Toggle Light / Dark / Auto color theme
Toggle table of contents sidebar
Duality Relations ISTj and ENFj by Stratiyevskaya
¶
Written by
Vera Stratievskaya
:
original blog
entry
.
Duality observations
PART I
¶
PART I Programs of ENFj (Hamlet) and ISTj (Maxim): Succession of form
and information as an evolutionary mission, as a property of living
beings, as a social and spiritual breakthrough, as social and spiritual
leadership.
Evolutionary mission of LSI (Maxim) [*] development of a successive
social hierarchy; [*] attainment of personal social, rank superiority;
[*] attainment of personal right to creation of a personal, subordinated
to himself as a person, social structure; [*] creation of a hierarchical
structure as a constantly evolving and improving form of successful,
reliable, and viable existence of social rights based society within
hostile to it environment.
1. The management of the system: the inborn sphere of competence of ISTj.
¶
Maxim and hierarchy  these are inseparable concepts. Where there is
Maxim, there a hierarchy arises and becomes established (that is, in
cases where there isn’t an already established one). Successfully
fitting into another hierarchy Maxim can do as well - for him this is as
simple as joining a waiting line. One only needs to know “what is
given”, what is valued, what are the norms, the measures, the charter of
the hierarchy (its algorithm and module), who becomes promoted and for
what kind of achievements, what rank or position they are granted, and
what are the related benefits and privileges. Having determined this,
the LSI begins to feel himself familiar within this system and is able
to quickly and easily orient in new conditions (in new system
relations), to quickly adapt to and assimilate into the system, to learn
its ideology, its code and rules, and once he has assimilated Maxim is
able to move up. He can get into its core leadership and from there
easily manage the system without departing from his TIM’s given
“program”, as if he has been doing it all his life.
In the absence of any organized system, in a democratic, “classless”, or
some other poorly organized society, the LSI creates a hierarchy for
himself. This is again as easy for him as organizing a waiting line
sign-up list for an empty office. This is because the LSI cannot imagine
interactions with his environment in absence of a hierarchy. Under such
circumstances, the LSI poorly orients in the world around him and in his
social relations with others.
The surrounding living world the LSI also organizes systematically and
hierarchically, as its owner: on basis of the principle “Man is the king
of nature.” With a good reason to it, he subordinates our “younger
brothers”, tames, trains, harnesses them for food, for entertainment,
for various household needs. Animals, thus, are also subject to LSI’s
organized hierarchy where they exist as working (and other) units and
powers. In this sense, the LSI can show himself to be an extremely
talented and resourceful trainer. A representative of this type, back in
1930s, has easily solved his household problems by teaching his dog
(Doberman Pinscher) to go shopping. He made a few arrangements with the
newspaper manager and the cashiers of neighboring shops, and always had
fresh bread, milk, and newspapers in his house.
In accordance with the the system of coordinates of his TIM, with the
Ego-“program” function of hierarchical logic of relations (+Ti), LSI
Maxim, wherever he may be, creates for himself a comfortable hierarchy
a comfortable, well organized eco-niche in which he can exist
successfully and realize his program and creative potential. That is, to
carry out the evolutionary mission of his TIM, according to which the
LSI transfigures his environment (and the surrounding informational
field) into an elegant, subordinated, viable social hierarchy, that
continuously strives for improvement of its strength, durability, and
its eco-appropriateness of the household and social constructs, that is
based on a strict volitional and disciplinary regime.
2. The union of spirituality and power.
¶
As the bee creates a honeycomb from wax  a form or construct for
filling it with extremely valuable, vitally important content  honey
so does Maxim create his hierarchical constructs  usually extremely
durable, significant, and grandiose by their power and monumentality of
the declared objectives. The LSI creates socially structured information
containers (“cells”) that are intended to be filled with the fruits of
human labor, the works of the positive and constructive, intellectual
and spiritual creative labor, the best achievements of the contemporary
to the LSI civilization and human society, with the aim of preserving
and multiplying these for the purpose of transfer to successive social
and cultural experiences of future generations.
From each of the “social units” of his hierarchy, from each “cell”, from
every creative and viable “element” of his system, the LSI requires
complete dedication and sacrifice in the creation and establishment of
these material and immaterial values, as well as in the safeguarding and
preservation of their full potential, to be successively transfered to
future generations as evolutionary, historical, spiritual, social, and
intellectual expertise that is needed for the successful development and
the existence of this viable hierarchical system in all possible
(eco-social) circumstances and at all times.
As can be seen here, the idea of a fair re-construction of society
(forwarded by LII, Robespierre), during which all “social units” turn
into “workers” who equally and actively work in the field of social work
(on example of ants or bees), finds its development and evolutionary
implementation into practice, but not in the framework of linear,
egalitarian, “democratic” (“questim”) logic of relations of LII,
Robespierre (-Ti), but in the framework of a hierarchical model
(“declatim”) logic of relations of LSI, Maxim (+Ti), implemented by
aspect of volitional sensing (-Se) and founded of eco-expedient basis of
a nonlinear system that has been formed evolutionarily (along a spiral).
The “honeycombs” of Maxim is the successive building of the Tower of
Babel, to which each generation adds its own turn (revolution on a
spiral), its own floor or row, that grows over time and transforms the
hierarchical system into a multi-national and multi-lingual empire,
which then splits into many disparate and self-determined people.
Analogously to what happened with the Byzantine Empire, that united many
disparate ethnic groups and tribes within its highly organized social
hierarchy into one nation that was the spiritual, social and
intellectual successor of the ancient Romans and Greeks, united by a
common culture and a common religion (Orthodoxy). This empire has
preserved its culture, its power, its centralized and highly
sophisticated social organization for fifteen centuries.
In this sense, LSI’s hierarchy works as a great conservative of the most
significant and outstanding achievements of human civilization, a
reliable “ark” or “capsule” that preserves successive information  the
extremely important, accumulated by many generations, evolutionary
(cultural, historical, and social) experience, which is necessary to
preserve, to supplement and grow, and to transmit throughout the
centuries, such that our descendants will no longer have to resolve same
problems, but have access to already developed by their ancestors
designs and solutions, that have been tested by time and space, bathed
in tears and blood of glorious victories, bequeathed by will and
sanctity to them together with this hierarchical system, called the
fatherland, together with the land on which it stands, with all its
glorious history, with extensive and deep roots, which also become their
common heritage for the good memory and for all time. Their wisdom,
their experience, their knowledge, their work THROUGH ALL TIMES is
carried by a hierarchical state  a reliable and comprehensive
repository of information, created by TIM LSI on his “program” aspect of
hierarchical logic of relations (+Ti).
According to this principle  the principle of informational continuity
and succession of socio-cultural, historical and evolutionary experience
the LSI organizes any social community: family, clan, tribe, clan,
collective, “a group of comrades,” a team, his personal life and his
personal relationships with the people around him.
The role of filling of this super-stable and viable structure with
highly sophisticated and significant content is taken on by the EIE
(Hamlet)  his colleague, his associate and faithful assistant in all of
LSI’s activities and glorious deeds, oriented at innermost understanding
and fruitful cooperation with TIM LSI, and united with this type by
millenia of evolutionary and historical experience of successful
socio-political (cultural, spiritual, and ideological) cooperation.
None of the dyads in the Socion possess such an all-encompassing
spiritual and social experience and such a strict orientation at mutual
cooperation as the dyad LSI-EIE. These types for centuries have went
hand-in-hand, creating mega-states, mega-civilizations, and
mega-empires, asserting their authority and power for centuries,
erecting magnificent monuments and gigantic monumental constructions
both secular and religious  giant temples and palaces, that save for
future generations the highest achievements in culture and arts of all
times and of all peoples, and protecting these intellectual and
spiritual treasures  priceless works of human hearts and minds, human
thought and spirit  from foreign usurpation, misappropriation, ruin,
and plunder by enemy raiders and destroyers of all kinds.
Maxim and Hamlet  a dyad of WARRIORS of the hierarchical social system
that they themselves strive to build, cohesively and effectively, and
likewise themselves fill it with sophisticated high-quality spiritual
and intellectual content, themselves protect and develop it, advocate
and defend its existence and well-being within the environment that
surrounds this system. They expand it, strengthen and improve its
stability and durability, protect it against the attacks of its
“external and internal enemies”, and pass it on from hand to hand to
most reliable and prepared for the succession representatives  the best
of future generations  as the most precious treasure, the most valued
sacred relic.
Within this lies the highest goal and the main task of the dyad LSI-EIE,
which links to every element of their “programs”, each conceptual module
of every informational aspects of their TIM models. Without the
understanding of the evolutionary, socio-historical mission of these
sociotypes, it is not possible to understand the core nature of the
relationship of this dyad, nor the heart of the disagreements and
mismatches in their interactions with other TIMs.
Because in actions of every person, they wish not only to see the logic
of actions and conceptual correlations of their dual, but they also wish
to see (to track and identify) some sort of connection to the over-goal,
the highest objectives of this dyad, that are strategically set and
determined by the ideologist of this dyad (and of the entire 2nd quadra)
- EIE, Hamlet. The conceptual quality of ideology, its spiritual focus,
its ideological and social significance, its accordance to the
contemporary pressing problems, and with the tactical and strategic
goals and objectives of the system  are fully entrusted to EIE, Hamlet
this is his prerogative. The EIE is the soul of this dyad, its
ideological content and spiritual filling.
Meanwhile, the adaptation of the filling to the form, the compact
compression of its content  of its information richness, density,
wholesomeness  is ensured by LSI, Maxim, who adjusts the form to the
content (for worthy content - a worthy vessel!). LSI is also the most
ardent keeper and safeguard of the spiritual values that have been
amassed by the EIE. It is also the LSI who by high requirements and
strict discipline orients the EIE at clossedness and self-sufficiency of
their hierarchy (their system). Maxim is watchful that no alien
influences and trends would penetrate with their corrosive poison into
the “precious vessel” of their values, that not a drop “nectar” would
fall into the “other cells” (else he imposes strict demands: “Our ideas
in exchange for your bread, your rights, and your land”). In other
words, if you want to be our spiritual successors, then become a part of
our system. And how can it be otherwise? Otherwise it cannot be!
Indeed, the quality of spiritual content the EIE provides of the highest
and most sophisticated sort: into the spiritual fabric of his
ideologies, the EIE integrates all the most beautiful and poetic tales,
myths, legends, fantasies and images that he gathers on his information
field, fluttering along it as gracefully and with ease as a butterfly
moves among the most exquisite flowers. It is no accident that a
butterfly reviving from its “capsule” (chrysalis) was an ancient
cultural symbol of immortality of the soul. While the durability and
strength of the “capsule”  of this symbol of future ease of flight of
the imagination  is provided by Maxim. He, as a good manager and owner,
protects this life-giving source, this spiritual and energy torch of his
dyad from breakdown and contamination, and from harmful influences, by
keeping it in a strictly limited, confined space, with no light and air.
Only when it has matured to take the flight of free spirit, free thought
and free fantasy, the “butterfly-soul” makes it through all these
obstacles (“breaks the capsule”) and becomes free  this means that it
has become strong enough to carry the valuable information (“precious
nectar”) to other fields and environments over long distances, through
space and time.
3. Overcoming space and time: the creative program of the ENFj.
¶
Overcoming of the obstacles, resisting the difficulties by force of will
and spirit  are some of the major requirements within this dyad  the
main conditions of its endurance and resilience. And, of course
self-sacrificing, creative work by vocation, that is subordinated to the
directives of the soul and the powers of inspiration  here is an
especially revered value  the mission of the elect, dedicated,
spiritual benefactors of society  the representatives of the spiritual
and intellectual elite, the belonging to which by his calling feels the
EIE, Hamlet.
Transforming into the tangible artistic values the ??highly surreal and
intangible spirituality, the EIE creates his or her treasures: that very
collection of beautiful dreams, myths, images, and stories, which he
brings from the outside world, collecting them through the most
beautiful and important objects of the surrounding reality. Having his
fill “fluttering” like a butterfly or a bee around the “flowers”
around all that is bright, impressive, and attractive  the EIE collects
his “nectar” and carries it to the “cell”, in order to create out of the
best a valuable material substance, that keeps and retains for each
suffering soul its life-giving and healing properties throughout time.
From this comes EIE’s interest in collecting art treasures, that many
members of this TIM collect for those to whom this will be valuable in
the future, who will carefully manage and preserve them, and pass them
on to future generations.
But of course it is the LSI who takes “the first test” of this “honey”.
He is its main degustator and guardian.
The LSI prefers to be “first” for the EIE in all relations and respects.
In dyad LSI-EIE this point is extremely important (traditionally
important) and is subconsciously observed and respected by both
partners. Troubles start when LSI learns that he is not the first for
his EIE partner  the “fusion of the halves” (a reliable and durable
dualization) already cannot happen: a sense of security is lost.
And yet, the EIE has many opportunities to convince the LSI of his
rightness: EIE’s power lies in verbal emotional effect, in the emotional
richness and energy intensity of his information; in his ability,
through the power of word and imagination, to gain value and importance
in society; to pierce by the word, as if by the edge of a sword, through
the centuries influencing the hearts and minds of the people, causing
them to empathize with the fate of the heroes of past ages as can only
be done by the EIE  EIE the actor, the playwright, the poet.
Nature creates a person as imperfect, allowing him or her to improve
every day, but it is the person himself who, with his hands, his
thoughts, his feelings, and his sophisticated, sometimes traditionally
advanced technologies, passed on over the centuries from generation to
generation, creates works of art that are perfect in their thought,
their form, in their emotional expression and their content.
From this come the high demands of the EIE towards any creation and
creative work  high demands to its quality and depth, to the
informational and substantiative compactness of content for the perfect
harmony and perfection of the form  to all that is expressed and
provided for by sophisticated “high style” and “high-tech” extroverted
aspects of the “evolutionary” ring of benefit (LSE-ILE-EIE-SEE).
His creative task and challenge the EIE sees in taking the global,
constructive ideas, that relate to the fundamental constructs of the
world, worldviews, perceptions and understandings, which he receives
over the aspect of intuition of potential (+Ne) from his “benefactor”
ILE, Don Quixote, and supplementing them with the brightest imagery and
fantasies that are deep in meaning and succinct in content. And putting
them into a harmonically sophisticated and brightest in strength of
expression and impressions form (which the EIE later sends to the
material-technical processing and preservation (“conservation”) of his
dual LSI, and his social successor SEE, who in turn will forward it to
the technological improvement of his “beneficiary” LSE, who in turn will
forward it back to the ILE for further intuitive complication and
expansion of possibilistic capacity at the new turn of “the spiral” of
evolution).
The energy of the word endowed with huge possibilistic potential  the
energy of the image, that has kept the fervor of feeling and warmth of
an immortal human soul, overcoming space and time  is able to reach a
high goal and illuminate it with the light of truth, that has made it
from the depths of the past centuries encompassing within it all that is
best.
And this idea  the overall and over-arching “program” of TIM EIE,
Hamlet  is absolutely gorgeously expressed by William Shakespeare (EIE,
Hamlet) in one of his finest sonnets (55th):
“Not marble, nor the gilded monuments Of princes, shall outlive this
powerful rhyme; But you shall shine more bright in these contents Than
unswept stone besmear’d with sluttish time.
When wasteful war shall statues overturn, And broils root out the work
of masonry, Nor Mars his sword nor war’s quick fire shall burn The
living record of your memory.
‘Gainst death and all-oblivious enmity Shall you pace forth; your praise
shall still find room Even in the eyes of all posterity That wear this
world out to the ending doom.
So, till the judgment that yourself arise, You live in this, and dwell
in lovers’ eyes.”
Energy  is the conductor of all the best, all the brightest, all the
most pure and sublime  from the present time into the distant, bright
future, the distant long periods of time. (+Fe, -Ni).
In this regard, the energy needs to be clean, memories - full of light,
images - lofty, bright, and perfect in form, and maximally high-quality
and informationally compact in content.
This program is the maximum of TIM EIE. It comes down to bringing the
happiness to mankind by the creation of a better future from the
present. And to bringing happiness to oneself by knowing that one was
involved in this noble mission.
