[drizzy lake]

Thought for the longest I'mma So/Sx, however, back then I still typed as a Four though. As of late (and with typing as One now) I'm heavily considering Sx/So. Sx-1s, and to some degree all Sx-first, are known to relate to being Fours, even if they ain't, so that would be a sign for being Sx-first. How can you define the best which one's your first and which one's your second instinct? Or what are the clearest differences between SoSx & SxSo?

 

[angelfish]

Theoretically, your first instinct is where you have the most neurosis, while your second is fairly healthy/natural. So you are quite adept and interested in the realm of the first but it also is where your anxiety tends to manifest, because in a sense you have the most to lose there. Your second, on the other hand, is a bit of a playground, because your skill level is decent and you don't have so much invested in it.

I had a very hard time distinguishing between the two myself - clearly my two variants, like yours I suspect, are very close in strength.

These descriptions from Typewatch were useful to me - they illustrate how different balances of the stacking can come across differently - and so you get a better picture of both sx/soc with strong soc and soc/sx with strong sx:

sx/so

Quote
fireside sx/so - strong sx, weak soc and weaker sp. pulls from sp/sx shadow to intensify sx. exhibitionism, wild abandon, most 'on fire' of all stacks or stack ranges.

flirter sx/so - strong sx, moderate soc, weak sp. highly sociable and extroverted per type, flirtatious interaction style, more coy than firesiders but more risque than coolsiders.

coolside sx/so - strong sx, strong soc, weak sp. pulls from so/sp secondary, political activist streak, 'cooled' by soc with some intellectual reserve, channels sx into social causes. [...]

so/sx

the so/sx version is what I call lightside (soc as unquestioned dictator, just as in warmside so/sp), and on the other end is the darkside (soc as chairman, sx as vice chairman who sleeps with the chairman). and the midrange, that lovely muddy area in between where soc is the boss but sx at least has its own corner office.

lightsiders vs darksiders is almost like a phobic/counterphobic split in attitude. the lightside is engaging, ingratiating even, and is the closest to what has become the stereotype for so/sx. unmistakably friendly, amusing, eager to attend to others in a personal, customized way. also hesitant or unwilling to upset the delicate chemistry or harmony of individual or group dynamics, since soc cohesion is at a premium. some famous lightsiders: mister rogers, steve carrell, george foreman, ben affleck, zach braff, michael jackson, and bill clinton. [...]

darksiders on the other hand seem eager to prove their soc isn't in full control, so they typically test the boundaries of traditional soc values. maybe knee-jerk reactions against sheepish herd behavior, group mentalities, or warmside strategies for making connections. they aren't any less healthy by definition, but can seem that way due to their darker, more confrontational manner. they use highly customized interactive tactics like all so/sx's, but in a more uncompromising "keeping it real" way, owing to the active tension between "good" soc and "bad" sx. some examples are woody harrelson, frank zappa, jack nicholson, lauryn hill, judy garland, chris rock, eminem, george carlin, andy warhol.

More here if you're interested.

And here is my favorite resource on instincts, period - from a blog where an e5 has shared his notes from a seminar:

Russ [Hudson] said that the life script of a self-pres dominant tends to emphasize continuity, organic development. Sexuals tend to have chapters, and have sometimes “gone down in flames’ with what they’re attracted to. Socials tend to have “pods of affiliation”, that is different groups or activities they’re involved with.

Look at your actual behavior. If you’re not doing your dominant instinct, then you might feel like you’re taking time away from what’s important. If you have to put in effort in the realm of the instinct, this may be your blind spot. There’s an intelligence to the way that your soul has set things up. Look at it. Look at your particular programming. See what you’ve taken yourself to be. What supports you is an issue of stacking. Relax around it—just look at where the attention goes or does not go.

[...]

I’ve said this before in other topics, but the way I see it, the variants represent your needs and priorities. The types are more like your internal issues. Your own problems. The internal problems you focus on (the conflict between ego, superego and id). The variants, by contrast, focus on the outside world. The outside problems you focus on.

