their trust, to enter into
their close circle, and to seek something from them later in return for
his initial goodwill and accommodation. For example, he may ask for
personal disclosures of information, for greater degree of trust, for
care and protection from his partner, for reciprocation of positive
feelings (which must be followed up by deeds). Initial kind assistance
and accommodation are part of EII’s strategy, his means of rooting his
ethical guidance.
The EII won’t extend his services for nothing and considers him/herself
in the right to later ask for a “moral account” from his partner. This
“account” may be extensive, since the EII values his own concessions and
acts of kindness very highly, and moreover, considers that his goodwill
and loving, kind attitude towards another are beyond any price. Thus he
may benevolently accept everything that his partner does for him,
especially if this person is someone who is very close to him and
receives most of his love. Someone close to him may be even in an
irredeemable debt before Dostoyevsky by the sheer fact of their
intimacy. The EII highly values his ethical sensitivity and guidance, as
well as his concern for his partner’s physical well-being.
The EII also values and continuously monitors the state and future
prospects of his partner’s affairs. This gives the EII certain moral,
social, and “informational” advantages and “assets”, and allows him to
ensure greater obedience from those under his watch and guidance. Thus,
the EII is often very persistent in imposing his services and favors so
that he can obtain the rights to ask for something in return. For this
reason the EII feels offended if someone turns him down and refuses his
service, or views his participation with suspicion and keeps him at a
distance. Evolutionary development of their program functions means that
in the EII-LSE dyad, unlike in the previous one (ESI-LIE), partners are
not interested in searching for alternatives and spare options.
Evolutionary orientation encourages them to strengthen their existing
bond. Their partnership is received by both of them as almost a
predestined or predetermined event, as a kind of a starting point for
sharing their life paths, in course of which both of them can positively
influence each other’s lives and their existing life conditions, which
they create and improve for one another. From this originates their
loyalty and dedication to their partnership, which form the foundation
of their dual relations: “Here’s your life companion (who may have been
pre-chosen for you). Have a long and prosperous life together, be happy
and seek to improve your relations with one another, and by this
investigate and develop various methods of personal betterment and
intervention, using punishments and rewards, concessions and demands,
and so forth.” In this dyad strict measures alternate with kind and
rewarding ones. Under “strict” what is understood here is some kind of
austere but still humane measure of influencing one’s partner, required
for his or her personal, ethical, or physical development.
Representatives of this dyad enjoy discussions of everything that is
positive and beneficial. They try to steer the conversation away from
anything that is viewed as negative or deleterious for themselves, to
their relations, their success, and their well-being. Intuition of
possibilities (Ne) dominates in this quadra, which here is understood
not as missed opportunities, but as a possibility to ruin something that
is good, something that has already been achieved, such as for example
one’s current reputation or measure of influence, or the current
standards of living and level of prosperity. The other dominant aspect
is involutionary sensing of experiences (Si) which is the creative
function of LSE  on this aspect the LSE strives to not let in anything
that may destroy the already existing order, harmony, and way of life;
he wishes to distance from physical and and psychological irritants, to
preserve the wholesomeness and beauty of relations, of the person, of
the world around him. If harmful elements are brought up for discussion,
they are usually mentioned as something that needs to be eliminated from
one’s environment, and eliminated from one’s personality and one’s
relationships.
As a creative intuitive type and as a strategist, the EII doesn’t miss
an opportunity to become close to the people and quickly bridges the
interpersonal distances. As a declaring type, who is sure of his/her
rightness and oriented at close spatial-temporal relationships, and as a
positivist and an evolutionary type, the EII uses any opportunity to
become close to others, to introduce positive notes into their
relations, and to show him/herself off in the best possible light.
Towards this goal, EII’s creative manipulative intuition of
possibilities comes up with a myriad of approaches and techniques,
helping the EII to quickly become liked and gain positive consideration
of others. In this respect, EII’s creative Ne works as a “set of master
keys” which allows him or her to find an individual approach to almost
anyone. The EII is almost always able to spot something positive,
interesting, and attractive in a new person and will use any occasion to
say something pleasant and complementary, to show his/her own emotional
sensitivity, judiciousness, and prudence, to receive and welcome the new
person, to offer them help, services, or needed information. Sometimes
the EII as a constructivist type may resort to logically framing his
intentions in order to get close with someone.