Piercing space and time by the power of feeling, spiritual purity, and
greatness of thought, the energy of the word is able to stay ahead of
the time, to conquer it, passing on the greatest wisdom and the most
profound meaning to the farthest edges of the future. Transcending
space, flying through the millennia, the continuity of the image, the
continuity of information  a strong, dynamic, and energy-rich  finds
its successor, and places its own request, becomes his or her vocation,
his social or spiritual mission, his guiding star.
4. The union of the “administrator” and the “minstrel”.
¶
Times we do not choose … In the old days, in the era of the Dark Ages,
when the relations within this dyad could come together most closely,
tied by friendship and mutual cooperation, and its representatives,
being socially and spiritually in demand during this time period, they
could more fully and visibly realize themselves, to simple and humble
workers and laypersons in most cases, for such hopelessly boring and
dull were the days. The joys and vivid impressions were not in
abundance, especially for those who bore the burden of military service,
of complex administrative issues and difficult organizational and
management problems, within domestic and social conditions that were not
simple and sometimes downright risky. What else besides a fantastically
bright idea and a dream of attainable happiness could make Maxim to
break out of dark despair and boredom?
The LSI could day-to-day, with patience and fortitude, bear his guard
duty, standing on the platform of an observation tower of some medieval
castle, knowing what a generous prize awaits him if he will have served
his lord, that he will be rewarded by a great honor to carry the guard
in the evening at a gala dinner in the banquet hall, where he will feel
happy, in paradise, when they will heat up the chimney, kindle the
lamps, bring in the musicians. And some sweet, modest girl  charming,
like a young fairy  will sing with a clear angelic voice, accompanying
herself on the lute, some improvisation or an old ballad about the love
of a noble knight to a lovely lady. Then he himself will want to become
such a noble knight, to win the honor and glory, to do some great feat
to become knighted, to obtain the title, coat of arms, a small estate in
the property, and - most importantly! - the hand of the pretty singer as
the award. To become a part of her life, her world, her inspiration, her
joy, her fate. To become her protection and support to the end of the
century. And to live for her and for their common future in the world of
images born out of her imagination and inspiration.
The EIE sets high spiritual goals for the LSI. He puts before him
ambitious projects and tasks, and himself suggests their solutions. Most
often this is done allegorically  by subtle hints, abstract images, and
fantasies embodied in works of art. Understanding EIE’s parables
literally, and taking them as a his “program”, the LSI comes to the
final frontiers, opens up new perspectives for himself, and, by tactical
moves, step-by-step, rises further and higher up the career ladder. And
now he has reached the desired: behold, he was promoted to the rank,
married to a lovely girl, and their family received separate quarters in
the castle, albeit still very modest. And here they are already sitting
at the lord’s table at the feast (and not even in the most remote
place). But for new achievements they are allocated lands, given a small
estate as a gift. And now, in their own ancestral castle, they arrange
everything the same way it was arranged in the court of their lord. The
same rules and regulations are established, the same traditions of
festive dinner, with musicians in the bountiful rooms. There arises a
new environment around them, new nobility, new artistic and intellectual
elite. The spacious rooms become covered with their family portraits;
the galleries - with collections of captured weapons and works of
skilled craftsmen and artisans. Family archives, libraries, education
studios, art and craft shops are created. Around them a small city
arises, perhaps even a small state. And it will have its own history,
its own succession (its own evolutionary potential), its own traditions
and customs. Its flag and its coat of arms that was received by the
founder of the city a long time ago for the first combat service and
achievements.
The union of LSI and EIE  is the inseparable union of the militant,
harsh administrator and the romantic dreamer-poet (union of “warrior”
and “minstrel”) who always needed one another: without the colorful,
fabulous creations of the minstrel to brighten up the cold lonely
nights, the life of the warrior would be unbearable. Painted in gloomy,
black, white, and grey colors (at times with a mix of blood red), such
life would suppress the warrior by its cold, devastating of the soul
sadness, by its bleak gray mundane labor days, that do not forebode
anything bright and joyful. The strength and desire to live, to continue
fighting for existence, to protect and defend, to engage in battle and
to win, wouldn’t be enough. It is only the introduction to this treasure
chest of fantasy, fairytale, and poetic images  artistic, literary, and
musical  that brightens up his existence, creates a sense of
celebration, becomes an affordable and easy journey to a magical world
of illusion and fantasy, allowing him to dream and hope for the best, to
feel happy in this dark and hopeless reality. The belief in a better
world, in the immortality of the soul, the light and hope for better
changes, the LSI also draws from the works of his dual, the EIE. His
dual, in turn, draws his inspiration from LSI’s severity, strength, and
masculinity, and from his optimism and the love of life, and celebrates
LSI’s exploits enveloped by the glory of past battles, creating
strikingly accurate and vivid images, recreating the exact description
of the events, of which the EIE talks in such detail and vividness as if
he was a witness to these events.
Without color, light, richness and romantic creativity of the EIE, the
life of LSI would be terrible, mundane, and gloomy, alike a raw, cold,
dark cellar. It wouldn’t even be life, as it would’t supply him with
either energy and strengths, nor the desire to live and enjoy his
existence (-Fe).
The LSI is the “subjectivist” of second quadra (quadra of “merry”,
“aristocratic” types) and his life is subordinated to social and
ideological schemes, to social and ideological rituals, that include all
of his service schedules, his duty rosters, his work and home routines.
Whether he is standing guard, or reporting in the office of his
supervisor  he is in rank, he is sharp and collected in his bearing, he
is disciplined. He’s ready in our times, just like he was a hundred, two
hundred, five hundred or a thousand years ago, to work and to protect,
to fight or to duel (if necessary), ready for the “class” and political
struggles  ready to submit his life to the interests of the system,
ready to fill it with joyous holidays  with military celebrations and
formations, with solemn oaths and vows, triumphant parades and
processions, vivid spectacles of festive folk festivals with singing,
dancing and theatrical performances. These are traditional holiday
rituals, handed down from generation to generation, and traditional
cultural rituals, and also contribute a certain mood and variety in his
life  that discipline, move one to respect the strength and power of
the system, provoke one to appreciate own well-being that is provided
for by the system, its economic and military prowess (a particular point
of honor for Maxim), and its spiritual and social priorities, which the
LSI deeply respects, and at which he orients for to as long as they are
justified by the real successes and achievements of the system.
5. The union of “the most right” and “the most righteous”.
¶
Analogously to the way the LSI interacts with the environment  creates
for him/herself a comfortable, hierarchically organized eco-niche, and
enacts his management and leadership within it  that is, takes up a
dominant position of the overseer, of the administrator  similarly, the
EIE, interacting with the environment, creates a convenient for
him/herself ideological hierarchy, and becomes its permanent autocratic
leader. Appropriating the highest degree of dedication to the mysteries
of the spiritual and irrational realms, the EIE creates new priestly
institutions, new cultural places, and does not permit anyone else to
compare with him in the level of initiation and dedication to the
highest cult knowledge, nor to compete with him in the righteousness of
serving a higher power.
No other dyad in the socion has left behind such brilliant imprints of
their interaction with the environment as the dyad LSI-EIE, that, over
the past centuries and millennia, has been creating and establishing
administrative, cultural, and religious institutions and organizations,
bureaucratic and theocratic hierarchies of all possible sizes and
designs imaginable, that surpassed by their intricacy and sophistication
designs of all the variety of social structures that have been created
by other dyads of the Socion.
The ability to create a comfortable eco-niche in his environment, an
eco-system of a particular configuration that corresponds to the value
system (system of coordinates) of TIM models (or the system of values
and coordinates of the “program” information element), as well as the
ability to create (or recreate) a complete evolving eco-system based on
one single “program” element (the informational aspect), in this essay
we will call the fractal property of this “program” element (of the
information program, of the information aspect, of the model of TIM).
Similarly to how a seed re-creates the entire grown plant, reproducing
all the properties inherent to it, so does the information aspect of
model “A” reproduce programmed qualities championed by this aspect of
the model within the environmentally appropriate limits (this is
applicable to any aspect, not only the “program” one). Due to this, the
social eco-system organized by any information model can, over a long
period of time and quite self-sufficiently (given favorable external and
internal conditions), develop quite intensively and rapidly, accruing
power and possibilistic potential, because here much is dependent on the
ideological and administrative programming (from static and dynamic
basis); the proof to this is once again the dyad LSI-EIE, that, in
various epochs, has created and established mega-empires and
mega-civilizations that lasted for long periods of time being quite
successful in their self-sufficiency and in self-imposed isolation.
Which again speaks of the enormous evolutionary potential dyad Hamlet -
Maxim.
The ability to create for themselves comfortable, ideologically
“justified” eco-niches, and within them  favorable, hierarchically
advantageous to themselves “ideological loopholes”, latent “moves” and
“exits”, and departmental shifts, that allow to appropriate by “default”
new ranks, rights, and powers  is just as typical of Hamlet, as it is
of Maxim, who, for his own benefit, uses economic and administrative
“vents”, allowing both of them to enjoy virtually unlimited authority in
their positions, while continuing to be completely lawful (in their own
opinion) “elements” of all-powerful structures.
LSI-EIE is the dyad of lawmaker-founders that create the ideological and
spiritual foundations for the order of law. In this case, the LSI serves
as a decisive, strong-willed administrator, and EIE - as a harsh
ideologue, cruel and merciless, convinced of the fact that with any
other conditions such administration won’t last. Harsh administration
requires a harsh ideology that permits for a social regime of terror and
fear, and requires from all members of the hierarchy readiness to
complete self-sacrifice, complete dedication, and high level of
commitment in the interests of the system.
The union of LSI and EIE  is the union of two pedantic people:
“rational”, “obstinate” “subjectivists”, who keep to and uphold the
charter of the system, its set of rules and regulations, its code, that
doesn’t change its label nor deviates from what’s acceptable. Both are
capable of masterfully orienting in the relations, moves, and shifts
within the system (of rank, caste, class),
Part II: Early stages of dualization. First problems and challenges.
¶
1. First step of dualization: mutual trust and business interest: Channels 3 - 7, dualization over the aspects of “ethics of relations”, Fi, and “logic of actions”, Te.
¶
Already at first acquaintance the LSI shows him/herself as an
interesting conversationalist  extremely erudite and well-read, given
to thorough thought, witty, able to maintain the conversation on almost
any topic. At the same time (on basis of emotiveness associated with
mobility and communicability over normative aspect of the ethics of
relations, +Fi), Maxim makes an impression of a sensitive and
sympathetic person, attentive, caring, tactful, capable of deep nuanced
feelings and compassion. All of these traits are extremely appealing to
the EIE and thoroughly impress him or her under favorable circumstances
and with a pleasant initial impression: good looks, gallant manners,
refined taste, external charm, tidiness, neatness, accuracy,
self-discipline, acting considerately, holding oneself in society with
dignity, courting beautifully and generously, and being exact with
fulfilling one’s promises.
In cases when the relationship seems to be “worth it”, the LSI imparts
on the partner the most well-disposed and favorable impression (on a
maximum of his upbringing and education). If expectations are not
justified, the LSI can likewise switch from the state of high chivalry
to extreme rudeness: the LSI dislikes being taken for a “fool”, being
cheated, kept for an idiot, baited and switched  in such cases becomes
offended, angry, and considers it his duty to punish the offender. If
the “punishment” consists only of an angry verbal attack or a loud
rebuke, it can be said that the offender got off easy. The LSI is
unforgiving of hurtful jokes and ruses: as it is exactly when he’s made
such an important bet on tying a favorable and advantageous acquaintance
with the goal of finding a life partner, that he least wants to be sent
on a wild goose chase, to waste his time, his chances, strengths, and
material resources on a “fake”, that could lead to no end of troubles
and prove to be a dangerous and unsound connection.
As a systematic logical type, a static, an aristocrat, and a declaring
type, that puts ahead of him/herself ambitious goals and strives to
achieve them promptly, the LSI is pragmatic: he’s not going to expend
himself on false (sidewise) goals, but attempts to systematically
combine and arrange them such that each of the achieved goals would
realize other tasks, resolve other challenges, and open before him new
prospects. If one gets married, then on a girl or woman with
connections, a good dowry, a residence permit, with ideal living
conditions (such that later one wouldn’t have to leave), with gorgeous
looks, well-mannered, well-educated (not to feel ashamed of her before
the society), with good practical and business skills (so that with her
help much could be achieved), that is organized and diligent,
well-wishing and friendly, such that she was a good person, a great
hostess, wife and mother, respectful towards her husband, his parents,
and his children.
The LSI is the obstinate-declaring-static-aristocratic-rational
introverted sensing systematic logical type. And, given the combination
of all these traits, he or she is extremely picky about the qualities
and characteristics of the future life partner. But most importantly
he or she is very prudent, pragmatic, and stubborn  uncompromising (on
psychological grounds). Life must “break” the LSI hard before he or she
lets go of at least an inch of his demands and requirements towards a
partner. Thus, the LSI looks for a partner to bring home as meticulously
as in the good old days the farmer looked to buy a horse or a cow. He
will comprehensively evaluate each trait and each quality, and think
through every step beforehand (it is also preferable to check the
quality of the new acquisition on the spot, and still have the
possibility to return it back as unwanted, and even make a claim and
present a bill for any resulting moral and material costs).
When an LSI (even an old, wise by life experience person) visits a
dating service, he, at first, seems to be an unassuming and
unpretentious client. But when he begins to list all the requirements
necessary for his potential mate, the computer doesn’t have enough
memory to save it all. (While the employees of dating serves generally
prefer to not have to deal with him and accept his application: as, on
one hand, the LSIs are providing plentiful information about themselves,
while on the other the IEEs are out searching (just in case - perhaps
someone interesting will show up) - and there’s decisively no one to
match to anyone else.)
Trying to pair up “on calculation” and following up with strict
correspondence to his or her demands, the LSI falls directly on the IEE,
who is very good at accurately guessing what yet another “hero of the
day” wants, and behaves very prudently and flexibly on the principle “as
you please, sir?” arriving at the epicenter of relations of conflict,
when, it seems, some long-awaited miracle appears on the horizon, and
each partner is waiting for “the continuation of this magic dream”,
while it turns into a terrible reality.
Dualizing with the LSI “out of calculation and convenience” - is more
expensive to oneself! The LSI is a practical and economical manager: in
no time that he brings his new wife back home with him that he finds her
a “useful” application. Directs and sends her “to work”  to the
kitchen, to the field, to the barn, to the stable … Here comes the end
of all romance!
Therefore, for full happiness, the LSI needs the kind of romance that
does not develop as a myth or a dream, and will not collapse like a
mirage at the first encounter with reality.
Of course, the LSI can dualize with a partner from a low-income family,
with a fellow student at the institute, with someone from neighboring
communal college housing. And all the previous requirements here will
fall by the wayside. Somewhere, in the depths of LSI’s memory, will
arise the image of that charming minstrel from the medieval castle. And,
of course - Here’s my happiness! Nothing else is needed! All the old
calculations will be forgotten immediately. There will be no other wish
and desire than to serve that beautiful lady, and be her “knight in
shining armor” …
Dualizing with “a girl from the communal housing” is even preferable
because it is here that the LSI has an opportunity to look closely at
her and judge her ability to successfully exist within “system
relations”, observing all the rules of “communal living”. (Life in a
medieval castle, too, was organized according to the principle of
“communal cohabitation”, even though it was paid for by the feudal lord
and followed rank differences: those closer to the elite had the most
comforts and privileges. But the ability to live in communal housing
quietly, modestly, tidily, observing decorum, and not going beyond one’s
statute  would distinguish that girl who had every reason to establish
the best opinion about herself (among the controlling structures), to
get the best recommendation, to make a successful career, to earn the
reputation of being “exemplary”, “dutiful”, “indispensable”, and get
closer to the “elite” in the shortest possible time. It is precisely
such a wife, suitable for living in any enclosed and self-contained
system, that the LSI will chose based on his calculations and
sympathies.