Therefore, the social type focuses on society as a whole, and… well… social problems. That is – your job, your school, whether you have homework to do, whether you don’t have homework to do, how well are you doing in life, how well are other people doing in life, how well are you doing in life compared to how other people are doing in life, your role, etc.

It compells you to desire to interact with others, and focus on the interactions between you and others, as well as the interaction between you and… things even. It’s a thought that’s very… gear-like. Very… mechanic.

There’s always movement. They are aware of also the interactions between others and others, and others and the environment as well as themselves and others and themselves and the environment. It’s being aware of interactions in general. How everything interacts with each other. That’s what makes it very gear-like. One gear affects another, and their aware of how they can harm and help this whole entire process (of interacting with others and stuff).

When they lose someone, they feel that a gear was just lost. They can’t interact with it anymore, and it’s gone. That something’s missing (and they know what it is).

Sx-firsts, on the other hand, aren’t as aware of the interactions between them and others and the environment, rather… their more aware of the chemistry. So while the so-firsts are more “mechanical”, the sx-firsts are more “chemical”.

Focusing on sx-first issues involve: Am I close to my gf/bf? Am I close to my family? How much in common do we all have? Do I really like this thing? Am I attracted to it? Is that person attracted to that other person? etc.

They’re more aware of the bonds and the chemistry between them and people, as well as environment, and other people and other people, as well as other people and the environment. They really like being close to their intimates, and are generally passionate about things.

Likewise, they fear that those chemical bonds could be broken, and when they are, they are emotionally hurt. They feel literally separated, and ripped away from the other person or object.

Finally, sp-first issues revolve around: Am I healthy? Do I look good? How are my financial issues? How is that person’s financial issues? Am I hungry? etc.

In other words, sp-firsts worry more about fitness. Fitness in general, of course, not necessarily just body fitness. Therefore, they worry more about how fit they are in their environment, as well as how fit other people are in their environment. They want to be fit. I guess this represents more of… potential energy, rather than mechanical and chemical energy.

When someone leaves them… I guess perhaps they feel more unfit, since I’m sure they may rely on others to keep them fit. Though, its still more important for they themselves to be fit on their own.

Therefore… now… stackings:

So/Sx– Mechanical energy -> Chemical energy (-> = then)
Focus on the interaction of things, and how their “chemical energy” influences these interactions. They use their “chemical energy” to help them interact better. They seek a bond with everything they interact with.

Sx/So– Chemical energy -> Mechanical energy
Focus on the chemistry of things, and how their “mechanical energy” influences the chemistry between them and others. They may rely on interactions to help their “chemical bonds” remain stable (such as asking a friend for advice on the relationship, as well as interacting with the right objects to help the relationship remain stable).

So/Sp– Mechanical energy -> Potential energy
Focus on the interaction of things again, but then they also focus on their fitness, and how fit those interactions are. Use their fitness as a away of reinforcing the strength of the interactions as well (“I will do better at work if I am well-suited”).

Sp/So– Potential energy -> Mechanical energy
Focus on their fitness, while also focusing on the interaction of things. How those interactions affect their fitness. They may, for this reason, seem more business oriented. (“If I take that offer, it might help me more”).

Sp/Sx– Potential energy -> Chemical energy
Focus on their fitness, as well as the chemical bonds they’ve developed with people. They also focus on how those chemical bonds affect their fitness.

Sx/Sp– Chemical energy -> Potential energy
Focus on their chemical bonds, as well as fitness. Basically, the fitness of those chemical bonds, and what they can do to make them “fitter”.

In my case I initially typed as sx/soc because I do feel very intensely, care very much about my personal 1-on-1 relationships, and have always been a bit obsessive over "that one special person/place/thing". That said with time I have realized that I'm much more of the "flitting" type than the focused, on fire type. Also - a lack of exhibitionism, intensity. I could go further into it but this thread is about you, not me!

 

[drizzy lake]

@angelfish: Thanks, that was insightful.