Quite frequently Dostoyevsky ends up imposing his/her friendly and
welcoming attitude and services on other people in the process. And
towards which purpose does the EII do this? As a positivist “program”
ethical declarative type, the EII seeks to establish strong,
long-lasting relations with those around him. Being surrounded by
friends and people who hold him in positive regard elevates the EII’s
self-assessment on the aspect of +Fi  every new friendship, every new
positive association the EII can view as something that is actively
positive and beneficial for him/herself.* As a pragmatist-objectivist
of Delta quadra, the EII doesn’t miss out on opportunities to strike up
and acquaintance and is potentially beneficial for him/herself. Towards
this purpose, the EII aims to tell of something that is pleasant and
agreeable, to reward others with a compliment or kind word seemingly out
of nowhere and for not much at all, to be of service, to bestow a
“generous” advance, for which, however, the EII will later expect
reciprocity.
[translator’s note: Hence the impression that EIIs often impart on
others that they are as if trying become the most liked person in a
group, to be favored by everyone, however, if they are directly asked
about this they will say that this is an unrealistic thing to strive
for.]
This orientation at “imposing” gratification with the following
expectation of reciprocal services, concessions, or compensation is a
general feature of yielding types. It allows the EII to bridge the
distance with the right persons, to earn their trust, to enter into
their close circle, and to seek something from them later in return for
his initial goodwill and accommodation. For example, he may ask for
personal disclosures of information, for greater degree of trust, for
care and protection from his partner, for reciprocation of positive
feelings (which must be followed up by deeds). Initial kind assistance
and accommodation are part of EII’s strategy, his means of rooting his
ethical guidance.
The EII won’t extend his services for nothing and considers him/herself
in the right to later ask for a “moral account” from his partner. This
“account” may be extensive, since the EII values his own concessions and
acts of kindness very highly, and moreover, considers that his goodwill
and loving, kind attitude towards another are beyond any price. Thus he
may benevolently accept everything that his partner does for him,
especially if this person is someone who is very close to him and
receives most of his love. Someone close to him may be even in an
irredeemable debt before Dostoyevsky by the sheer fact of their
intimacy. The EII highly values his ethical sensitivity and guidance, as
well as his concern for his partner’s physical well-being.
The EII also values and continuously monitors the state and future
prospects of his partner’s affairs. This gives the EII certain moral,
social, and “informational” advantages and “assets”, and allows him to
ensure greater obedience from those under his watch and guidance. Thus,
the EII is often very persistent in imposing his services and favors so
that he can obtain the rights to ask for something in return. For this
reason the EII feels offended if someone turns him down and refuses his
service, or views his participation with suspicion and keeps him at a
distance.
3. EII-LSE. The dyad of pragmatic rationals.
¶
On the other hand, the EII cannot take initiative and be imposing for
too long as this would be unethical. For him, as for an introvert, in
general any kind of expansion is impermissible, but as a “strategist” he
can extend his influence quite far. Presenting himself as
demonstratively helpless and insufficient, a kind of unpretentious
“Cinderella” resigned to his or her fate and waiting for her rescuer,
the EII opens up before a person the “treasures” of his soul, captivates
him with unusual notions, fantasies, and ideas. He guesses at the
person’s moods, sympathizes just at the right time, patiently listens to
his conversation partners, and even offers some kind of (even minor)
help. With all of this the EII can very quickly “win over” people
positively predispose them towards himself, gain their trust and
confidence, bind them to himself, submit them to his will, draw them
into his game and eventually make them his “moral debtors”.
The rate of this strategic take over and capture of a person will be
monitored by the EII subconsciously and conducted on all of the aspects
of his informational model: monitoring the way a person reacts to his
participation and goodwill on ethical aspects, meticulously and
accurately tracking compliance over time and registering any deviations
on intuitive aspects, directly and indirectly receiving care and
protection thereby gathering the “harvest” of his services on sensing
aspects, and monitoring the quality of methods, services, and advice
that have been supplied to him on logical aspects.
Of course, any resistance to this “capture” will be met with resentment
and annoyance because for the EII this means that a person doesn’t trust
him or her, and “pushes” him away, possibly because such person doesn’t
want to provide and give anything in return.