Such a girl the LSI will look for within his circle and in his league,
relying on his powers of observation. (And his eye is sharp!). Such
“diamond” he will look for to make her his life partner  a “modest
diamond” of pure essence. From the way the girl/woman holds and behaves
herself in the community  quietly, modestly, but with dignity and with
clear understanding of her place in the system, while not losing it, not
giving way to anyone, and defending her rights by lawful, normal,
legitimate ways; by the way she knows how to be friendly with the people
around her and respectful of elders; by the way she is able to allocate
and spend the time doing useful and needed tasks (for successful
existence in communal conditions); by the way she selects her inner
circle from the most trustworthy and well brought up peers; by the way
she organizes her leisure time, visiting theaters, museums, libraries
from all of this it becomes clear whether she would make an appropriate
match for such “a person of the system” (“a man in a case”) as is Maxim.
Here, as a rule, either everything fits “one to one” (as in a good
clich) or doesn’t match at all.
The LSI will pick a girl/woman with an impeccable reputation, about whom
no one has a bad word to say. (Otherwise, he won’t be able to live with
her  being the most socially oriented TIM, he is highly dependent on
the opinion of people around him. The LSI chooses a decent inner circle,
fearing “what if something happens” and safeguarding himself on the
“vulnerable” function of negative intuition of potential, -Ne.
Therefore, he won’t look for a girlfriend among mischievous girls and
dare-devils. (He bypasses them a mile away, trying not to have anything
to do with them.) While LSI’s fears of “what if something happens” have
to be shared by his companion EIE (Hamlet), as the aspect of intuition
of potential opportunities in this dyad is a repressed value. Therefore,
the EIE woman also won’t make friends with anyone who creates grounds
for gossip (if she values her reputation, wants to remain in system, and
to move up to privileged positions). For the EIE, as well as for the
LSI, outside of the hierarchy there is no existence in the system, and
“that soldier is a poor one, who doesn’t want to become a general”.
Unaccompanied the woman EIE also wouldn’t want to appear: due to
extraversion and “aristocracy”, and due to “decisive” and “negativist”
traits (one needs support able to shield from potential trouble, because
“what if something happens”). As a “strategist” and an “asking” type,
that complicates attainment of the goal with obstacles, the EIE also
doesn’t want to be too easily accessible for Maxim. She first needs to
test his resolve, determination, and patience. It is necessary to give
the LSI a chance to think about his decision and his true intentions.
Although disappointing him, cooling him down and making him indifferent,
she also won’t do. Her entourage is already sufficiently schooled and
obeys her without question: appears and disappears upon the first
request, and perfectly understands her hints and insinuations.
Therefore, she will appear at the right time and in the right place (her
intuition never fails) and the LSI gets an opportunity to use this
chance.
The partner seems to be flawless if she is able to mesmerize by her look
and voice, by the energy of her words and of her expressions and
gestures. (And all of it are attributes of the emotional expressiveness
of EIE (Hamlet) - innate and acquired: taken note of and learned, tested
and tried, honed to mastery, brought to the highest level of
perfection.) Any EIE is able to learn good manners, movements, facial
expressions and plastics, knowing that they will be useful in life. It
is not necessary to visit the actor’s studio for this; although Hamlet
is pulled to theater, to cinema, to spectacles of all genres and levels,
from an early childhood. EIEs are extremely observant  they notice and
copy everything they find interesting in others: the characters, facial
expressions, gestures, looks, gait and smile  and choose for themselves
the model that seems most appropriate for the occasion, or the most
natural and organic to their environment.
On the normative, technological aspect of “logic of actions” (+Te),
Hamlets also successfully occupy themselves as technologists (individual
and mass) of communication models, and advantageously leverage this
capability for tactical and strategic purposes: to be a leader, to be
the “soul” and center of any company, to gain wild popularity, to
inspire boundless confidence, to influence the thoughts, feelings,
interests and attitudes of people in any society and at any level,
within the widest circles. (In the sphere of political technologies, of
directing and modeling of social phenomena and events, few other types
can compare with Hamlet.)
Even with modest appearance, the EIE can impart a strong impression on
the LSI without much difficulty. The problem lies in being a match to
him on all the social parameters as well. (LSI is a person of the
system. He/she is a system logical “aristocrat”, who divides people on
formal grounds: by social strata or rank, based on ethnic, religious,
and ideological commonalities, by objectives and professions -
prestigious, and not very. The LSI is a conformist: he doesn’t go
against the existing power and is not inclined to support the
opposition. Although representatives of this TIM are found among
dissidents, including opposition leaders, and function successfully in
these circles, creating for themselves suitable eco-niches among the
numbers of like-minded individuals.)
LSI  the snob. LSI  the esthete. Comfort, well-maintained household,
prestigious familiar connections and ties, popularity in society, high
social status, and the dominating influence on environment  all of this
is valuable to the LSI. Thus, in the process of dualization of this
dyad, the program of correcting the social normatives gets turned on in
order to “fit the desired to the real”  to work through everything that
is needed to achieve the necessary level of psychological and social
adaptation to their social environment  to the hierarchical system of
relations within which their dual relations will develop further. For
the LSI it is extremely important that his companion is received and
treated as an equal in his circle, that he won’t have to be ashamed for
her and have to justify her behavior, or explain her awkward and
unethical actions. For the LSI it is important that his companion “suits
the court”, the new for her system, that she is able to adequately and
organically enter into it and become “one of own” for the most respected
and revered members, that she is able to find the right and appropriate
tone for her relationships with everyone.
This task is complicated by the fact that both the LSI and the EIE are
“obstinate” types. “Obstinacy” is one of their dyadic traits. Neither
one nor the other is willing to lower the level of their requirements
and demands. Furthermore, they don’t allow their partners to lower their
demands towards themselves either, and to be lenient towards their
weaknesses and the weaknesses of others. Here, both being rational
pragmatists (LSI on “observing” function of -Te and EIE on normative
function of +Te) try to realistically estimate and weigh their own
chances and the chances of their partner.
It is another dyadic trait that saves them - the “Carefree” trait.
2. The saving effect of “carefree” trait: migration and settlement on distant territories.
¶
Everyone is familiar with these student weddings  when the newlyweds
live in different housing for two-three years (each with five, ten
flatmates and neighbors), meeting only in secret, and spending time
together only during the holidays (when the other flatmates and
neighbors leave), or when they come to visit their relatives and friends
back home, when at least someone starts to respect their rights as a
newly formed couple. But then again, up to a point: it’s not at all easy
to become “the head of household”  that is, the founder of a new family
hierarchy that, in addition, has to “embed” into the already existing,
dominant, parental hierarchy on the rights of the subordinate, usually
humiliated and subdominant unit. It is difficult primarily because the
parents traditionally start to undermine and break down this subdominant
hierarchy (i.e. a new, younger, more fragile family), showing them in
all possible ways that they have been and will remain on subordinate
positions. And if the parents wish, they can even be divorced. The main
purpose  the birth of grandchildren  can be achieved with divorced
spouses, and grandmother and grandfather can replace the absent parent.
The newlyweds LSI and EIE in this situation feel terrible. They cannot
disobey and not honor their parents. Neither can they allow parents to
destroy their young family: for this they would need to constantly pull
them back, to argue, to object to them, to challenge their views, their
order, their actions aimed (traditionally) at the destruction of a young
family that the parents now see as a rival one, contesting and putting a
claim to the dominating role. However, there cannot be two equally
dominant hierarchies in a centralized system. This means that either the
common system will become decentralized, i.e. the young family will move
away from their parents, or that the new, young family will no longer be
centralized (cease to be a hierarchy), and will be destroyed at the
root, and lose some of its important “program” functions and positions,
its structural connections, units, and elements. The LSI, as a “program”
structural logical type, understands this better than anyone, seeing how
his ties to his parents are coming apart (under the effect of their
disrespectful attitude towards him), and how his connection with his
wife is being broken down, when she is forced to endure humiliation and
to witness the humiliation of her husband. Even though it happens in the
second quadra that “whoever shouts/cries the loudest, gets the most
rights”, this only applies to relations within the system and between
people of equal in standing and rank within the same hierarchy. With
those who are “senior in rank”, the LSI and the EIE are bound to observe
subordination in accordance with the “programs” of their TIMs.
Therefore, parents are not talked back to (otherwise, what kind of
family is this? and what example can be set for the children?) The
rights of parents are generally respected here. Violating the rights of
parents  is a violation of the rules of family’s subordination, of
family’s hierarchical succession, family customs and traditions, which
are considered a core value of the dyad Maxim - Hamlet and upheld as
sacred here.
Everything ends well if holidays are brief, or if there is a reason to
cut them short and return back to school and to studies. All is well if
upon the graduation the newlyweds are able to move to a room in the
distant city, leave their parents and begin building their lives on
their own. A new family hierarchy arises, free from old remnants and
prejudices of the previous parental hierarchies, created at a new place,
under a new (evolutionary) angle on the axis of time, at which
everything is organized in accordance to new (contemporary to them)
order and regulations, amenable to their mutual respect, mutual
assistance, mutual sharing of rights and responsibilities. Without
difficulties, of course, it cannot be, but what saves them is optimism,
determination, perseverance, and the fact that in the life of Maxim and
Hamlet there is always room for a heroic feat.
3. Suggestive effect on the aspect of the ethics of emotions, Fe: in life of Maxim and Hamlet there is always a place for heroic feat.
¶
From the first minute of his meeting his dual, the EIE begins to orient
the LSI towards some heroic deed  towards uncovering and implementing
his forces and capabilities to their maximum  by trying to interest the
LSI with himself, and with relations with him, and to instill in the LSI
a deep belief and interest in the possible beneficial prospects that
will become available to the LSI if he sets ambitious goals and wishes
to achieve them.
Why is this necessary for the EIE?
The problem is that the LSI is timid (in the sense that he cannot go
beyond what is permitted by the framework of the system). The LSI  is a
realist, a sound-thinking pragmatist. He himself is not inclined to
overestimate his strength and capabilities. He doesn’t take on excessive
responsibilities or jump higher than his head to grab one of the stars
from heaven. Maxim is not prone to adventurism. Work or business
adventures are usually not his methods. His motto is “slow and steady
wins the race”. The main thing  is to not be a burden to the system: to
keep up and do everything in its time and in place. To not be dragging
behind at the tail, to not be among the laggards, to not weigh down the
team. Trying to “take another’s seat” or to jump over the heads of
“senior companions” the LSI also doesn’t view as a possibility. These
are not system relations, this goes against the rules of the system,
within the system (especially if hierarchical) one does not act like
this. (If someone discovers these inappropriate methods to gain
promotion, there will be shame to no end  how will he later look his
colleagues in the eye?)
The EIE directs and moves the LSI to feasible adventures. Such as, for
example, the implementation of a very daring creative, political,
professional or social project. The EIE may lead him to the thought of
an unequal (in hierarchical terms) marriage, that goes against the
requirements of the system, which the LSI is used to consider and
respect. However, the EIE waves away all of his
What should be done to make a snob-LSI (for example, a young man from
elite circles) to marry a simple girl from the communal housing?
The EIE relies on ethics of emotions. He or she strives to make a
lasting impression on the dual, with all his powers to ingrain into
LSI’s soul. But he does so solely by the power of emotions: by
exceptionally expressive look, impelling intonations, emotional pathos,
force and energy of speech, depth and expressiveness of thought. In
every movement, gesture, gaze the EIE tries to be compelling -
awe-inspiring, stunning, unforgettable. He operates on the principle:
came, amazed and shocked, and conquered! (Mesmerized, fascinated, “broke
through”!)
The EIE does not say  he speaks. And “fans out” emotions to the maximum
(+Fe). He plays artificially and theatrically (or with a touch of
theatricality), but extremely impressively, sincerely, and deeply. The
EIE himself believes what he is trying to express in such moments. He
feels inspired himself and inspires the LSI in the process. The EIE is a
player. Once he has chosen a suitable dual partner, he puts a lot at
stake in this moment. He tries to be very convincing, being sure in
advance (feeling intuitively) that the gullible and naive LSI won’t take
note of this excessive theatricality (with all attendant “special
effects”).** And not everyone takes not of it  only “program”ethical
types notice the excessive pathos of Hamlet. While for Maxim, this is
exactly what is needed for the full effect on his “suggestive”
“dual-seeking” function (for the completeness of suggestion or
persuasion). When the emotional impulse is weaker, these “signals” would
have never made it through to the LSI or arrived with a huge delay, and
the LSI would have remained indifferent to the “performance” of his
dual. If the emotional impulse is too strong, the LSI considers that his
dual is “over-playing”. Usually, intuition allows the EIE to regulate
precisely the extent and power of emotional pressure and still be plenty
persuasive. EIE’s emotions overtake and captivate the LSI, and there
arises a feeling of emotional unity, an unbroken direct and reverse
connection between them. And now the LSI fully trusts his dual and
awaits, as if a miracle, a happy turn on his fate: finally, life has
brought him together with the person for whom he has been searching and
dreaming of meeting one day! Finally, he has found his “other half”, and
now his life will become happy and complete. Though the most important
and difficult still lies ahead: the “Cinderella” needs to be led to the
“palace”, to his father’s house (the hierarchical, matrix system), and
“embedded” into the relationships of familiar to him people. One needs
to watch how the new branch will take on the familial tree. One needs to
arrange for himself and his new wife and future family a comfortable
ecological niche, while not offending, angering, or pushing aside any of
the “elders”, as to not disturb the already existing relations and links
in the system.
What helps and saves here is the respect for traditions and for the
continuity of system relations in this dyad.
4. Succession and respect for traditions.
¶
The continuity and succession of the system of relations  is a
significant value in the dyad LSI-EIE. These TIMs won’t try to undermine
the roots of the tree that had nurtured them (acting like a “pig under
an oak tree” from Aesop’s fables)  this is contrary to the evolutionary
mission of the dyad. Their task is not to break down the existing
matrix, but to continue developing further the work of their ancestors,
drawing from the continuity of traditions and knowledge.
The EIE is respectful of the established relationships, ties, and
connections in the system, thus he accepts the care of the LSI as his
own and tries in every way to fit into the required requirements. He
truthfully provides about himself all the necessary information. (In the
rational dyads this is acceptable and expected: ugly truth first is
better than having to deal with an unexpected exposure later. Of debts,
family or external problems and liabilities rationals will talk in the
early stages of dating - before relations get to the phase of being
serious and responsible. Excuses: “I didn’t mean to upset you, thus I
didn’t tell you about my secret passions” - here do not pass and are
considered a betrayal of the interests of the partner. For this reason,
for rationals it is difficult to build a relationship with irrationals,
who often make decisions and act “at random”, “as the road takes them”.
In rational dyads, loyalty and honesty is valued above all else.)
Especially in the dyad LSI-EIE, where the aspect of negative intuition
of potential, -Ne (“what if something happens”) is a real threat to both
partners, it is customary to tell the truth and only the truth about
yourself. Deviation from this principle brings profound disappointments
that settle as heavy burdens on the heart of both, and leave an
indelible mark on their relations that never fades from memory.
In the dyad LSI-EIE it is totally forbidden to lie and tell untruth. In
the extreme conditions of existence of the dyad of “obstinate”
“carefree” rational types of the second quadra is risky and
unacceptable. The LSI, in this respect, is very demanding, thorough, and
picky (with his “painful” function of negative intuition of potential).
Thus the EIE tries, however she or he is able, to meet and satisfy this
requirement, though sometimes he does act at his own risk on the
principle of “not caught - not a thief”  if he has lied once, he tries
not to get caught on this lie. Therefore, he lies very skillfully whilst
trying to redirect all suspicions, as well as any persecutions and blame
away from himself (if he was already caught on some offense). In
relations with the LSI the EIE initially prefer to be honest
established good relationships he holds dear. And if he does happen to
have sinned, he tries to repent in time and at the right moment.
An example:
One charming, middle-aged lady of type EIE, Hamlet, being of a mature
age has met at a resort a man who was much younger than her, and they
started a marvelous romantic relationship. It so happened that both of
them were from the same town, and returning from vacation have continued
to meet and to see each other. Their relations have rapidly developed,
and after some short period of time this man has asked her to marry him.