Okay, I think I found a good way to determine your stacking now. The problem I always had was to decide if I focus on an area like 'Social' out of an over-obsession with it or because I cared too less for it and tried to deal with that kind of insecure weak point, you know?

I think the best way to define it is like this: An instinct is what makes you worry. The stronger an instinct is in your stacking, the more energy you spend on it, because the stronger an instinct is in you, the more relief you get from feeling secure in it.

I'm SP-last for example. I know that because when I take care of my SP-needs, I'm just like "yea, nice I guess". Its cool, its an area you tend to neglect and caring for it is important, but feeling secure in it doesn't make me go "yea, life is great now". I value it too low for dealing with it having much an effect on my current life, which is why people usually spend the least energy on their last-instinct since they don't really care for it and therefore dealing with it doesn't give you much perceived relief, satisfaction, secruity, etc. However, this results in it being your blind spot. I guess everybody has to decide for themselves how much they want to care for their blind spot. Since your brain/soul/blah doesn't really pressure you to spend any energy on it, the energy you spend in it is really up to you, like if you want to engage in it at all beyond the most necessary level (like eating f.e. when it comes to SP lol). I started to care about my body for example as I got older. I was never compelled to it, doing so doesn't relief any instinctual anxiety or whatever since I don't value SP much. Its just because I decided to care for it out of other reasons (that are more of an Sx-, So-nature probably).

When it comes to your strongest instinct, the reason you become obsessed with it is because being healthy here makes you feel so secure. So you become unnecessarily perfectionistic in this aspect. I guess the time periods you were the happiest in your life correlate with having a really healthy relationship with your dominant instinct and therefore feeling really secure. However you obsess so much on this that you spend all your energy on it in an attempt to relief the instinct - which is probably not the wisest way to deal with it. The second instinct is the one in which you are probably the wisest in. You care for it in your life, feeling secure here gives you satisfaction, but its not your priority and you are less blinded by this instinctual need to deal with it, which probably results in a more chilled approach in meeting its needs.

However, while this made me even more sure of being SP-last, I still am not sure about if I'm SX or SO first.
In some way I feel like I'm most conscious of So-stuff but I feel like I get the most relief from feeling secure in Sx - which sounds more SX/SO to me tbh. I guess Istill need some more time to decide what my core motivation is ... :/
I think part of the problem is that both SP-last strategies Seen similar - both are mostly people orientaded.

 

[Temizzle]

Thought for the longest I'mma So/Sx, however, back then I still typed as a Four though. As of late (and with typing as One now) I'm heavily considering Sx/So. Sx-1s, and to some degree all Sx-first, are known to relate to being Fours, even if they ain't, so that would be a sign for being Sx-first. How can you define the best which one's your first and which one's your second instinct? Or what are the clearest differences between SoSx & SxSo?

Guess you're a 6 now :/

Regardless, if you're sx first I think it's very clear to you. Most of your issues and enneagram problems will arise in the 1 on 1 sphere -- intensely binding to people, causes. Feeling empty if your life remains on a mellow plane. Feeling like you need more. Sex is hardly enough, like you want to completely consume your partner. There is an emphasis on your desirability and you're very picky with who you connect with, but when you find someone who matches your energy level and chemistry you dive deep. DEEP. Like, pour way too much energy into it and overdo it -- there's a fear of putting too much into things that you'll break them. That intensity.

So is much more concerned with their positioning in a social sphere and is first and foremost conscious to who they are in society or in their community and second about their passions and intensities. An SX first would throw it all away for that deep satisfying connection.

 

[drizzy lake]

Regardless, if you're sx first I think it's very clear to you. Most of your issues and enneagram problems will arise in the 1 on 1 sphere -- intensely binding to people, causes. Feeling empty if your life remains on a mellow plane. Feeling like you need more. Sex is hardly enough, like you want to completely consume your partner. There is an emphasis on your desirability and you're very picky with who you connect with, but when you find someone who matches your energy level and chemistry you dive deep. DEEP. Like, pour way too much energy into it and overdo it -- there's a fear of putting too much into things that you'll break them. That intensity.