Perhaps the person actually doesn’t have anything to give? Perhaps. Then
it’s even more imprudent to seek his company. As a strategic type,
setting a goal, the EII always sees the end point of his “conquest”. He
sees something positive and attractive in any person, something that may
be of benefit and advantage to himself. He sufficiently highly values
his time, effort, and capabilities (and most importantly  his feelings
and attitudes). He won’t exchange them for “unnecessary” people and
won’t burden himself with any ties and undertakings that are undesirable
and lacking in potential, since subconsciously the EII is a rational,
pragmatic type, oriented at uniting with a “program”
pragmatist-maximalist the LSE. Let us not forget that the aspect of
logic of actions, Te, which includes pragmatic acumen, skill, and
ingenuity, is a priority value of this dyad. Even though it is a
passive, unconscious value of the EII, he will not concede his positions
over this aspect. This is especially so since EII’s current position
over this aspect never seems to be solid enough, his provisions never
seem fully sufficient.
In this dyad, everything is very rational and pragmatic, even more so
than in the previous dyad (ESI-LIE), because this is a dyad of
evolutionary, aristocratic types who are able to observe, evaluate, and
accrue advantages over rational aspects. These advantages are
accumulated on the aspect of logic of actions, Te, for the LSE and
ethics of relations, Fi, for the EII.
4. Altruism as an ideological component of the EGO program of Dostoevsky.
¶
Thus, the EII’s goodwill and niceness are not unlimited. Altruism, as
any other psychological function, has a certain purpose and limits (its
own limit of environmental expediency and viability). It cannot be
directed against the carrier of this program and threaten his own
survival or undermine his own well-being. An “altruist” won’t give up
the last crumbs of sustenance; he won’t share something of which he has
very little because this will make him vulnerable and nonviable. There
is a limit to self-sacrifice for any person. This limit is regulated not
only on conscious level but subconscious level as well, on the level of
the most basic instinctive and psychological programs. Thus an altruist
can share only that which he has in excess, or that which he is able to
acquire in excess from others, making them work towards some output and
then stimulating them towards unlimited self-sacrifice.
Altruism, as the ideological component of the evolutionary ethics of
relations of Dostoevsky (+Fi), is quite rational and does not contradict
the pragmatism of these types, but to the contrary makes it even easier
to accept and partake in it. It is a popular role model for imitation:
representatives of this dyad readily get involved in various charitable
activities, in organization of which the EII has no equal among other
types. The EII, like no one else, knows how to entice people to the most
extreme (and transcendent) concessions, motivating them to give up the
most needed and necessary, especially if he has promised such
concessions to someone else on their behalf. Those who agree to make a
contribution will comply and obey their “guarantor” not wanting to
disappoint him and put him in an “awkward position.” And this is one of
the reasons why Dostoevsky is considered to be the Auditor/Supervisor of
the entire Socion: he can allow himself any sort of coercion against
anyone, he can control and direct of actions of others against their
will (“work over their head”), meanwhile positively framing his intents
thereby safeguarding himself from criticism and being completely
convinced of his own infallibility and rightness.
The LSE, of course, is not put off by all these “ethical capabilities”
of Dostoyevsky. In everyday matters, the altruistic program of EII (+Fi)
very adequately combines with the program of “heightened pragmatism” of
LSE (+Te)  with his aspirations to constantly increase the technical
potential, to improve the process of production, to perform the job with
maximum output, methodically and with high quality (+Te) in critically
short periods of time (-Ni).
5. EII-LSE. The ethical-intuitive complementation in the dyad.
¶
This dyad has sufficient work loads for everyone. This is a result not
only of LSE’s tendency to present himself and others with increased
demands, but also from his habit to come up with an exorbitant work load
himself and his subordinates or work group (his “team”). The LSE agrees
with the statement “all the work in the world cannot be done” only when
he has no more energy nor time to do everything that was scheduled and
planned. What is there to say about his team or employees on which he
usually imposes unreasonably excessive requirements?
Since heightened moral and physical demands in this dyad are considered
to be the norm of professional and personal relationships, the presence
of a person capable of smoothing out conflicts, defusing tension in any
situation, and reconciling the interests of management and employees by
predisposing them to mutual concessions, is highly important. It is
exactly this function that LSE’s dual, the EII, performs. And he
performs it very well.