She would have been glad to accept, but she felt uncomfortable with
their age difference. And although she looked much younger than her
years, she still didn’t dare to tell him  she was afraid that if he
finds out he will stop seeing her. She shared her worries with a friend,
and her friend suggested “losing her passport,” and promised to replace
the lost passport with another document, which will have a more
appropriate age for her fiance. No sooner said than done! The future
bride obtained a new passport, and on the appointed day and hour they
became legally married. And nothing marred the happiness of the
newlyweds, until her girlfriend, envying them, decided to blackmail her
and demanded a very large sum of money in exchange for keeping silent.
But the bride valiantly withstood the test. From her age she even
extracted a benefit: she confessed to her husband about everything
about her true age and about the forgery  confessed, repented, and
explained to him how much she was afraid of losing him. She swore that
she has no other secrets from him: age was the only thing she hid from
him. Promised to only tell the truth in the future. Only after this did
he forgive her. But she saw that this forgiveness was not easy for him:
for a long time he felt upset by this deception.
In most cases, the EIE tries not to disappoint the LSI (unless it is
absolutely necessary), and reports only truthful information about
himself or herself, trying not to conceal or distort anything  because
he truly understands how important this is for their family now and in
the future.
And, of course, the EIE tries to make the most pleasant impression on
the LSI. To dispel all the fears and doubts of his dual, to inspire him
towards taking such an important and significant step, the EIE strives
to be (or appear to be) the way the LSI sees his ideal partner. To guess
what this ideal might be, the EIE sometimes want to consult about his
observations, to put his imagination and intuition to work, and to find
in memory, in his imagination, or in the surrounding reality that image
that needs to be re-enacted, in order to enchant, charm, and conquer his
partner with it for life. (Whatever the EIE takes up, he or she does it
with interest, with a spark, and with imagination. For example, one girl
of type EIE wanted to attract a man (who on closer inspection turned out
to SLI, Gabin) and all the time brought her girlfriend’s child along
with her, wanting to demonstrate how strong are the motherly qualities
in her. She came to his house with the five years old boy, and created a
play by all the rules: played with the kid, dressed and undressed him,
fed with a spoon  this was all part of the image of the mother. (She
“worked” on the demonstrative emotions, probably unconsciously adjusting
to TIM SLI, as her direct emotional influences left him completely
indifferent.) She did not marry him (fortunately for her), but she
seriously became absorbed by the idea of becoming a mother, taking care
of and playing with a baby.
In a dual relationship, the EIE doesn’t need to go through any special
searches for an acceptable image. All the necessary images already lie
within the framework of the system of values of his TIM and his dual
dyad. In the absence of any objective obstacles and contraindications,
relations develop very easily. This ease pleasantly surprises them both
pleases, delights, motivates, and encourages them. A sensation of
flight and intoxicating joy arises  a feeling of dual euphoria  an
excess of joy, a surplus of happiness, an excess of energy and
generosity, a sense of extraordinary emotional recovery, the high tides
of strength and inspiration.
5. LSI-EIE: the social romance.
¶
In the rational dyad LSI-EIE everything is subject to the charter and
“charter relations”. The responsibility of being the guardian and the
keeper of the charter of family lies on the shoulders of husband-LSI. He
is responsible for the safety of this cohesive and centralized system of
relations. He has to protect his wife from the humiliations and abuses
by the “elder” “higher ranking” relatives and family members. Otherwise,
the wife EIE will believe him to be a “traitor”  and for a good reason.
The times of noble duels with swords and guns are long gone, while from
the abuses (by parents) in this dyad no one is immune to this day, with
no means of protecting the honor of the family. Realizing himself a
“traitor”, grasping his own incompetence and inadequacy in the role of
the “protector of family’s honor”, the LSI sometimes eaves his dual wife
himself. Just because he cannot constantly feel himself “guilty” and be
between “a rock and a hard place”. In the second quadra, the “guilty”
are themselves to blame for their misfortune. And “declaring” types
(unlike “asking”) tend to take on their own account their own fault and
someone else’s faults as well (or pass their own fault and the faults of
others to someone else) because fault for them is an indivisible concept
(as well as many other concepts).
The LSI, seeing how his family is falling apart by his own his fault,
how his relations with his wife, family and friends, become ruined,
falls into shock, into stupor, and very painfully goes through
everything that’s happening, while being unable to help himself or
others: the system has collapsed - it’s a disaster! - the end of the
world!
For both of them, being so dependent on the system of relations, the
situation turns out to be irreparable: if there is no system, there are
no relations, and no family - there is nothing!
An example:
A young man of TIM LSI, Maxim, while working at a factory has met and
dualized with a charming nurse from the factory clinic. Before they got
married, she lived in communal housing, and after the wedding, with her
husband, moved to the house of his parents (to their three-bedroom
flat). His parents (father LSI and mother ESE) have allocated to them
the largest room (15 meters). Another room was occupied by her husband’s
sister (SEE). Thus the five of them lived together in the same flat -
three hostesses on a 5-meter kitchen. Altercation took place almost
every day. And all to the fault of their young daughter-in-law of type
EIE, who was constantly harassed with demands and claims by the other
two housewives - both extroverts and sensors - who immediately felt
themselves too cramped in this apartment. When the young family had a
child, the daughter-in-law was moved to the position of “nanny - maid”,
ordered around, humiliated, forced out of the scope of her maternal
duties and interests. It was always: “Go there … bring this … bring
that … Wash him! … Feed him! … And hurry up! What are you messing
around with?”
Naturally, she could not put up with this situation. By means of her TIM
by her look, voice, intonation, correctly placed accents, she was able
to put her mother-in-law and sister-in-law in their place. But,
nevertheless, she was upset at her husband’s position, who was much too
compliant towards his parents and never argued with them (observed
subordination), never stood up for his wife  he believed that she
herself understands everything, and will be able to find a way stand up
for herself and to adapt to new conditions. She understood everything,
adapted, found the right tone in her relationship with her new
relatives, but her husband seemed to her too conformist and unprincipled
one of those people who try to please everyone, “for yours and for
ours”. She found it difficult to continue to RESPECT him under such
circumstances. While mutual respect in the dyad LSI-EIE  is most
important! If there is no respect, there will be no subordination, no
system, no hierarchy  no form for the continuity of family traditions.
And one day, during some family celebration (as she re-told later)
“something has gotten into her …”, and there wasn’t a trace left from
that same restraint and deference before her husband … All of this
happened because he, feeling himself guilty, started crouching and
fawning before her (the EIE does not tolerate fawning in any shape or
form - she hates all kinds of falsehood and lies). Then she humiliated
him by word in front of the guests, telling him: “Go away, you shrimp of
a man! .. Don’t tangle between my feet! ..” By age he was younger than
her by six months, and this phrase has really hurt him. And he left …
He began to fade out of the house. At first, he didn’t leave too far. He
took a fishing pole and went to fish in a nearby park. But he caught no
fish, but sat there looking at one point on the water and thinking his
heavy thoughts. Their common friends would see him in the park, and call
her with a warning: “You husband is again sitting in the park, fishing
and fishing. You should come, take him back home with you … otherwise
it will be a pity - someone will take and lead away such a man! ..”
But she didn’t come to pick him up. She knew that she has violated the
“family charter”: offended and hurt him in front of others, and now the
rest did not depend on her. Asking him for forgiveness - meant
acknowledging that she is guilt, declaring herself to be “guilty one”.
In second quadra this is dangerous: all of the sins get written off onto
the “guilty” party - and this person will have to answer for his own
mistakes and the mistakes of others. Once you have admitted yourself
guilty, then you will always be to blame. (Just because one was already
to blame last time - so it doesn’t matter, one more fault, or one less.
Being “guilty” - means becoming the “scapegoat” within the system (and
re-building such a system becomes not worth it). He also didn’t want to
be responsible for the actions of his family members: “children don’t
answer for their parents” - why should he be the exception? Thus he sat
in the park and looked at the water, until another young, pretty, and
lonely woman picked him up. She was not his dual, but he was no longer
searching for an “ideal companion”. He left his wife and child behind in
his parents’ home, and went to live with his new companion. His EIE wife
did nothing to get him back into the family. Because, again, it was
“against the rules” and “against the principles.” If he has already
betrayed the interests of the family, left and became a “traitor”, why
try to bring the “traitor” back into the family?
They didn’t divorce for a long time, and made appearances in common
social circles before the divorce, and afterward. He had his own
personal life, and she had her own. Neither of them started a second
family. One marriage was enough for both, although each of them felt
unsettled. Over time, she managed to privatize her room and exchange it
for a small flat of her own. She now sees her ex-husband very rarely: he
takes an active part in the education of his son and nothing more. She
doesn’t ask him for anything, because once again it’s “against the
rules”  if they separated, she has to solve her problems herself. For
all the misfortunes she blames only herself, but does not admit it
before him …
6. The danger of relaxation in dyad EIE-LSI: mental aristocratism and vital democratism.
¶
The LSI is an introvert (hierarchical, structural logical type), and
towards the hierarchical system of relations and evolutionary continuity
of system connections he is extremely respectful. The EIE is deeply
persuaded (suggested) by the aspect of “logic of relations”, and even
though he treats the surrounding system relations more democratically
(and only for himself, the eternal hierarchical leader, makes an
exception), towards the current existing hierarchical traditions he’s
very respectful, since he doesn’t conceive of relations outside of the
hierarchy. (At the vital level, one can play with democracy (-Ti), one
may relax and act familiar, as “one of the guys/gals”). But on the
mental level, in a formal setting of system relations, when there is a
need to keep eyes open and expect betrayal form any side  you need to
clearly understand your place in the system and for whom others take
you. Although, it’s not a sin to appear drunk: it’s dangerous to always
look sober and alert  in second quadra this arouses suspicion and
distrust, the desire to frustrate, to displace and drive away, to take
revenge (“When I drink, I don’t like those who keep sober.”)
The second quadra values holidays and pleasures, and appreciates the
moments of enjoyment and relaxation (which happen rarely, as they don’t
quite fit into the program of the dyad and of the quadra). Trying to not
lose control of the situation and of oneself, very little relaxation
takes place here. But when they have fun  they do it from all their
heart. Therefore, democracy (and the desire to be with all on familiar
terms, to love all and interact with everyone on equal terms, be moved
to tears, and kiss each and every person in merry relaxation) manifests
here (mostly) only on the vital level (unless it’s a part of some dining
ritual).
The reflection of these properties we find in the TIM models: the mental
block of representatives of “aristocratic” quadra contains
“aristocratic” information aspects (of the aspects that dominate in the
“aristocratic” quadras: rational aspects with a “plus” sign and
irrational aspects with a “minus” sign), and vital block contains the
“democratic” aspects (aspects that are dominant in the “democratic”
quadras: irrational aspects with a “plus” sign and rational aspects with
a “minus” sign). Hence the vital block “democracy” on logic of relations
in the EIE  to play and fool around, to act weirdly, to get mischievous
(while remaining “himself”) the EIE can only do in easy and relaxed
atmosphere, in a state of mild, intoxicating fun, particularly in a
state of relaxation on the vital level. And on the mental level the EIE
immediately becomes serious, requires adherence to etiquette, decorum,
distance, and subordination  immediately ceases to recognize
yesterday’s “friends for one fun evening”. (A parody on this quality of
“aristocratic” types in general (and EIE in particular) was reflected in
one of great Charlie Chaplin’s films “City Lights”  in the episode,
when the Tramp befriends an alcoholic millionaire. During those periods
when the millionaire was drunk, he sincerely rejoiced in the company of
the Tramp, was friendly towards him, bestowed expensive gifts on him.
The millionaire only had to sober up (in the morning), when he
immediately ceased to recognize his “friend” the Tramp: he took away his
food, expensive clothes, gifts and expelled from the house to the
street. At night, he got drunk and again went looking for the Tramp all
over the city, as only for him the millionaire felt boundless
confidence.) The concept of vital level “democracy” of “aristocrats”
fits quite accurately into this movie plot. Vital level “aristocracy” of
“democrats” is the reverse phenomenon: once they relax and lose control
over their behavior, they immediately become presumptuous, arrogant
snobs, of the cheapest manners: can easily become nasty, rude,
insulting, and offending. Towards those senior in position, age, rank
they refer haughtily and talk down to them.) In mixed groups where both
“aristocrats” and “democrats” interact over formal and informal
settings, they try to straighten out and revise each other, and put up
reciprocal claims for each awkward word or step, eventually coming to a
common conclusion: that they need to drink less under any circumstances
and control their behavior.
The same goes for the dual dyads. Fearing potential trouble, partners
remind each other of the need to keep their behavior in check.
Once dualized, the partners of “aristocratic” dyads overall (in most
cases) interact on the vital level, so each one has to recognize his
partner as an equal. More precisely, - worthy of himself. And so each
must recognize the superiority and primacy of the other in something.
But only in something singular: that is, this superiority should be
limited to what constitutes the special “sphere of success” of the
partner - the main thing is that there has to be something for which he
or she can be respected. And this depends on the level of his
self-esteem, the ability to present himself, and his level of
self-respect. In this dyad, mutual respect is ensured by a fairly high
level of development of rational aspects that in quadras of
“aristocrats” always have a “+” sign (+Ti, +Te, +Fi, +Fe) and depend on
one’s ability to see logical and ethical benefits, on the sense of
self-worth and dignity, on pride for one’s family and partner, for team
or alliance  in “aristocratic” quadra this is extremely important.
If one of the partners ceases to respect himself, begins to degrade, or
lower himself, for the partner this is the worst symptom  a foreboding
sense of disaster arises  the feeling that the family is crumbling, the
whole world is coming apart, and everything is falling into the abyss.
This is felt especially acutely by female EIEs when their LSI husbands
permit too much to themselves. The LSI as a static, as the logical and
sensing backbone of this dyad, as the carrier of its basic elements, has
no right to “relax” over the top even in the company of “friends”.
Which, nevertheless, happens quite often, when Maxim feels himself sort
of like a “small king” to whom “everything is allowed”, including in
respect to his EIE partner, and behaves on the principle of “What is
allowed to Jupiter is not permitted to a bull” (“I can do whatever I
want - I’m head of the family - while you are no one, a nobody. And you
have no right to teach me.”)
Such complications can be caused by poorly developed relationships of
subordination, and some kind of deep disappointments of EIE partner, her
perpetual dissatisfaction, irritation, nagging, reproaches. Indeed, here
is an example:
Her - Hamlet. Him - Maxim. Both in early forties. Talking with a family
counselor.
“Her: We got married at an early age. We met when he returned from the
army. We would see each other, take walks around the city. It was so
good together! It was fantastic! Then we got married and move in to live
with my mom. The first years, I think, everything was well … Children
were born. More worries were added … We had less leisure time … I
don’t know may be it wasn’t as interesting for him with me, but he
started leaving and spending time in a company of friends more and more
often. He returned late and tipsy. And this started happening almost
every night. On weekdays and on weekends. He ceased to pay attention to
the family … I didn’t like this. And besides, I was afraid that he
will turn into an alcoholic …
He: How am I going to turn into an alcoholic? I works as a driver, I’m
always behind the wheel. All that we drank was a little - a little! ..
(shows)
She: This is exactly what I was afraid of! We began to quarrel! I asked
him to stay with me at home. But he didn’t listen, and left again. And I
couldn’t influence him. I don’t know why he left! We had a nice family!
No one bothered us, I was a good housewife …
He said: Your mother has always bothered us! .. She would try to direct
you! … And you were never a good housekeeper. And never learned to
cook.
She: I have learned how to cook and cook well! And my mother didn’t
interfere with us … The reason is in him. He went out every night, and
I couldn’t do anything about it. Then I decided to take an extreme
measure, even if for me it was very difficult. I decided to part with
him. I took the children and moved out. But soon he started visting us,
first he came to see the children, then me. He said that he cannot live
without me. I also realized that I cannot be without him, but didn’t
dare to move in back together. Then we agreed to meet as lovers. He
would visit me as if we were seeing each other anew again. He was so
clean, well-groomed, and handsome! Brought me flowers and gifts. It was
very romantic! It was the best time! But the role of the wife - mistress
I didn’t like: the children are growing up, they will start to ask
questions … And before other people it’s awkward - is he my husband or
is he not my husband? And I thought, if everything is so well between us
again, why not live together again? Maybe now things will change for the
better? We agreed and moved in back together, but the same has started.