So is much more concerned with their positioning in a social sphere and is first and foremost conscious to who they are in society or in their community and second about their passions and intensities. An SX first would throw it all away for that deep satisfying connection.

The problem is that my SX and SO feel so close. I don't know if I would throw it all away for that one deep connection. Thats kind of abstract if you know what I mean, in as hard to apply to real real life.. From my understanding, the second instinct flows into the first - meaning you use your second to dive into your first. So you care for the 2nd instinct cause it serves your 1st. But I can't tell which serves which, Sx->So or the other way around. Its hard to differetiate the energies. :/
SX feels stronger but that just may be my dom-Fi.

 

[Temizzle]

The problem is that my SX and SO feel so close. I don't know if I would throw it all away for that one deep connection. Thats kind of abstract if you know what I mean, in as hard to apply to real real life.. From my understanding, the second instinct flows into the first - meaning you use your second to dive into your first. So you care for the 2nd instinct cause it serves your 1st. But I can't tell which serves which, Sx->So or the other way around. Its hard to differetiate the energies. :/
SX feels stronger but that just may be my dom-Fi.

For me, SO serves my SX by making me more drawn to crowds and being social when I have no obsession, looking for that obsession. Once I’ve found it, I leave the SO behind

 

[drizzy lake]

For me, SO serves my SX by making me more drawn to crowds and being social when I have no obsession, looking for that obsession. Once I’ve found it, I leave the SO behind

I guess thats what I have to find out still cuz thats the thing I'm not exactly sure about yet. I simply care about both a lot. But, having recently retyped myself a 6, and I'm pretty sure its final this time (there's a quote by Eli Jaxon saying Sixes, especially CP, have the hardest time typing themselves, which explains why it took me so damn fucking long), SX-dom seems more fitting and some of what I feel as strong SO may actually be just about being a 6 period.

 

[Temizzle]

I guess thats what I have to find out still cuz thats the thing I'm not exactly sure about yet. I simply care about both a lot. But, having recently retyped myself a 6, and I'm pretty sure its final this time (there's a quote by Eli Jaxon saying Sixes, especially CP, have the hardest time typing themselves, which explains why it took me so damn fucking long), SX-dom seems more fitting and some of what I feel as strong SO may actually be just about being a 6 period.

That's right I recall you typing yourself as an ISTP 8w9 before. Must have identified with the aggression but thought yourself not aggressive enough to be an 8w7 so you figured 8w9.

All I'm saying is, if you were SX, you would know. You would come off as too much to people around you, and you would feel like you're a little misfit for this wold. There would be a heavy longing or itch you wear on your shoulder.

 

[d e c a d e n t]

Sx-firsts, on the other hand, aren’t as aware of the interactions between them and others and the environment, rather… their more aware of the chemistry. So while the so-firsts are more “mechanical”, the sx-firsts are more “chemical”.

Focusing on sx-first issues involve: Am I close to my gf/bf? Am I close to my family? How much in common do we all have? Do I really like this thing? Am I attracted to it? Is that person attracted to that other person? etc.

Someone with high Social can care about how close they are to someone as well, however, and might identify with the Sx description more especially if they're a Feeler.

 

[nep2une]

Ah lovely, now I'm also questioning having set mine as so/sx because of this:

coolside sx/so - strong sx, strong soc, weak sp. pulls from so/sp secondary, political activist streak, 'cooled' by soc with some intellectual reserve, channels sx into social causes.

An SX first would throw it all away for that deep satisfying connection.

God, I feel like my advice to them would be, "Please don't." That tends to be my first reaction to hearing that kind of sentiment as someone who used to believe all I needed was a relationship. Guess that depends on exactly what that means, though. If it means losing all interest in anything but your obsession and only living for it then, no. Just no. That just doesn't sound healthy to me.

 

[drizzy lake]

That's right I recall you typing yourself as an ISTP 8w9 before. Must have identified with the aggression but thought yourself not aggressive enough to be an 8w7 so you figured 8w9.