Dostoevsky is not only capable of persuading others to go for
exorbitant, sometimes inappropriate and even harmful to them
concessions, but he is also able to hold the person in this position
indefinitely. By this he can be very useful for Shtirlitz, who is not
always also to stimulate work that is financially profitable and
beneficial. In many cases he prefers not to do it at all  why waste
material resources on that, which if handled ably can be obtained for
free? Thus the LSE may for a long enough time drain people of their
efforts and abuse their patience and enthusiasm. In this context, and
the presence of sa person who can persuade them to yield, to accept and
endure a little longer, and even show a personal example of this
endurance, is extremely valuable for the LSE.
In general, such ethical-intuitive complementation is necessary for the
LSE in parts of his life. It provides not only the normalization of his
personal relationships with others, but a highly important and necessary
for the LSE personally optimized for him or her intuitive regime - the
optimal allocation of time and effort based on LSE’s individual
capabilities and priorities.
In presence of the EII, this work regime is also complemented by
psychological comfort  by an environment of trust, stability, mutual
understanding and mutual accommodation. The main ethical impact of the
EII consists of helping the LSE soften his relationships with other
people, to be kinder and more tolerant of them, to be more yielding, to
not feel angry and take hostile actions, do not nurture vengeful plans,
to not hide the evil in his heart, and try to forgive and be above any
grievances and offenses. The ideas of Universal Love, Atonement and the
Highest (Ethical) Justice are all delivered by the EII’s program
function (1st function +Fi) and accepted by suggestive function of the
LSE (5th function -Fi).
6. LSE. Caution in approaching his dual.
¶
It might seem obvious that the LSE should strive to be with his dual and
listen to his advice. Imagine  he is in no hurry to do so! LSE is a
negativist type, and negativist types bridge the distance with other
people very carefully and view each new acquaintance with caution and
apprehension. LSE as a negativist, tactical type may be on blind
defensive continuously and see a potential trap in any attempts of his
partner to take initiative to becoming closer to him. As a yielding,
“program” pragmatist (1st function +Te), the LSE is also reluctant to
accept generous offers of services from a person who is unfamiliar to
him, knowing well that free cheese comes only from mousetraps.
LSE is usually careful in choosing his friends. He highly appreciates
the services that he has extended for others and the efforts that were
required of him (both physical and emotional). The LSE usually extends
himself towards maximum output, applying all his forces and strength,
and thus he doesn’t particularly like it when some extra commitments are
being imposed on him, when he is being signed up for something against
his will, when initiative is imposed from the outside and when he’s
being “hyped up” for some kind of generous pledges and promises. The LSE
is careful with giving promises even more so than the LIE, because
unlike the LIE he actually fulfills them. Thus the LSE prefers to
dispose of his own actions on his own accord and doesn’t yield
initiative and control to anyone else when it concerns pragmatic
undertakings (1st function +Te).
But as a creative sensing type and an emotivist the LSE can allow
himself to spend some time with a person who is simply pleasant to him,
a person who seems so nice, kind, and harmless, who knows how to be
interesting and how to evoke positive feelings in people in his own
address and to come into their good favor. And the EII won’t miss an
opportunity to win over LSE’s consideration. Both the EII’s creative
intuition of possibilities and demonstrative intuition of time will come
to aid here. Since the LSE values his time like no one else, the EII
will have little of it for his “operation”, but as a creative intuitive
type he is able to make the time. The EII can find a way to capture and
hold Shtirlitz’s interest if he notices that the later seeks to cut
their communication short. Thus, at initial stages, the LSE who isn’t
interested in close contact with his dual will have to spend a lot of
effort on setting some distance, as the EII is very persistent in
getting close to people, thus the LSE will have to find means and
methods to counter EII’s persistence (as well as many other EII’s
qualities).
Getting closer and closer to a person, the EII does not surrender the
positions and privileges that he has already obtained. He will fight for
them to the extent of his his capabilities and opportunities and in
accordance to how appropriate this would be. As a strategist, and as a
“program” ethical type, aiming to conquer and positively predispose each
person towards himself, the EII will become offended each time he
encounters distancing or alienation from his partner, an attempt to
“push” him away, to distance, to conceal something from him, or do
without his kind participation. Moreover, the EII won’t forgive this to
a person whom he was counting on making a close friend. He won’t forgive
detachment, distancing, absence of attention and care, and participation
in his troubles. The EII may go as far as breaking off all relations
with such a person to “punish” him for lack of attention and interest
towards his person. For example, a nice girl EII felt offended by lack
of interest from a young man of type LIE: “He hasn’t called me, hasn’t
shown that he is concerned for me. He doesn’t inquire me how I feel,
doesn’t congratulate me over the holidays  so why should I consider him
to be my friend?