He again began to leave in the evening, and to drink … Everything
repeated! And I don’t know what to do! .. Maybe it was better to not get
back together? “..
The female EIE often allows for disciplinary over-pressing, especially
when she is alarmed by a dangerous trend. (Drinking is not a joking
matter. Where there’s alcohol - there are other women, there is
betrayal, and destruction of the family, of the fates and lives for
generations to come.) And now a new “area of ??concern and mistrust”
develops. And gives rise to incessant criticism, accusations, judging
remarks, condemning discussions of the behavior of her husband. And
condemnation of actions in “subjectivist” quadras  is process
humiliating and painful  for the person being discussed. And even more
so  for the head of the family, who, of course, wants to be above
criticism and tries to be independent of the opinions of his wife and
his mother-in-law. But he cannot discount the opinion of his friends,
and insists on being the authority in the family, periodically trying to
show his wife and her mother “who’s in charge here.”
There problem is due to confusion in hierarchical relations: careless
slackers and negligent wimps in this dyad are not obeyed. The person who
becomes hostage to their addictions  becomes dependent on his or her
circumstances, in which relaxation leads to vital level “democracy” and
becomes the norm (today he is drinking with who knows whom, tomorrow he
is fraternizing with the first stranger he meets and bringing him home).
Thus, he’s no longer considered to be the hierarch and the leader  he
“falls out” of the mental level of “aristocratic” relations: he has no
authority, there is nothing for which he can be respected.
And, of course, of great importance is the notion of “family honor”,
social mission and top objectives of the family, which are the
cornerstones in this dyad, of which periodically there need be
reminders. If there is no idea, there will be no understanding of the
over-goal, which both duals are realizing in their union, for which they
join as a family  and the system will inevitably start to disintegrate
and “decay”. Moreover, the weak link here will be exactly the conformist
and easily amenable to another’s influence Maxim. (That very same
“Jupiter”: this ambitious and domineering “fool”, who is too uncritical
and undemanding toward himself.) His mental “supportive core”, his
position of “maximum force - is a minimum of weakness” in these
circumstances loses its relevance: he will simply forget about it (why
be strong, organized, and disciplined when it’s so great to be loosened
and weak, and make one concession after another to oneself and one’s
whims?).
Not receiving from the EIE the desired spiritual and energy output, not
getting enough “suggestion” on the aspect of ethics of emotions, Fe (and
not the ethics of relations, Fi), the LSI first starts to degrade
himself, then pulls his family down to the bottom. (A typical variation
of this development: first husband LSI starts to drink himself, then
makes his wife EIE drink with him, turning her into a complete alcoholic
and disregarding her weak sensing functions  and then, when she is
sick, weakened, and degraded, he kicks her out of the house …). So,
the fears of EIE women here are not in vain: there is sufficient ground
for worries: in the system of relations of LSI-EIE the prime candidate
for elimination is the one who is replaceable (or easier to replace).
From this come the pervasive fears of betrayal, distrust towards the
partner, as well as tests for endurance: “I beat him, but he doesn’t
leave - he tolerates me for who I am. This means that he is a
trustworthy partner who can be relied upon.” From this, too, comes trust
by blood and kinship ties. But again, only towards those people who are
not marred by potential for revenge. Brother and sister kinship, the LSI
and the EIE, for example, may not trust. Struggling from an early age
for a place in the system, often enough both manage to spoil relations
with their siblings, by trying to force them out of the sphere of
parental care, to push and throw them out of the family nest, such that
they may be wary of their revenge for life.
7. Extreme  an effective measure and good method for preventing relaxation.
¶
Rigor, discipline, strict division of responsibilities only strengthen
relations in this dyad. And things go especially well when it is the LSI
who is responsible for disciplinary action. Take, for example, this not
very young, but happy dual pair: he - LSI, her - EIE, living together
for more than 10 years. This couple is unusual by the fact that his EIE
partner (a journalist by profession) from birth doesn’t have both legs.
And yet - she is an exceptionally active and hardworking woman. Her
energy is inexhaustible. And she finds application for herself both at
home and at work. She doesn’t try to escape her duties, doesn’t make
excuses, indulgences, and exceptions for herself. They are raising two
children. (Whom she herself managed to give birth to, even though it was
extremely difficult and not advised by the doctors.) Nevertheless she
did it, and is happy that she succeeded. (In the dyad EIE-LSI there is
always a place for a feat). She doesn’t feel any physical inferiority,
but carries on cheerfully and confidently (even a little boldly and
daringly, which is typical for extroverted “obstinate” “aristocratic”
types). Her attitude is optimistic. She firmly believes that her family
happiness she owes entirely to her LSI husband: “He wouldn’t let me go
limp, but kept me in his “iron fist” and rightly so …”
8. Activation on the aspect of “intuition of time” (Ni).
¶
For his end, the EIE also disciplines the LSI: influencing him over
EIE’s “realizing” aspect - “intuition of time”, cultivating in the LSI
the qualities of stamina, patience, endurance, readiness for
self-sacrifice and for overcoming of the difficulties,
The aspect of “intuition of time” for the LSI is in the evaluating,
activation function (+Ni). Within the interpretation of “declaring” TIM
model (a model with close spatial-temporal connections), the aspect of
“intuition of time” comes to the first place, becomes a priority, gains
particular relevance and importance. Keeping the LSI with the power of
his emotional impact, “on the crest of the wave of emotions”, creating
an illusion of easy accessibility and feasibility of difficult and
fantastic goals, the EIE manages to inspire the LSI and direct him to
realization of remote and hard to reach the goals, that, with EIE’s
delivery, with his deep emotional conviction and thorough belief in the
correctness of his words, with his ability to persuade, inspire and
mobilize, seem quite realistic and achievable. From this comes the
blinding effect, brought about by EIE’s mystifications and forecasts
that are so persuasive for the LSI: whichever way you look at the task,
it seems feasible and easily accessible, and the goals - close and
appealing. While the requirements are very few: simply go along the
exactly specified (political, ideological) path, without changing
direction, calmly and methodically, confidently, being sure of success,
with willpower and determination of the spirit overcome all difficulties
and obstacles that inevitably will be along this road; don’t be afraid
of difficulties and be ready for new tests and obstacles  that’s all it
takes!
Becoming inspired by ideas and forecasts of the EIE, the LSI can all his
life look into the future “with the sense of great satisfaction”,
regardless of the results that he will be presented with. His readiness
to be patient is totally unlimited (in which few TIMs can compare).
Maxim endures and hopes even when all his ideals seem to be breaking
down. The main thing  is that the “idea” is alive  without it life is
truly meaningless.
And in this, he is fully supported by the EIE, who sets a personal
example of even greater conviction. Otherwise, it cannot be: a
disappointed LSI at once becomes lethargic, apathetic, and inert  try
and make him get up then! (The aspect of “intuition of time” is located
in his “inert”, “child” block of SUPERID). Thus the LSI is very slow to
get involved and inspired by anything, and takes a long time to get
hyped up  unless he is captivated and “taken along” by some vivid and
emotional idea  then, later, at the end of the “mission”, he likewise
takes a long time to “cool down” from the enamoring idea, even if the
idea has already discredited itself.
And since it is necessary to nourish any idea, the forecasts made by the
EIE need a speedy confirmation, the goals and objectives - immediate
practical embodiment, in a bid to achieve at least something, some
positive result, as soon as possible. Even if experience was formulated
and provided incorrectly, it can all can be attributed to inadequacies
and mistakes in technical implementation. The main thing is that the
technical conditions (technical mode of operation of a new social model,
or technical mode of a new social experiment) does not go beyond the
norms. (For the EIE the aspect of the “logic of actions” Te is a
normative function - thus he keeps track of technical standards. (And
even when he places a bet on excessive endurance or excessive power in
his trials and experiments (including psychological ones)).
In case of unfulfilled predictions, the EIE has someone who is “guilty”,
and if not, then he’ll be found. However, this applies to more global,
political issues, and not to private and family life where it’s quite
possible to rely on Hamlet. The EIE him/herself has a very responsible
attitude towards duties, and tries not to let down and disappoint his
partner.
The LSI and the EIE - if they’re already a dualized, tested by time
family - always seem welded at the seams. Supportive spouses and loving
parents. And the harmonious education of children is given attention
here. But unlike the first quadra, here the education is done not so
much for a well-rounded, all-sided development of the child, but for his
or her successful social and professional fulfillment in the future.
These parents want to be sure in advance that their children will claim
a worthy place in the society. This couple often tries to determine the
professional orientation of their children from an early age. (The LSI
especially pays attention to this. His problematic “intuition of
possibilities” doesn’t let him rest from the first minute his child is
born  he needs to definitely know whom his son or daughter will
become.) And in general, for the dyad of LSI and EIE (both “rational”,
“evolutionary”, “obstinate”, “decisive” “subjectivists”, (systematists)
“aristocrats”) commitment to excellence, self-improvement, overcoming of
difficulties, and on-going self-work, are all characteristic.
9. EIE-LSI: a rational approach.
¶
In dyad LSI-EIE, as in any rational dyad, the system of attitudes,
beliefs, values, and viewpoints is coordinated first.
Here, same as in the rational dyad of the first quadra, there are
principles of “logical and ethical justice”. But unlike the dyad
LII-ESE, these principles have a hierarchical quality: the higher the
social status, the greater the obligations are imposed on the person and
the stricter the ethical standards to which he or she is held. Although,
of course, at the highest hierarchies there may be certain privileges
(“in the interests of the system”).
Outside of status, relations in this dyad do not exist, since here the
role of ethical canons is taken by the aspect of “logic of relations” -
“the logic of systems and structures”. Therefore, all ethics is
constructed in the framework of relations within a structure.
(Even during a brief telephone conversation, a representative of this
dyad (especially EIE) will certainly indicate his status or social
standing: “You’re talking your husband’s colleague” or “the classmate of
your son”  this is the first thing that will be said. If a person
doesn’t provide such information, the first thing that he’ll be asked is
who he is, his relations to others, and only then he will be spoken
with. Orientation towards formal markers and traits  is an inherent
property of this dyad, as well as all of the dyads of the first and
second quadra (“subjectivists”). In this dyad - the dyad of “rational”,
“aristocratic” “subjectivists” - while introducing yourself, it is also
accepted (and considered mandatory) without unnecessary delays (to not
take away extra time) not only to declare your belonging to some common
social system, but also to indicate your status and your place within
it.
Both the LSI and the EIE feel themselves as an integral part of the
surrounding natural environment and analyze relations within it
according to a hierarchical system of coordinates. They are always
interested in the structural relations within their environment, and the
position that they occupy in the structure. Therefore, ethical
evaluations of the behavior of each person here are made within the
framework of the structure, further considering such angels of system
behavior in ethical relations as: respect and contempt, honor and shame,
honor and dishonor. (If a person has moved up the steps of the hierarchy
- respect and congratulations to him; if he lowered himself - shame. In
such a society there must always be “boards of excellence” and “windows
of shame” …)
Ethical attitudes here are also considered in logical interpretation, as
intra-structural. From the point of view of a concise and clear set of
rules of “subjectivists”:
1). Outside of striving upwards there are no relations in the
hierarchical system.
2). Outside of the displacement from the system there are no
interactions with the environment, which itself, to the best of its
possibilities and scope, is a closed, isolated system, with limited
number of positions or places. (Especially of the environmentally
advantageous positions, the most convenient and favorable eco-niches,
the most profitable and privileged spots, that provide for the most
comfortable conditions for the existence, which, because of the limited
territorial, resource, and economic opportunities  may not be equally
accessible to all). This principle is simple and understandable for
everyone, and clearly perceptible on a purely physical, material level.
(In accordance with the natural laws of the interaction of the material
object to the environment (by known to all Archimedes’ principle): the
material object enters into an environment and displaces a portion of
the medium, pushing it away, from the central positions to the
peripheral, and from there  outside of the boundaries of the system.)
“Subjectivists” (and even more so - “aristocrats”) cannot conceive of
their interactions with their environment in any different light. Since
any other types of interactions, besides the system and hierarchical
ones, don’t fit into their views and ideas, dictated by the information
models and parameters of their TIMs.
Thus,
1). Anyone who stops fighting for a place in the system, sooner or later
ends up being pushed out of it. (The displacement occurs consciously, if
the person is surrounded by “subjectivists”, and unconsciously (due to
circumstances) if the person is surrounded by “objectivists”, who “do
not believe” in intentional displacement and don’t come into active
awareness of the meaning and effect of their actions, even when they
directly displace someone out of their ranks  “objectivists” will find
various explanation for such actions (“in the interests of the project”
or “for healthier psychological climate”), but they won’t directly
recognize it as a displacement from the system or team, since with them
this happens unconsciously (due to the traits of “objectivism”: the
dominant aspects of “ethics of relations” Fi and “business logic” Te).
2). Anyone who stops fighting for the dominant position in the system of
relations and allows himself to either remain in the same position, or
to get moved to the lower strata of the hierarchy, ends up in the most
unfavorable conditions of existence, in the most humiliating and
dangerous to himself (and his close ones) positions. “He who doesn’t
seek the climb to the top, falls down to the bottom,” analogously to “he
who doesn’t grow and doesn’t work on himself - degrades”. Standing in
one spot, absence of career development and progress (lack of the desire
“to grow”, “to become promoted, “to climb the occupational ladder”) is
the first sign of degradation. In Beta Quadra  the quadra of system
“aristocrats”  absence of the desire to make a career is
incomprehensible and unnatural. (“If you don’t want to build a career,
why have you even joined the department? You should have gone and become
a free artist, or chosen another profession that is independent of
system constraints … If you aren’t interested in climbing up the
professional ladder, give place to those who are interested!”)
3). He who puts up with disrespect, who has stopped fighting for
respectful attitude towards him or herself, out of observance of the
interests of the system, is also forced out. (If a person doesn’t care
how he or she is treated, let those who are not indifferent receive and
enjoy the greatest respect. Since (in their view) it’s not possible to
bow down before everyone and please everyone to the same extent. (What
kind of hierarchy would this be if everyone indiscriminately bowed down
before each other? - In such circumstances, the system priorities won’t
be clearly marked and identified. The system of hierarchical coordinates
and preferences won’t appear to be indistinct - it will be vague and
blurred: it won’t be clear who should be honored, and who -
disrespected.)
Accordingly, in the hierarchical system of the second quadra, the one
who demands the most respect  enjoys the highest honors. (According to
the principle “what he has asked for - he has received; since he asked
for nothing - he received nothing”.) Those who are undemanding don’t
survive in this system. Yet, no one forbids anyone else to ask for
respect for themselves. Though, of course, a “list of prices” (“table of
ranks”) exists (as a system of coordinates): respect for seniority, for
years of service and work experience, according to the merits and
achievements, as belonging to the elite ranks, by the presence of
prestigious formal markers (in one’s resume), to varying degrees are
used and enjoyed by all members of the community. But even the person,
who as of yet has no merits and ranks, but is quite clearly aware of his
affiliation to the system, and in spite of everything desperately
struggles and fights for a priority position, even if he angers others
with his audacity, his very understanding of the benefits of system
relations (his desire to exist in the given system, to gain a foothold
in it, as in a hierarchical, elite community) is in itself worthy of
respect. Others say about him: “He will go far,” - and rarely they are
mistaken.
The LSI and the EIE orient themselves at ambitious goals and objectives,
regardless of whether someone likes their far-reaching plans, or not.
Here start the biggest concerns for this dyad. Both the LSI and the EIE
always become very worried if, for no obvious and understandable
reasons, they are shown disrespect. Moreover, they view and approach
this issue not from an ethical standpoint, but from a logical one (in
accordance with the system of values ??and ideas of their dyad).