All I'm saying is, if you were SX, you would know. You would come off as too much to people around you, and you would feel like you're a little misfit for this wold. There would be a heavy longing or itch you wear on your shoulder.

ISFP 8w9 that is.
Its just the typical CP-6 mistype. After more pondering I settled on Sx-first now. I think it really just comes down to having a stronger than average second instinct, which someone in this thread already mentioned is an option.

 

[angelfish]

Someone with high Social can care about how close they are to someone as well, however, and might identify with the Sx description more especially if they're a Feeler.

Yeah. That was me. I do feel all of this:

Feeling empty if your life remains on a mellow plane. Feeling like you need more. Sex is hardly enough, like you want to completely consume your partner. There is an emphasis on your desirability and you're very picky with who you connect with, but when you find someone who matches your energy level and chemistry you dive deep. DEEP. Like, pour way too much energy into it and overdo it -- there's a fear of putting too much into things that you'll break them. That intensity.

This is where it gets fuzzy:

So is much more concerned with their positioning in a social sphere and is first and foremost conscious to who they are in society or in their community and second about their passions and intensities.

While so/sp typically are clearly about position/role in community and the greater good, so/sx is not always so clearly structurally oriented, I think. Part of the joy of sx is in subversion and of allowing sx to take over. I love Typewatch's wording of sx being the vice chairman who sleeps with the so chairman of the board because think about that relationship. The chairman is still in charge, ultimately, and does have the power to make individual decisions that override everything. But is it pleasing to the chairman to override the person he's sleeping with? Probably not, no, especially with him being social and wanting to be inclusive. Does the person he's sleeping with have insidious effects on the chairman, whether they mean to or not? Yes, I'm sure. If we remember the sx vice chairman's personality: he prioritizes the passion, the intimacy, the depth, the fire, the ability to merge above all. So the chairman is swept into that, too, even though he also is aware of his responsibility to the rest of the board, and he rather likes the rest of the board as individuals and appreciates them, too. So he ends up moving back and forth between the two, drawn by the darker and more intense appeal of sx, but finding joy in the ability to dance in the lightness of the social realm, too.

Especially as an introvert Feeler I think it has been hard to see myself in some social descriptions. I am not particularly suave or ambitious. I do not like sociopolitical play. I do not like networking. I do feel deeply empty if I'm not making enough intense, meaningful connections either with my world and/or with my intimates. I do have a good amount of (typically concealed) personal storm and fire, often regarding 1-to-1 relationships. (I initially wrote 1-on-1... Freudian slip?) That said, my main obsession and angst is "where do I fit in and who and what do I fit with?" - and that's still a deeply social question, even with its sx undertones of "clicking". I can identify good connections but remain so concerned with how it all fits together, what I should prioritize, etc.

I think this is a good point and potentially a litmus test:

An SX first would throw it all away for that deep satisfying connection.

I won't throw away my whole world for that. I will fight very, very hard to keep both, but ultimately I will release a singular connection in favor of the ability to continue connecting with my world. I don't value the deep submerge with one alone over the ability to form many meaningful connections and to maintain the ones I already have. Of course - I like some deeper than others!

That said the easier answer for me was simply that I'm a "lighter" person than sx. I'm more dancing sunshine dapples than sx/so's dancing blazing fire.

 

[ShugerBby]

Someone with high Social can care about how close they are to someone as well, however, and might identify with the Sx description more especially if they're a Feeler.

OMGGG that's exactly my problem now....I'm an infp

 

[Schizoid]

Sx/so here, and deep intense connections with people is incredibly important to me.

I tend to get my feelings hurt easily whenever I sensed a psychological distance with the people around me, especially if I wanted to get to know someone on a deep personal level, but I get the sense that the feeling isn't mutual and they aren't interested in getting to know me on a deep personal level.

I think So-doms are less likely to take it personally when people around them doesn't want to get close to them.

But as an Sx-dom, I tend to take it very personally to the extent that I'll start withdrawing from that person. I guess I'd rather be alone by myself than to deal with shallow/superficial connections.