7. EII. Realizing his “right to correction”.
¶
As part of his widely reaching and mass-imposed “program” of ethics of
relations +Fi, the EII as any ethical aristocrat attributes meaning to
the rituals and outward manifestations of what is appropriate in his
circle, and proceeds to direct his partner to comply with them. He may
ask questions of the type: “Have you replied to his email/letter? Have
you called her and asked her if we could come visit?”  and make other
statements, depending on his personal ethical program. The age of his
partner and his level of education here are not important. What is
significant for the EII is the level of deviation from his own ethical
program and the opportunity opening up before himself to raise it, to
elevate the ethical demands and norms, to “whip” the person into rising
up to meet them. The EII’s own ethical “program” function +Fi impels him
or her towards this  it is a program of unlimited ethical evolution and
improvement.
There is another motive that urges the EII to correct the behavior of
people around him: for the EII as for any ethical-aristocratic type, it
is imperative to exercise his “right to correction”. And who grants him
this right? As any “aristocrat”, the EII assumes that he has such a
right intrinsically. The “right to ethical correction” is an instinctive
program of all aristocratic types which allows them to build relations
of subordination, to psychologically dominate their partners, to
willfully assert their superiority over a person or group of people, and
if necessity arises to terrorize their partner with constant supervision
and control of how well he complies with the mien of their circle.
Therefore, even if the partner tries to behave impeccably, the EII won’t
miss a chance to find fault with something and start to hassle him with
his accusations and reprimands. He will fault him in having too mean or
too loud a tone - or vice versa, speaking too quietly, such that the
neighbors “can’t hear his greetings”. EII might find fault with the
lexicon of his partner and will correct and straighten him on every
occasion that presents itself: “Don’t say this, this isn’t the right
expression or word, or this is too mean-spirited or unf
The EII makes such amendments in order to realize his EGO - program: to
push his partner towards higher ethical requirements, to continually
assert his own superiority over his partner and dominate him, and to
retain advantageous positions to himself.
8. EII. The need to dominate.
¶
For Dostoevsky it is important to be the one who directs, teaches, and
instructs.
The instinctive “right to correction” for the EII is not only a
psychological defense, allowing him or her to be above criticism and
thus feeling free from it. It is also a method to obtain compensation on
reconstructive, corrective, involutionary aspects of -Ne, -Fe, -Se and
-Te, and a program of full-fledged expansion, and planned, natural
“conquest” via step-wise broadening of his sphere of opportunities and
privileges on the evolutionary, constructivist aspects: +Fi, +Ti, +Si,
+Ni. With his remarks, statements, and criticisms, the EII tries to make
up for the lack of attention, care and beneficial services coming from
his partner. This essentially constitutes EII’s way of pulling the
privileges over to his side.
The more the EII taken care of, the more attention she or he requires.
From his side, the EII pays a lot of attention to his new acquaintances
and friends. The closer the EII becoming to a person, the more he thinks
of them. And therefore he demands a “report” from them: “Where were you
and what were you doing? Were you thinking of me? I was thinking of you.
When were you thinking of me? Me too! I could feel that you were
thinking of me, this is why I’m calling you…”. For the EII it is very
important to be the “possessor” of the mind of his partner, to enter
into close personal contact with this person, to build a close soulful
connection with him at close distance, and then proceed to keep the
person at this distance and not lose ground.
As a result a particular model of relations is built with which the EII
can effortlessly manipulate his partner, keep him under constant moral
and psychological dependence, entangle him with various requests and
obligations, requiring attention to his persona and ever-increasing
amount of care, and know of all his partner’s plans, intentions, and
actions, thus obtaining all the necessary information about him or her.
Isn’t this a little too much to ask for? These are only the starting
requirements.