For example, to the LSI this may even be the grounds for a divorce. (One
of the representatives of this TIM complained about her husband: “He
showed me a lack of respect - he exchanged his apartment as his mother
wanted to, and not how I insisted. This means he doesn’t respect me. And
I won’t have this!” And all attempts to convince her that there were no
traces of “disrespect” here have led to nothing … because in a
logical, hierarchical, systemic scheme of things disrespect was indeed
present: she got an impression (with all grounds to it) that she was
lowered in her status. Further relations with her husband under such
conditions did not seem promising to her. (And if his mother next
desires to “sign her out” out of the flat and leave her without
registration and without a roof over her head? Such cases are not
uncommon …)
10. Search for a place in the system.
¶
Every “aristocrat” (representative of “aristocratic” quadra) must be
sure that his status is higher than the status of his actual or
potential competitor in the system of relations (logical, systematic -
for Beta quadra; and ethical, business - for members of Delta quadra).
The LSI doesn’t need to find out anything special to adequately orient
within the system  he only needs to check the facts (although they
aren’t always available). Therefore, for the LSI it is extremely
important to receive only truthful information about everything (and
preferably from primary sources), for which he arranges a direct
examination and questioning session (often tries to “knock out” the
necessary information).
Hamlet, too, is not averse to questioning and examinations. Questions
(often inappropriate ones) he formulates very clearly and poses them
mercilessly in a hard and firm tone (with metallic intonations in his
voice). During this, he relentlessly stares the person in the eyes.
Sometimes, it is enough for Hamlet to turn over some intrigue to
understand who or what, and to which extent, poses a threat to his
status and authority. (A sample case: A young journalist came to a book
fair. In the lobby hall, she by chance met a friend - an old publisher -
and entered the exhibition hall holding him by his arm. When she took a
couple steps away from him, she was approached by two unknown ladies who
asked her to go into an office. In the room, at the desk, sat a
stern-looking woman (of TIM EIE), who right there and then, in the
presence of a few other women who stood behind her, started to
rigorously question the young journalist. The questions were: “What ties
you to this person? What is your relationship with him? Did you know
that he’s married and has children? Then why have you entered the hall
holding his arm? Are you telling me the truth?” All the questions were
asked in the best tradition of Hamlet - with a harsh tone, hammering
style, with metallic notes in her voice, under a watchful and stern
look. The young girl was so confused that she has even forgotten to ask
by what right she was being questioned. When she was finally released,
she was so happy that she didn’t even try to find out who questioned
her, by what authority, and for what purpose (and who were all these
people present in the room?).
Hamlet feels an enemy or potential competitor a mile away. And setting
up a questioning session for the suspect for him is a piece of cake (a
pleasant pastime to see before him someone’s frightened eyes). The main
thing is for the EIE to be certain in his own right to “catch” and
question whoever he wants, without a trace of embarrassment, not having
any sanctions or powers for it, referring only to his own opinion that
“this is necessary.” And if “this is necessary” it means that he “has
the right”.
The LSI respects this quality in the EIE. He himself is not averse to
usurp another’s authority “for the good of the cause”: he believes that
a person has the right to use the opportunities given to him that he has
conferred to himself with the tacit consent of the others. (In the dyad
of “obstinate” “decisive” types LSI and EIE, audacity, boldness is not
considered to be a flaw or a shortcoming (if it is accepted, tolerated,
forgiven, or “not noticed” by others). The main thing  is to not be
caught and found guilty of abuse of power. And if not a single person
among those present objects, why not dare and try?  bravery takes on
cities. In Beta Quadra nobody provides benign conditions of existence
for anyone else: each person has to press on and achieve for him or
herself. Passivity, compliance, lack of ambition annoys “obstinate” Beta
types: the one who’s too afraid for a daring act, who stands in one spot
in hesitation, who lets the chance to exercise informal leadership slip
by  remains a “slave”, a subservient figure* whom everyone displaces
and pushes away.)
[note: See Stratiyevskaya’s Beta Quadra Complex of Subservience.]
Next to his dual the LSI feels himself protected. He admires EIE’s
insightfulness, strictness and rigor, and his directness: the EIE can
take anyone by surprise, interview and question everyone in full - a
mouse won’t get by him, a bird won’t fly by unnoticed - he sees and
anticipates everyone from afar.
11. Testing the strength of relations. (Not without an intrigue.)
¶
With greater confidence in his rights, the EIE obtains the information
he needs with the help of an intrigue. And, of course, he most
successfully intrigues when he’s playing “on a home field”, according to
his own rules, among his own people, anticipating and predicting their
every move.
And example:
A young man of type EIE and a girl of type LSI were seeing each other.
Everything was wonderful, as long as their relationship was kept in
secret: they dualized quietly and happily. But as soon as it became
known to others, they started having problems with the girl’s mother,
who was also from the second quadra, also of TIM EIE, and did not want
to concede her daughter “without a fight”. She decided to “test her
abilities” against her future son-in-law, and at the same time find out
whom her daughter loves more, who’s more important, whose word means
more to her. Thus the mother began to impose on her daughter her own
candidate for a grooms - a man who was unattractive to her daughter and
not loved by her (and even psychologically incompatible, of TIM ILE).
However, all of these details didn’t particularly worry the mother. The
main thing was to offer her LSI daughter an alternative and insist on
her own opinion. In essence, this wasn’t even an attempt to matchmake,
but a kind of a “test” for the young couple, for their endurance,
ingenuity, and ability to withstand hardships, and, alongside, a test
for the obedience of her daughter, and verification of the fighting
qualities of the potential son-in-law - a sort of a “tug-of-war” and at
the same time a “challenge to a fight”. At first the girl didn’t take
the new candidate for grooms seriously: it looked too much like a set-up
- he arrived, had lunch, ate dinner, conversed with her mother. They
didn’t go out anywhere together, but when her EIE suitor learned about
the second candidate he grew worried: he didn’t want to concede his LSI
girl to anyone else. Unfortunately, he couldn’t offer her much: he
didn’t have his own place to live but rented a room at a friend’s place,
his earnings were modest, it was unlikely that he could pay for her
studies at a university. Nevertheless, he decided to kidnap his girl (in
the best traditions of the romantic genre) and formalize his
relationship with her in another city: the world is small, and he didn’t
want to risk meeting her mother - direct disobedience to the will of the
parent was also out of the question. In this dyad, the will of the
parents is respected, but loyalty to the mutual agreements are honored
above all. They “broke down” at the airport before boarding the plane:
both were not at ease. The girl was afraid of how she’s going to come
back home and what will she tell her mother? She decided to call home
and put her mother “before the fact”: to announce that she is flying to
another city and marrying the man whom he loves. It was important for
her to obtain her mother’s consent and approval. Her mother, while
taking her call, with a metallic voice and harsh tone demanded that the
daughter returns home immediately, unless she wants to lose her mother
forever. The girl’s legs became like paper, such that she couldn’t move
or even take a step anywhere. The guy asked her to make an effort and
get on the plane, but she could not. So the plane departed without them.
When she returned home, her mother, in every sense of the word, took her
captive: took away her money, passport, and even clothes. She locked her
daughter in the bedroom, tied her to a bed, and tortured her for several
weeks, trying to “knock” the rebellion out of her: tortured,
interrogated, starved (“tested her feelings for strength”). She went to
her daughter’s university and asked for sick leave on her behalf for an
indefinite period of time. Every day the EIE guy called, but his LSI
girl wouldn’t be allowed to pick up the phone, thus he didn’t know what
to think. He realized that there was nothing to hope for, and regretted
allowing her to return home. A month later, the girl’s mother told him
that her daughter has agreed to marry another man (although this wasn’t
true), and that he shouldn’t bother her any longer. The EIE guy was so
deeply shaken by this message that he didn’t want to hear any other
arguments. He was told by others that this is a typical, classic form of
intrigue, when lovers are being separated and completely isolated from
each other, and each is told slanderous things about the other, after
which, even if they meet again, they don’t trust or believe each other
(classic Walter Scott, “The Bride of Lammermoor”). So it happened here:
after hearing about the engagement the EIE guy stopped calling, and by
this he gave himself out. The mother realized that her ruse worked: the
boy believed the untruth and stopped calling. To celebrate, she told of
this to her daughter, hoping that now she will reject him: “See how
easily he betrayed you! And you didn’t believe that he is capable of it!
And now he doesn’t trust you. And he’s never going to believe you, so
you’re being stubborn for nothing! ” - she said triumphantly, and
promised to release her daughter out of the house if she agrees to marry
the other candidate. The girl hastily agreed to all her mother’s terms,
so that she would get an opportunity to meet with the EIE guy again and
speak to him.
She got this opportunity but she did not succeed in explaining herself.
He continued to regard her as a traitor: even if she said what she said
to gain back her freedom, he still considered that she betrayed him:
because now she’s obliged to fulfill her promises. If she doesn’t
fulfill what she has promised, this makes her a liar. And a person once
capable of deception, is capable of it again.
The girl began to tell him about how she was kept locked up, beaten,
tortured, starved … but he didn’t even hear her out. He declared that
he “does not forgive betrayal”, demonstratively turned and walked away
from her. He would later tell to his friends, “She told me how she was
beaten, tortured … I would have endured through everything and not
rejected her. And she is - a traitor! Now I don’t want to know her!”
And yet, he has rejected her - even though he wasn’t touched by a finger
but only outsmarted, but this was enough for him to turn away. Now that
the girl’s mother considered that she has won this match, she wasn’t
watching her daughter so closely, and he could have quietly and without
a twinge of conscience (after all that’s happened) take her away and
marry her. But he, nevertheless, didn’t try take her away the second
time (first attempt was enough for him), and instead chose to adhere to
his previous opinion: the one who was able to cheat once, will do so the
second, and the third times … (likely, this was a way for him to leave
this situation with a moral advantage: it is possible that he has
decided that he cannot provide for his girl the quality of life to which
she was accustomed. It was more convenient for him to formally consider
her a “traitor”: after she has already “broken down” once and went into
“captivity”, he believed that he couldn’t trust her any longer. He also
blamed her for the haste with which she returned home: “She didn’t
listen to me, but ran back to comfort her mom, even though I warned her
and tried to dissuade her!” … He also realized that now, even if they
do get married, his mother-in-law will always stand between them. And
always try to impede him. And eventually they will be successfully
separated … For some time he kept thinking, doubting, sifting through
different options, but then he broke it all off.
12. Difficulty bring in a minority.
¶
For the EIE it is difficult to be left in a minority, alone (even in
“proud isolation”) - this is always a tragedy for him or her. Loss of
loved ones, loss of friends, transfers “to another camp”, to another
(perhaps rival) system of relations, the EIE always takes to extremely
painfully: views such people as “traitors,” “turncoats,” “weaklings”,
who didn’t survive the trials and tribulations to which he has subjected
them, and instead chose to “change sides”. He blames himself in the
least, believing that he had all the grounds and the rights to inspect,
to test, to intrigue, to pry and interrogate, to identifying and make
evident any hidden but very important information (to not destroy a
system of some very important for him relations, that have already been
established and that the EIE holds dear).
To an insecure and unsettled duality (relations of questionable loyalty
and strength) the EIE, like any rational type, prefers the certainty of
loneliness, as a relation with a clear-cut and controlled by him system
of coordinates, in which he sets goals for himself and accomplishes them
himself, where he checks in with no one else and is not accountable
before anyone else. Loneliness  as a guarantee of a full, unrestricted
freedom of successful self-realization, successful intellectual and
spiritual creativity, is preferable for the EIE. Especially if his
relationship with a dual partner is laced with doubts, disbeliefs,
insincerity, absence of confidence in the future and in the strength and
reliability of the relationship.
For EIE it is very difficult to forgive infidelity, “treason”, and
everything else that comes with this. Sometimes, there is no actual
betrayal, but some talk and premonitions of it, and this is already
enough  Hamlet makes a sentence and then puts it into effect. There’s
nothing else to do here - it’s the honor of the family after all!
The following has happened to one very united dual pair. (He - Maxim,
her - Hamlet). They got married while they were students. Their family
life began in difficult circumstances - they lived in the same room with
her mother (SEI, Dumas), slept behind a screen that separated rooms -
things were hard for them. But they were a promising young family. Her
LSI husband was a well-respected expert with many prospects. The future
didn’t frighten them. And the present didn’t frighten them either,
though there were some problems. His mother-in-law (SEI, Dumas) brutally
“audited/supervised” her own daughter: she thought her daughter won’t
get married at all, assumed that he would remain an old maid and will
take care of her mother until the end of her days; found fault with her
daughter at every turn, blamed her all the time, set up scandals, and
complained about her over every little thing to her son-in-law (her
daughter’s husband). On the young man (who was “beneficiary” to his
mother-in-law) this had an oppressive effect. Then, a new complexity
came up: so it happened that their mutual friends and colleagues started
hunting after the promising young husband. She paid visits to them,
would try to catch him alone at the entrance to the shop. After some
time, the young EIE wife began receiving news of the supposed victories
of this persistent and brazen person (which were likely started and
seeded by this woman). Her husband tried to explain the situation to his
wife. He referred to the vile innuendos and speculations, to which he
had no relations. But his wife considered herself obliged to respond to
the “signal”. She gathered his things in a bundle and in a spectacular
gesture threw them out of the apartment: other people need to see how
the “traitors” get punished. (She had no doubts in that her husband has
betrayed her, believing that people won’t say such things from nothing:
“There is no smoke without fire.”) This is how her guilty husband was
left without guilt and without a roof over her head …
Here, he was picked up by the pushy and tenacious “separator” (SEE,
Caesar), who has set this “trap” for the gullible young couple, thought
it out very well, and organized it … Her living conditions were very
good, and after a while she started cohabiting with the “homeless
newlywed”, after which he divorced his lawful wife and married his new
“patron”. Although he has made attempts to return back to his first
wife, but all the answer was the same: “Get out of here and leave me,
traitor!” And the “traitor” would return to his new wife. He has lived
with the new family for over 30 years and fathered two children, and
then the second wife finally loosened her grip, while his first wife,
now wiser and worn out by loneliness, finally forgave him. He divorced
his second wife and married the first wife again. He lived with her for
several years in a happy marriage and one hot summer of 1999 suddenly
passed away from a heart attack.
(It was painful and hard to see how at the funeral his widow was asking
him for forgiveness for these failed 30 years of life, out of which she,
from her foolish pride and suspicions, has deprived both him and
herself.)
Dignity, honor, reputation of family  these are sacred notions in this
dyad, but, as with any married couple, the most important thing here
is mutual trust. In a dual dyad trust gets established quickly, but the
worse it is to lose.
13. Complicated relations to loneliness.
¶
The “program” aspect of ethics of emotions of Hamlet (+Fe)  that is
“evolutionary”, “extroverted”, “subjectivist” (system), “negativistic”
(pessimistic), “strategic”  is difficult to realize in loneliness. On
this aspect, it is difficult for EIE to set and realize his goals and
targets, existing outside of an idea, outside of ideology (with which he
could captivate someone), outside of sense of leadership and
consolidation of forces, outside of a social system, outside of the
dynamics of rapidly flowing events (outside of an ideological,
political, class, social, or other type
But as a “questim”, a person of TIM EIE gravitates towards separating
him/herself from the outside world and erecting barriers between
him/herself and others. In this respect, appreciates and values own
privacy as providing freedom to think, freedom to create, to be
self-sufficient, to rely for everything on himself, to construct
independent and unbiased opinions, from time to time to rest from an
exhausting and disorienting interactions, and focus on intellectual and
spiritual creative work. For this, again, the EIE needs a system of
existing knowledge, experience, continuity of tradition, good (academic)
school, highly professional teachers and counselors, a friendly creative
environment, confidence (or at least hope) in that his work will be in
demand, a sufficiently interesting idea, theme, or topic that would be
relevant and valued at all times.
EIE has a complex relationship with him/herself, and with own
creativity, and with the surrounding world, and his/her place in it.
Finding much needed and desired knowledge which could provide the EIE
with answers to everything, or at least to many of his/her questions, is
very difficult. The search for it is conducted by emotional and
intuitive means, by a sense of belonging to something important and
significant, which often leads to (rather chaotic) change of interests
and hobbies. Finding his/her calling, purpose, place and meaning in life
for Hamlet (EIE)  is the question of all questions. Not finding an
answer, leads the EIE to spiritually and intellectually degrade and
suffer both mentally and physically. To him it seems that he’s melting
like candle, extinguishing, losing his energy, incentives, and vitality:
if he can find nothing to captivate and interest himself, then how can
he inspire others? For what, by whom, and how is he loved? Not being
able to attract the attention of others with love, respect, with
something positive, the EIE finds another way: to draw attention by
anything unusual, that is easy and accessible, in demand and of interest
to everyone, something that attracts and fascinates: an extravagant
eccentricity, that often frightens and intimidates by its antisocial
cruelty, despotism, nihilism, rebelliousness, and its emotional and
volitional arbitrariness. It some sense this can be interpreted as a
distress signal of a person who is “lost in darkness” of his/her
perceptions of the surrounding reality.