9. EII. The system of restrictions and prohibitions.
¶
Dostoevsky is not always willing to take on responsibility for the
decisions that he or his partner has undertaken. On this trait, he may
not do anything himself and won’t let his partner to take any decisive
actions. However, neither will he allow his partner to “bypass” him and
decide something on his own to ensure that his partner won’t commit any
actions that may be harmful to the EII or to himself. To deter his
partner, the EII employs a variety of approaches on his creative
intuition: requests, persuasions, suggestion, direct prohibitions,
tantrums, scandals, exaggerated fears, intimidation, associations to all
kind of negative examples, accusations, allegations: “You want to
destroy us! Do you know what happened to the people who used to live
across the street? Do you want the same to happen to you and me?” The
EII is well capable of intimidating his partner by contrived and
exaggerated fears. He can also limit and bind him by promises: “Promise
me that you won’t do this. I am not leaving here until you promise!” But
if a person has had the imprudence to make such a promise to him, the
EII will hold him to it and will make reminders.
Thus the EII builds a rather stringent network of restraints and
deterrents which shuts off all the outlets of which he’s mindful via his
creative function of intuition of possibilities: don’t go there, don’t
set foot here, that door is closed, this is impossible or off limits.
The scope and sphere of these restrictions can be broadened and extended
indefinitely. This will depend on the nature of EII’s personal fears and
apprehensions, to which he also subjects others.
The EII dislikes making enemies or incurring troubles and negativity for
himself or people who are close to him. His ever vigilant creative
intuition of possibilities -Ne will be working in this direction,
tracing all the potential problems and dangers, and widening the extent
of restriction from fear and apprehension “what if something happens”.
EII’s +Ni will be working in the same direction, trying to run ahead and
prudently avoid or circumvent all the possible troubles and adversities.
10. The intuitive custody of Dostoevsky.
¶
The EII is prudent as a farsighted type. He is able to anticipate
possible dangers (-Ne), and by this take care of his partner in
intuitive sense. Therefore, he tries to develop in his partner a habit
of unquestioning obedience to his advice, recommendations, and decisions
made on ethical and intuitive aspects, which are usually stringent and
not subject to appeals.
Does this mean that the EII is able to prohibit his LSE partner from
something? Yes, he very well can! But then again, only when it comes to
intuition and ethics. What is allowable and possible and what isn’t is
forethought and decided on by the EII in this dual dyad. When one sees a
five year old child saying “I won’t allow this” to his mother, one may
think that representatives of this type are born with this kind of
aptitude.
Falling into moral dependence of EII’s system of restrictions is
dangerous. If the EII has already disallowed something, then you may
grovel on your knees in front of him but he won’t back down - he will
feel himself as the dominant one in this situation until he gets tired
of his own stubbornness (or until his own unbridled expansionism and
assertion lead him to a dead end). The only way to get around these
restrictions is either to ignore them or to challenge the EII’s rights
on logical grounds, and preferably via white logic (!), because this
aspect is located in EII’s superego block, and thus he is not always
sure of his rights and authority on this aspect, and therefore dependent
on the opinions of others. And what if one tries to evoke sympathy and
“cry on his shoulder”? This may be effective but it will require
considerable emotional efforts. It is easier to challenge his “right to
impose constraints” logically - it will be received quicker since it
will fall on the mental block and not the vital one.
The EII often puts himself or herself into an awkward position,
extending his disallowances to people who are equal to him in rank
(especially so if they are representatives of other quadra). For
example, a technician-operator EII told to her LIE co-worker: “I won’t
allow you to move to another shift!” To which her partner immediately
responded, “And who are you to allow or prohibit me from anything?”
Does the LSE abide by these prohibitions and limitations? He does for as
long as it doesn’t concern the scope of his EGO priorities -
professional, business, creative interests and activities in areas of
+Te and -Si where he makes decisions for himself and won’t cede to
anyone else.
The right to exercise moral and ethical superiority of course remains
with Dostoevsky as a “program” ethical evolutionary type who accumulates
benefits and advantages over this aspect. To ensure that this gap isn’t
significant, the LSE feels obliged to meet some of the ethical
evaluations and requirements of the EII.
The same thing happens with the “right to correction” (which is the
cause of the most heated “battles” in aristocratic quadra). This right
the LSE leaves to the EII, being highly suggestible by EII’s remarks
over aspect of ethics of relations (+Fi), while the right for “logical”
correction the LSE reserves for himself (+Te).
11. EII-LSE. Distribution of priorities.
¶
Distribution of personal and professional priorities is one of the most
touchy and painful subjects in this dyad (as in any aristocratic one).
This is because rank relations between the partners will be established
in accordance to this distribution. Relations of subordination or
equality will arise depending on how they will promote themselves,
demonstrate themselves, position themselves, and how they will recognize
one another.
The right to priority in business or ethical initiative does not extend
to suggestive function. The LSE does not allow himself to make bold
statements on his suggestive aspect, but delivers his opinion in manner
of careful observations, warnings, and recommendations. For example,
when one family was discussing early pregnancy of their teenage
daughter, her father LSE in a very cautious manner expressed to his wife
(LIE) the following remark: “If you didn’t allow her to use your
wardrobe, wear your dress without control, and go in them wherever she
wanted, this wouldn’t have happened … ” - he accused her of excessive
democratism, carelessness, and all-allowance, that is, all those
qualities which the LSE considers as harmful and which are not found in
the EII.
The EII also doesn’t directly point out what is needed to be done.
Recommendations for his suggestive aspect of logic of action he gives
very carefully, with uncertainty, and in the form of hints. If the EII
doesn’t like or agree with what his partner is doing, he will complain,
blame him, tell of it to his friends and neighbors, he will become
“offended” and ignore LSE’s instructions, but what he won’t do is tell
him directly what to do (unless the LSE is in position of assistant or
servant, “Honey, make sure that they serve the dinner!”)
Everything is so complicated in aristocratic quadra … But not as much
as it seems at first glance. They have their own rituals, as any
aristocratic dyad, which it is customary to recognize by certain signs
and signals and observe or react appropriately (to respond “correctly”)
because these are the “key” to the “lock”, the “code” to the
- It’s not as difficult as it seems, but it has its rituals (like any
aristocratic dual dyad), they are usually there to observe, recognize
the signs and signals and react to them accordingly (that’s right for
them “speak”), as they are the “key” to the “lock”, the “source code” to
the “encryption”, without which mutual understanding between the
partners is not possible.
12. EII-LSE. Aristocratic observances and rituals.
¶
Are there any rituals and manners of behavior specific to this dyad? As
in any quadra of aristocratic types, and moreover a rational dyad, it is
customary to court in a beautiful manner, to give proper respect to the
lady, especially so if she is of an ethical-intuitive type. If she is a
logical-sensing type, the alongside “nice gestures” her partner must as
soon as possible show himself capable in work, in good deeds and
intentions.
The right to an ethical initiative in this dyad remains with Dostoevsky.
In framework of this program, he must present himself as a corporate
ethical type, that is, to offer his shoulder such that it could be
leaned on, to offer his help, to be of service. This is indeed how the
EII begins winning over new acquaintances. With this he wins over the
favor of his dual the LSE. After all, it is so nice when one meets a
person who offers help from the very first meeting!
With this, for example, began the acquaintance of one dual pair: a young
man of type LSE went on a business trip to the southern provincial city
and paid a visit to one family to fulfill a request (drop a letter with
them), and there he saw a girl from the neighborhood who accidentally
stopped by at the same time. They started talking and he (again by
accident) lamented about a difficulty he was having: he needed to get a
medicine for his cousin that was in deficit. The girl immediately
offered her assistance: she gave him an address to a pharmacy, wrote a
note, and the drug was obtained. The guy was so appeased by her
participation (and so fascinated) that all the remaining free time from
his business trip he spent with her. And then later the girl, on her own
initiative, came to visit him in Leningrad (a return visit). He
introduced her to his relatives, showed her the town, talked about many
interesting things, drove her to the theater and a cafe, presented her
flowers - beautifully looked after her. Then she returned back home and
they corresponded for some time. Then he asked her to go on holiday
together and she unexpectedly agreed. And then they returned to
Leningrad and submitted an application to the registrar. Now they have
two children and four grandchildren.
That is, the EII takes the initiative. As a declaring strategist, he
outlines a goal for himself and aims to achieve it without doubting his
own right to obtaining it. Being convinced in the rightness of his
actions and certain of his intentions, the EII will make offers that
others find hard to resist. If the EII has set a goal to “win over”
someone, he will find opportunities to become needed and even
indispensable, to be pleasant and to come into favor.