The EIE sees positivism in a system of relations only in conjunction
with a strictly hierarchically defined system of relations, that is
based on force and organized through it strict internal and external
discipline. The positive, life-affirming system of social coordinates of
the LSI, his tough, strong-willed and optimistic socialization of the
surrounding reality delivers the EIE from his/her oppressed and
depressed state.
And if it doesn’t deliver and lift the EIE, this means that the LSI will
find himself in this dark captivity. In this dyad, partners
characteristically “knock” each other out of “dark hibernation”, from
lowered vitality and tone of life, from the “negatives”, from suppressed
“twilight” state of mind and soul  “like cures like”! The main thing is
not to allow force and energy to stagnate!
14. An idyll built on contrasts.
¶
Relations in this (rational, evolutionary) dyad are based on a rational
and conscious pursuit of excellence and perfection, and pursuit of the
maximum that is attainable.
The maximum power here is seen as a minimum of weakness,
The maximum order  as the minimum of chaos.
For the LSI the maximum emotional impact  means a minimum of
despondency, a minimum of monotony of emotions, a minimum of dullness
and grayness of impressions.
If the EIE begins to dress in gray, dull, black or dark colors, if he
doesn’t leave the role of a grumbling hypochondriac, if he mopes from
morning to evening and becomes irritated over minor things, this means
that he’s weary and in need of a variety of contrasting sensory
experiences that will supply him with the necessary brightness of
impressions, and charge him with energy and vivacity (something akin a
contrast shower, but more interesting). The LSI acts as the master and
the supplier of contrasting sensory experiences in this dyad, rather
accurately guessing the secret desires and needs of his dual and
sensitively orienting at his state and his feelings.
The search for sharp, contrasting sensations  is an indispensable
condition of dualization of Maxim and Hamlet, though this doesn’t always
manifest in obvious and distinct ways. (This very much depends on
respective ages, the level of culture, tastes and preferences of both.)
Either light or heavy extreme is permitted in small doses, provided that
both find it pleasant and it doesn’t go beyond the framework of what is
acceptable to both, and allows these duals to receive acute sensations.
There are certainly couples who, as they claim, do without it, but
somehow they don’t look very happy and energetic, and their unions are
not always so strong: lack of trust in sexual relations, incompleteness
in sexual sensations and in their “programs”, generates ethical and
personal distrust, which leads to a crisis and the breakdown of
relationships in this dyad.
Volitional and emotional stasis  is the worst that could happen here.
Once one of the poles of this dyad accumulates too much “dark force” or
“dark energy”, as one of the duals of this dyad turns from a dear
charming person into a tyrant, a monster. This they cannot afford and
permit to each other, thus they subconsciously regulate this process on
an intuitive and sensory level, not allowing their partner to become
overly consolidated in a leading position, and to accumulate too many
rights, privileges, and benefits, that would threaten the balance of
alternating leadership that exists in this dyad that allows to create an
illusion of equality. Partners in this dyad hold situational equality
tactically, situationally, alternating between formal and informal
rights to lead. From the outside it often looks like fights, quarrels,
humorous militant clashes in which each partner tries to keep the
advantages for him or herself. An alternating struggle for leadership
thus arises  a light, dynamic resistance (something alike a game of tug
of war), which does not allow either of them to lose vitality and “fade
away.” The society of the second quadra encourages willingness to fight,
determination, courage, stamina, endurance, desire and ability to stand
up for oneself. This gets expressed to the greatest extent in the
rational dyad LSI-EIE, where the constant practice and training of
fighting qualities is required to maintain normal vitality  the best
psychological regime … Light cockiness, “prickly” enthusiasm, some
emotional overexcitement  these are all part of a normal, natural
state.
Imagine the scene in a bank lobby. There is a long waiting line. In this
line, a charming young couple, a young man - EIE and a girl - LSI, is
waiting their turn and dualizing. Whether married or simply in love -
this doesn’t matter, what matters is how they “play” with each other: he
pushes her, she pushes him away, he pulls her by the hair, she nails him
in the face. All this “fuss” is already annoying the people around them,
people start looking at them, but to them it doesn’t matter - they are
having fun with all the heart, they “play” being taken in by themselves.
Then suddenly a girl remembers something, hangs her purse on his
shoulder, and runs outside to make a call. The guy immediately becomes
quiet and more gloomy. He waits in line, fills out all the forms, pays
for everything. Then goes back to the girl, puts the receipts before
her, gives a detailed account …
In each dyad there is its own, certain way of “building a nest” and
“tweeting” in it and rearing the young, creating for this the most
optimal conditions, relations, sensations and feelings. Here, as in
every quadra and in each dyad, there are certain sexual programs that
meet the needs and requirements of the dominant aspects of the dyad
the despotically strong-willed and the hyper-emotional. Since duals are
the guardians and bearers of these socio-programs, they must “remember”
them, work through and dealt with them from time to time (evolution
doesn’t sort out the “extra”, archaic or atavistic programs as soon as
could be wished for). In small quantities, “thrilling” and “edgy”
sensations, both emotional and physical, entertain them both …
(And sometimes in large doses, as was shown in the movie “Nine and a
half weeks,” that is now a “soft classic” of this genre: a young man
(the character of Mickey Rourke) is constantly creating cruel “tests”
for his lover: making her feel opposite states of physical and sensory
sensations, testing (and studying) the limit of her patience, the extent
of her obedience, instilling in her different tastes, habits,
traditions, and lifestyles. Ultimately, the girl leaves him because she
gets tired of being his “victim”, the object of his training, tests and
manipulations. She becomes scared of changes in tastes and preferences
taking place in her, the displacement of her target programs, her system
of coordinates and value orientations. In her view serious relations
should develop in a different way, by a different scenario. The young
man was looking for a suitable girlfriend by method of trial-and-error,
permitting himself to conduct very bold experiments. The entire problem
is that this style of relations should not be targeted and addressed
“just to anyone”, and finding one’s life partner should not be carried
out by “blind” tweaking and adjustments (although so far there are no
other ways).
Maxim and Hamlet belong to quadra of “decisive” types, where “sharp”
experiences and sensations, tests for endurance, pleasure from pain,
constitute an instinctive part of acceptable in this dyad “marriage
programs”, and in the process of dualization this becomes partially
evident in some form or another. The question is: how should one relate
to this?
Contempt for pain and fear in this dyad is considered one of the
priority values. The person who despises pain and fear here seems to be
an attractive and reliable partner, and inspires trust and respect.
(According to “decisive” types, a “whimpering weakling” has nothing to
love, and instead evokes contempt and loathing.) Mutual tests arranged
by partners in the dyad  are not only demonstrations of one’s strength,
but also a form of a “love game”, that includes instinctual
manifestations of dyad, quadral, and individual psychological
characteristics that define the program of relations within this dyad,
giving form to their dual scenario. Remove the extreme and thrilling
experiences and sensations from this dyad (as well as from other dyads
of second and third quadra) and partners will start to lose heart, fall
into depression, drown in a sense of boredom and frustration, that
disaffect these dyads.
15. The system and the idea in the dyad EIE-LSI.
¶
In dyad LSI-EIE (as in any dual dyad), there are two axes  static one
and dynamic one; two foundations: the system and the idea,  the idea
and the law. If one of these is taken away, the dyad will cease to
exist. The question of what should take precedence  the law over the
idea, or the idea over the law  in this dyad is resolved and decided
upon constantly: locally and globally, both statically and dynamically,
tactically and strategically, and so on. There is no definitive answer:
this dyad is evolutionary and the change of leading priorities within it
is on-going  on evolutionary basis, based on all three laws of
dialectics (mainly by the law of negation of negation  the law of
change and search for an alternative), and on situational basis  by
method of change and selection of leading priorities, both static and
dynamic. (On the level of a country this is called the search for a
national idea.) Within the framework of one given dyad, in everyday
life, externally this looks like alternating leadership in observed
order, on which one dual insists and which the other dual supports. (If
there is a need, for example, to bring order to the family, to
distribute and assign responsibilities, then the “static” dual is
listened to  his word will be decisive. If there is a need to choose a
travel plan and plot a course of cultural activities for the next
vacation, here the “dynamic” dual takes lead. Others can’t do without
his opinion: if he doesn’t like the program of entertainment, others
also won’t get pleasure from it. (The EIE is like this: he can leave
mid-performance himself and pull others along with him, if he is certain
that the remainder of the play will ruin his mood for the rest of the
evening.) Unlike dual dyads of “democratic” quadra, equality (equitable
and just alignment of rights) in “aristocratic” dyads happens
vertically, by small and inoffensive “pushes” and “gusts”: today one
person gets ahead and higher  tomorrow he is overtaken by another. The
main thing  is to avoid significant differences in standing. For this
one needs to not lose face in the eyes of a partner, ensure and support
his respect for oneself, protect him and his honor and dignity, care
about the honor and reputation of the family as a major priority, that
programs “constitutional relations” in the dyad. Protection of the
interests of the system in “subjectivist” quadras (Alpha and Beta)
stands at the forefront, while the protection of honor, dignity, and
reputation of the system  is placed above all else. In the second
quadra  the quadra of “decisive” “aristocrats” “subjectivists”  the
issue of protecting the honor of the system (of a family)  is a
question of its vitality and viability: no one wants to be an outcast, a
pariah despised by all, a beaten down by stones “scapegoat.”
(No one wants to be the “leaven king”  “a jester” and “a fool” on whom
everyone drains their guilt, as a fermented slop, and who is then kicked
out of the community, along with all the sins that have been poured out
on him. This is why the issue of voluntary admitting one’s guilt is a
sensitive one (admit to one thing, and everything else will be poured on
you), and the issue of ridiculing one’s own imperfections and
shortcomings, and teasing over one’s disabilities, is humiliating, while
getting ridiculed for them by strangers - is not permissible for one who
wants to preserve his dignity, multiply own power and authority. In the
second quadra, jokes, criticisms, cruel ruses, parodies, caricatures,
and ridiculing cartoons may provoke a painful reaction. The position of
voluntarily making oneself a victim of general contempt  is offensive
and demeaning. The position of a compliant victim in the second quadra
is the position of a weakling and a coward. And these vices here is
customary to “beat out” at an early age, to eradicate complaisance and
cowardice by a harsh, Spartan upbringing, to instill endurance and
stamina, to accustom to inflexible cruelty (“you’ll have pity on your
enemy, but he won’t have pity on you”), to develop perseverance and
courage, the ability to bravely and courageously endure all the trials
and pain. Therefore, physical punishment is applied in alternating
manner by the duals (in the form of intimate, extreme entertainment, in
the form of extreme love games) for the emotional and sensory discharge.
They provide evidence of endurance towards that which is contrarian
(“I’m not afraid of pain, fear and beatings won’t break or intimidate
me”)  a kind of a regular test for reliability and trustworthiness of a
partner and simultaneously a check for his resilience, endurance,
patience, energy and vitality, readiness to stand up for himself and for
his dual without losing dignity  something akin to a “loyalty oath”,
sealed by blood and pain. Alternatively playing “the executioner and the
victim” as a game here, too, can happen, although in actuality the role
of a victim of someone’s social or ideological ambitions here is not
prestigious nor sought. (You can play, but don’t lose your face!)
Why are all these “rituals” needed?
The harsh programs of checks for resoluteness of spirit, firmness,
resilience, and strength of the relationship, that fill the EGO-programs
and information models of both TIMs do not allow to “forget” about
themselves and to be left behind “under-developed”, “not worked through”
and “not renewed”. At least, at a minimum, in the form of a game, in the
form of various extreme sports, in social and protective services, in
the form of harsh methods of education (and sometimes interaction with
teachers), they manifest themselves, at times even in public. (A case:
Students have filmed and sent to the TV some unique footage: teacher of
type SLE, Zhukov is yelling at her students, then she personally yells
at a student of type EIE, then swings her hand at him. The EIE student
makes a return swing, and the teacher falls out of the frame.)
A special romantic ambiance in this dyad also contributes to “renewal”
of their archaic programs: to “work through” these aspects, these duals
sometimes wish to create a special Gothic interior in their bedroom, in
their apartment or house. Or fill up their home with special collection
of antiques, vintage and unique craft projects  whatever they like,
there is no arguing about tastes here. The main thing  is to create a
setting, a mood, an image that inspires romanticism, romantic exploits
and feats, and everything connected with this …
Small medieval castle with vaulted ceilings, a chapel and a “toy”
casemate  can also be built in present times. However, dark dungeons
and cellars won’t be its main feature, since these remnants of
historical and evolutionary experience of the “past” do not take up much
space in the life of these duals, but they do hold connection to their
evolutionary origins, to the roots of this dyad, though walking through
this dark maze is not always wanted. With the attitude of this dyad
being turned towards a distant and bright future, falling behind their
contemporaries is not in their manner: like all they want to keep up
with the times. (Especially since the intuition of time, Ni, is the
dominant value in their dyad and “decisive” quadras.) Nevertheless, they
also cannot not go back to the roots of the past: due to the
conservative traditions in this dyad, given by “questim”, stretched
along the axis of time, conservative intuition of time of the EIE  his
creative function (Ni). While the EIE calls for a push towards distant,
bright future, he, nevertheless, is deeply rooted in the distant, dark
past himself, being a tireless researcher of the darkest, most
controversial, and little-known pages of history. Sometimes what the EIE
extracts from these pages of the past, looks phenomenally beautiful,
interesting, modern, and benefits all mankind. Sometimes it is
frightening and disturbing, such that it would have been better if he
didn’t bring it up.
LSI-EIE  is also a dyad of historians, archaeologists, ethnographers,
and anthropologists, who work a lot and with enthusiasm with relic
curiosities: what they have excavated, they then study and explore, draw
parallels and analogies with the present, and extrapolate their
knowledge and predictions for the future.
Much is said here about the idea of self-sacrifice, popular in the dyad,
and about its incompatibility with the second quadra despised “victim”
role. The main thing here is the difference  the border charted by
dyadic trait of “obstinacy” that separates these concepts in their
essence. Becoming a victim through concession to one’s own weakness and
permissiveness towards external aggression and foreign tyranny  here is
condemned in every way. This brings up incomparable contempt,
condemnation, to the extent that an overly compliant child here can be
beaten half to death, to “knock out” his cowardice and pusillanimity.
Simply because here this is possibly related to his or her ability (or
inability) to stand up for the honor of the system, outside the
protection of the interests of which there is no existence in this dyad.
Conceding to one’s own fear and weak will here is considered to be the
most serious crime, which is fought against with the fiercest and most
ruthless measures, forcing the will-less victim to the lowest layers of
the hierarchy  to a position of an “underling”, into the basement,
where he is terrorized and hassled until he, at last, realizes for what
he is being pushed and begins to “correct” himself. (Good thing is he is
able to guess! However, if he finds virtue in obedience and compliance
to the will of another, he has no chance of saving himself: the role of
pariah, on whom everyone vents their anger and annoyance, is assured for
him. (What difference does it make if he’s actually committed treason,
or not? - the main thing that by his combination of qualities, he is
able to do it! And he’s able to do it, it is necessary to deprecate and
punish him  in order to re-educate him. Once he is re-educated, he
himself will say “thank you” and like everyone else will fight for his
place in the system.) And the system in this dyad expands vertically.
Accordingly, everyone in this dyad feels as climbers to the top of the
mountain, tied and linked into one bundle. And if the friend suddenly
turns out to be not friend, neither an enemy, but something in the
middle, this person gets checked “vertically”, at the peak of the
relationship, at the height of the conflict, that may be staged as a
game  at the “cutting edge” of the very core of the conflict, on the
“edge of the sword”. (Members of this dyad take on an especially defiant
tone when someone informally speaks to them particularly delicately  it
starts to annoy them, and often, unexpectedly even to themselves, they
start to tell something rude, prickly and defiant. And the more they
defy and talk back, the softer they are spoken with: the process of
re-education of an overly compliant conversation partner has already
begun, and if he just won’t take offense, then you can continue talking
back: it is interesting to know where his limit of endurance and
patience lies. If a compliant conversation partner believes that the
situation itself requires him to show restraint, it makes sense to bring
it up and openly say so, before the militant contact moves from hidden
irritation to explicit one.) “Wimps” and “mumblers” here get treated
very harshly (but only for as long as they allow for it). If the
“mumbler-wimp” suddenly begins to show character, doesn’t yield and
concede, contests what he is being offered, imposes his own
alternatives, doesn’t agree to everything (emulates an “obstinate”
type), or slamming the door leaves with expression of resentment on his
face, here he’s beginning to be respected, loved, others regret about
his departure, speak well and bring up warm memories of him, sincerely
wish to return him back to the system, promise to treat them well in the
future. After he returns back to the system, at least for some time (on
inertia) they continue to respect him (at least for the fact that he has
somehow “reacted” to their (logical and emotional) “signaling request”,
which has allowed them to map their logical and ethical relationships
over at least some kind of system of coordinates. Since it wasn’t clear
before: did he care how he was treated before, or not; does he
appreciate and cherish the place he occupies in the system and his
reputation, or not? And if not, why not? What is this phenomenon? The
methods of treatment, at the same time, do not change. The fight to the
distribution of places along the vertical axis continues, and again he
is pushed towards the bottom. Nobody is going to change the methods of
treatment in the system according his model of behavior. The EIE sets an
example of behavior in such situations, because for him this is a
question of principle, and he proclaims himself to be the standard,
regardless of whether anyone likes it - or not. (In schools, EIE
students often disrupt lessons and impose their own model of behavior on
other students as a means of taking “revenge” on their unloved teacher
or subject. They also persuade the whole class to skip lessons  and
they don’t care if someone is trying to get a good grade or want to
learn the subject: they have organized the class action and period!
Whoever doesn’t follow, is immediately a “traitor!” For the EIE student
this is a way of checking the extent of his influence in the status of
an informal leader.)
The tone of interaction with the “victim” who has returned to the system
is also set by the EIE: it is interesting to learn whether the person
has changed any. And for how long this will last. And then, “who has
never tasted bitter, knows not what is sweet”.
By and large, the dyad LSI-EIE is a “cage for two” and a “mission for
two.” Children, unless they are identicals or duals, don’t feel very
comfortable here. (Yet, even the dual and identical children are
subject: parenting practices (including medieval, archaic) apply to
them, not to mention the grafting of tastes and interests. The charming
Addams Family - is a friendly cartoon made on a rational dyad in their
softest aristocratic version (with some touch of graceful infernality,
which is also not alien to this dyad.) All is well between them (except
extravagant games in the form of accidents and crashes), but children
seem removed from them, although in many ways they are already catching
up with parents, inducing fear and terror in their peers (and this is
not fiction). Getting carried away by decay and destruction, the members
of this dyad often overlook their own degradation and the corrupting
influence on those around them. The cult of death, terror, moral and
physical suffering that is often forcibly implanted here first of all
ruins children’s vulnerable souls. Attempts to grow them into “vampires”
(for continuity of infernal traditions) are very costly to society.
In this dyad is not accepted “wash their dirty linen in public” in the
interests of “protecting the system”, however, in the interests of
protecting society from pathologies, in the interests of environmental
protection of our shared society, our common information field, in the
interests of restoring healthy psychological climate within it, such
“huts” should be cleaned out from time to time, together with all the
accumulated debris in them.
16. The genie who has sat in the bottle far too long.
¶
Hamlet loves to play the role of a uncontrollable, infernal being, a
captive of his own raging emotions, and, at the same time, a prisoner of
the circumstances, that do not allow him to express those emotions - a
sort of a “genie sitting in a bottle”, annoyed already by the fact that
others are underestimating the danger of all that has accumulated in
terms of this explosive energy, ignoring his condition, getting
distracted by their mundane everyday affairs, which seem to be more
important to them than the need to allow Hamlet to release on all of his
“steam”, a need which no one else recognizes as relevant, primary, and
super-important, except for Hamlet EIE himself and his dual Maxim LSI.
Not waiting for permission from the outside, Hamlet allows himself to
“take his emotions for a walk”, as dogs who have been sitting on a chain
far too long, and releases them on whoever happened to be at hand. He,
of course, doesn’t take outsiders into account: with them, at least the
first few minutes, Hamlet tries to communicate within the norms,
although he makes it clear to them that he can explode at any second. It
is worse for those people who cohabit and live with him: he slights them
without any hesitation if they ignore his condition and disallow him to
express aloud his grievances, demands, and complaints in a raised voice.
When Hamlet finally “speaks out”, he winds himself up more and more,
begins to thicken emotional tones and colors, allowing for the greatest
amount of emotions to boil over. For this he provokes a scandal, using
any opportunity to “pose the question or issue point-blank”. And it’s
not that there are many “questions” and “issues”, but that there is a
lot of “dark energy” (“condensed emotions”) that have accumulated, which
are necessary to express somehow, to spill out somewhere, to discharge,
because “burning them through” by oneself is all very difficult. It’s
not pleasant to see how unrealized emotions  their value, unrealized
strength, hope, energy, and aspirations  burn pointlessly, as “dry
foliage”. Thus the EIE “lights up” as if on gunpowder whenever he is not
allowed (for whichever reasons) to successfully and creatively to
realize his emotional and energy potential.
So what is there to do with this “demon”, with this stagnant in itself
condensate of “black energy”? - Outside of dual relations such problems
are very difficult to resolve.
And what does the dual have to offer?  his educational “therapy”,
realized by method of “carrot and stick” in the best traditions of
“declatim” model, that has developed the classical scheme of effective
socialization of Hamlet, which, by the way, was offered by William
Shakespeare in one of his best comedies, “The Taming of the Shrew”,
since all the “diseases” of his own TIM (EIE), and all methods of their
“treatment”, he knew like no other.
The main character, Katarina  is a young and charming girl and at the
same time  an embittered and uncontrollable person. A sort of “black
sheep”, an insufferable shrew, who terrorizes her relatives with her
fits of unreasonable fury and instills and fear terror into people
around her. Due to which he is being kept locked up as wild and
indomitable creature: neither servants nor teachers attend to her in the
house of her father  a wealthy and noble senor Baptista Minola. Who,
nevertheless, is hoping that this “monster” can be successfully married
and settled somewhere more reliable, to free up his house as soon as
possible from her presence, and himself - from this painful custody and
responsibility for her fate. The dowry offered for her is big, but,
despite this, many poorer nobles would rather remain in their debts than
unite their life with unbearable Katarina. Fortunately, there is one
easy-going nobleman from out of town - Signor Petruchio, the son of
Antonio - who has arrived from Verona to beneficially marry “on
whomever”. Wealth is his “wedding chorus”, his goal and his stimulus,
and the bride  if she’s a sheer “devil”  what does it matter to him?
Petruchio is confident in himself and believes that for a decent reward
he can learn to live with anyone. Locals greet him enthusiastically  he
is the one whom they have been waiting for, because the “evil” Katarina
has a sister  a charming and modest Bianca, whom many wish to woo, but
she can marry only after her eldest sister is married. And in this lies
the problem: about Katarina  this “wicked witch”, with whom the “devil
himself cannot get along”  no one even wants to hear. Everyone in Padua
knows her to be as an impossible, insufferable creature, and none of the
decent men dare to link their fate with her. Petruchio is not one of the
locals and believes that these fears are exaggerated. As a man resolute,
stubborn, and strong (LSI, Maxim), who has seen and experienced much in
his lifetime, he is not accustomed to retreating from his goals.
Difficulties and dangers do not frighten him, especially such a little
thing like a grumpy bride  “woman’s tongue rattles no louder than the
chestnuts fired up by a farmer”. Petruchio comes to woo Katarina. The
size of the dowry - this is what interests him. And the wife, he is
willing to take as optional - without looking (like a cat in a bag), as
she interests him in the least. But Signor Baptista, as a loving father,
wants the groom to first obtained the agreement of the bride. Petruchio
meets the bride. And the very first meeting with Katarina he is
horrified: the “cat in the bag” is actually an unrestrained, ferocious
“tigress”  training which is not an easy task. At this point, changes
happen to Petruchio: he realizes that he’s in love with this charming
spitfire, and at the same time discovers in himself a talent of fearless
tamer. The plan of action and all techniques of training he invents on
the spot, using the sequence of “carrot” and “stick”. The “whip” is
applied in practice and actions, the “carrot”  in words. Noticing that
Katarina adequately responds only to what he says, and not his actions,
he adheres to this method: he is respectful only while spea
While Katarina is sweating for her past sins, her sister - “a shy,
quiet, and demure” Bianca, left behind as the only, favorite child in
her father’s house, becomes naughty and falls from one pre-marital
adventure into another. Fortunately, it all ends well, and Katharina and
her husband receive from her father news of her sister’s upcoming
wedding. By this time Katarina, too, has changed: the role of solitary
heroine, rejected by the environment, no longer seems necessary to her.
She has successfully adapted to her new environment, and at the same
time changed that environment in accordance to her own views of happy
family life. And finally, her first reward  she can leave the house as
a married woman: for this purpose expensive dresses and hats are being
purchased. Her husband asks her to try it all, and then suddenly  a new
shock!  again behaving inappropriately, recalling past grievances, he
screams and tears to shreds all the new clothing that was bought for his
wife, chops it all to pieces, and leaves Katarina crying over a pile of
useless scraps. The training continues: into the house of his
father-in-law, Petruchio must bring a submissive wife  a “house cat”,
not a “tiger.” Therefore, this work is under way at a quickened pace,
and within a month Petruchio finds that he has achieved the desired
result: now his wife obeys him in everything  even if she’s woken up in
the middle of the night, she doesn’t say a cross word. But this is not
the end of the program: the results must be solidified, and the harsh
training continues throughout the visit of the newlyweds in Padua. On
each object or person they encounter along their way, Katarina must look
through the eyes of her husband and “see” only what he sees, however
ridiculous it may look from the outside. Only when he makes sure that
she’s completely obedient to him does Petruchio brings her into the
house of Minola. According to his plan, Katarina has to go further and
pass “the final test”  a test for respectable behavior. In order for
the new changes in her character appear with most contrast, Petruchio
draws into a contest for submission two other men and their wives. The
betting terms are: whose wife comes running to the call of her spouse
the soonest will take the prize (as if the talk was about a horse or a
dog race). Petruchio wins the prize: Katarina’s obedience shocks and
amazes other people. To some present ladies her humility seems absurd.
But Katarina dissuades them: in this episode, she shows herself not a
slave to the cruel whims of her husband, but a devout and committed
leader  an ideological fighter for the rights of men in the family  an
adept of patriarchal relations, able to advise and instruct all who
question the moral superiority of this old, as the world, system. Of
previous feminism there is no talk. (As if it wasn’t her who shouted
before the wedding: “Men  are the worst of all evils!”) The new
Katarina is difficult to recognize: other “shrewd” wives can be sent to
her for re-education. And a demonstrative lesson, she, taking this
opportunity, starts immediately: she reads instructions to disobedient
wives, shames them, instructs, condemns, educates, and explains how a
reasonable and respectable woman should behave. At the same time, she is
thinking and explaining herself broadly, on the level of the state,
arguing that a rebellious wife  is nothing but “a rabid rebel who is
rebelling against his sovereign”. All of the husbands are shocked and
listen to her as to a newly found prophet  with wonder, reverence, and
attention. And Katarina herself also derives pleasure from the
impression that her new role has made on all those present  the role of
“the most righteous and the most proper wife”. This role she likes much
more than her previous one: it provides for her many more moral
advantages, opens up more opportunities, turns out to be that
convertible value that is most appreciated and popular in her community
and in her family. (And besides that, it allows her to displace her
husband from the field of his interests, and claim for herself the
priority position in the system: from the ranks of “submissive wife”
move into the role of a “friendly warden and supervisor”, which is also
very convenient.) Her fool of a husband thinks she has become humble for
him  but this is not so! He simply provided her with “codes” and
“ciphers” to his trust. Now, in his eyes, she will always be right, but
only when she wants it herself: after all, he likes re-educating her!
And Katarina is glad of her success and the fact that she was able to
present this “performance” for all as a gift to the wedding, as the good
wishes and advice. She is glad that she has managed to unspeakably
surprised everyone, and present herself not as a “vicious savage”, not a
“tigress”, not a victim of an oppressive husband, but namely as a
“mentor - adept” of the idea, which is so valued in this dyad: a
marriage is built not only on trust, but also on infinite respect, which
is presented at the first request as a “pass” to the higher level of
relations. The fact that this “pass” and the trust need to be earned, by
going through difficult, heavy, sometimes painful tests  there’s
nothing one can do about it: each dyad has its own “codes”, “methods”,
“approaches”, and its own access to happiness.
In this dyad, the director of these involving games is the EIE. He
decides how long he will play one or another role. The EIE also decides
which role he will make his partner play, relying, in this case, on his
social and ethical analysis of the situation and of the possibilistic
and power potential of the other person. And, of course, on his sense of
dramaturgy of the developing situation, on his intuition of time, with
which the episodes of the game must dynamically change one after
another. Heating up of emotions and passions, complications in the
intrigue, nevertheless, should not be protracted in time. Otherwise the
game becomes too boring, and the LSI will want to leave it. But the EIE
cannot permit his “tamer” to get out of the cage and lose interest in
him. Once the EIE becomes “boring” and “civil”, the LSI considers his
mission accomplished, loses a sense of purpose in further interaction
with his partner (loses the thread of further development of relations)
and abruptly becomes bored. The EIE cannot allow for this. If this
happens, for the EIE it will be difficult to attract LSI’s attention
again  as well as fight for a privileged place in the system: as the
LSI may forget about his daring and aggressive qualities. For this, the
EIE must constantly show small flashes and reminders of aggression. So
that the LSI feels himself living over an un-extinguished volcano and
takes this into account: such that he’ll be a little bit afraid of his
partner and respects him for his ability to fire up at any moment and
stand up for himself, for his rights, for his positions and his place in
the system. The EIE has to occasionally “growl” and pretend to be “an
angry snarling beast”, to remind the LSI that he’s “a tiger cub” and not
a “household cat”, and make the LSI, again, take on the role of a
trainer. And the LSI loves this role. Thus, there’s nothing unnatural in
this game (given that there are no abnormalities in psyches of
partners). The game pulls both of them in as a fiery “dance with swords”
and some kind of stunts  that allows to turn duality into a game, the
game  into a bright, impressive performance, the performance  into a
life filled with adventure, danger, risk and tribulations, in the
process of which duals may once again test their feelings for strength
and feel each other’s support. (To complete this image, one can recall
and imagine “The Sabre Dance” to the music of Aram Khachaturian from
ballet “Gayane”: the nature of music accurately reflects the nature of
the relationship in this dyad, the nature of this duality  energy-rich,
dynamic, constantly changing with contrasting images, sensations, and
impressions  strong and extreme, that transform their lives into a
fierce battle, into an undying struggle, and, at the same time, a bright
emotional show.) Without such confrontation of these bright and strong
characters their life together would seem boring and insipid  there
won’t be brightness and vividness of impressions, nor the sense of
completeness of life and happiness. Because happiness in this dyad
consists of growing interest in each other, and in the discovery of new
and unknown within each other, and in the daily heroism of overcoming of
hardships. Happiness must be earned and deserved, and suffered for not
only by new and unknown tribulations, presented by fate, but also the
pain and fear of dangerous experiments, frightening and not always
pleasant surprises arranged by someone  either one of the partners.
Because each “surprise” or “experiment”  is not only a test of their
feelings and of the strength of their relationship, but it is also a
lesson in survival, a test for devotion and dutifulness, for strength of
the bonds in this marriage. And at the same time  the transition to a
new level of election and enlightenment into the mysteries of this
duality, known, by and large, only to its members  the EIE and the LSI.