The EII makes many “strategic” concessions during the period of
“conquest” of a person. Once he has established himself in a
relationship, he starts trying to regain what was “lost”, to “win back”
lost grounds with unlimited expansionism. This is what followed within
this family. The heroine of our story for thirty years fought for the
title of the “model wife and mother”. Her house and family were
exemplary. Almost every holiday there was a demonstrative-exemplary
celebration hosted at their house - perfectly decorated table, plenty of
delicious food prepared by the mistress of the house, a “cultural
program” held before and after the meal with the participation of her
husband and children. Everything was well, but over time the EII wife
began to feel tired from this work load. She wanted to switch roles, to
shift the load elsewhere - she wanted her husband to vie for the role of
“exemplary husband and father”. Thus she began educating him in this
direction. This didn’t occur, of course, without reproaches: “This is
the only day off, and he either leaves or takes a book and this is the
end of everything! He doesn’t care for anything else! Well? Do I have to
pull everything on my own shoulders? I also want to take a rest, but our
apartment needs to be cleaned, dinner needs to be cooked. I also work
the entire week and also get tired.” Other people give her advice: “Go
out together with him then.” She retorts: “I offered this to him, but
afterwards we are both still tired. Then I have to sacrifice in
something…”
Is the EII is afraid of physical over-exertion? As an intuitive type,
the EII is not inclined to overestimate her capabilities. She is afraid
that she won’t be able to physically handle her assignments and duties.
She is also afraid that she will be put in position of owning something
to another person. She fears excessive work loads, fears that she won’t
finish her work, that she won’t fulfill her assignments and
responsibilities due to physical or material deficits. She fears that
her children won’t be fed and taken care of, that her husband will be
offended, that she will have to go work the next day feeling exhausted
and anxious. These fears are prompted by the positioning of EII’s
sensing aspects in weak positions.
Up to date, there have been successes in what the heroine of our story
has outlined as her goal. She still doesn’t consider her husband to be
“exemplary” or “ideal” and she no longer wants to be in every way worthy
of him, but sees him as a man who is “already changing for the good”,
who is “willing to be corrected”. From this point of view, she is
willing to consider him further: “He has already changed for the better.
He runs errands and does chores if I request it, goes to the store,
vacuums, takes walks with grandchildren. Sometimes he still devotes
himself to reading, but half of the library we left at our old house,
and half we gave out as gifts. He has also stopped working on his
collection and now devotes more time to the family. All of the money he
earns now go to the family.”
Numerous, plentiful parties and gatherings are no longer popular in this
house - they were only left in memories! She has taken up
self-education, attends lectures, travels a lot (to catch up). If funds
permit, she sometimes brings her husband along with her.
13. EII-LSE. Romanticism and spiritual community in relations.
¶
Another example comes from F. M. Dostoevsky’s story “White Nights”: the
heroine of the story rented one of the rooms of her small, cozy
apartment to a lonely lodger - a respectable man serving in the military
(young, but already in high ranks). It was wartime, thus her guest
seldom stopped by. He had to travel for various assignments, but when he
returned it was happy time for the young “lady” - he took her to the
theater and restaurants (which have re-opened), made expensive (for that
time) gifts, brought flowers, which was also a rarity. At the end of the
war he departed for three years.
They corresponded during this time. She had waited patiently and did not
consider other suitors (even though there were very few grooms back in
those times). He returned back from the war. They immediately got
married, but their happiness was short-lived and unstable: he had to
leave for duty again, they faced more separations. When they were able
to spend a few months together, for her it was the happiest time: she
could delegate to him some household maintenance tasks, play the role of
a “little girl” who so desperately needs his care and custody:
“I would be sitting alone at home. The baby needs food, meanwhile
everything is falling from my hands - the milk runs over, the porridge
is burnt, the baby is crying. Then I hear the sound of the doorbell and
I come out to meet him all in tears. And he sees me and immediately
smiles - and I feel so good, so calm and reassured. I calm down and soon
everything is running smoothly again.
He never yelled at me. A few times he raised his voice talking to our
daughter, but more often he brought her gifts. And me too.
We didn’t live together for long. At work he was infected with
tuberculosis - one of the employees forged a certificate, and their
whole department caught this sickness. He sought treatment for a long
time, traveled to various hospitals and sanatoriums. I would go with him
everything, take care of him and not let him out of my sight. They
released him to go back home when he was close to death. But I didn’t
believe it - I kept thinking I will nurture him back to health, we will
overcome his sickness. I kept thinking that love can overcome death. It
couldn’t be that death wouldn’t release him from its grip. When he died,
my life stopped - it was an enormous shock for me. All the clocks in our
home stopped at this moment - at exactly two o’clock at night. All the
clocks that we had, the ones hanging on the wall, and wrist watches, all
of them kept showing exactly the same time …”