with synflow the functions are just in balance and the second instinct serving the dominant one well and you can mostly see them working in symbiosis.

for contraflow it’s more like “90% the dominant instinct only”.. then “10% the second instinct going nuts and ignoring the first one completely and ruining everything the dominant instinct stands for”… and then going back to the dominant one who needs to clean up the mess.

e.g. sx/so will mostly look “extremely sx with no soc” and then at rare times “extremely soc with no sx” before returning back to sx-mode. whereas sx/sp is a constant flow of steady intense sx + a touch of sp.

synflow: sx/sp, sp/so, so/sx

smart, strong, beautiful people, jesus is smiling at them

contraflow: sp/sx, sx/so, so/sp

awkward, bastards of evolution, a disgrace to society

Even a mature contraflow will still have that “contra” aspect. It doesn’t make them more fit with the flow, but more attuned to how they can influence it without being whiny about it like most tend to do. In other words, mature contraflows learn to take advantage of both of their instinct to use the flow at their advantage even if it “disrupts” the flow.

Let’s say the Flow is like a vast pool of liquid. Synflows maintain, contain and balance the shape and movement of it. They are the “containers” of the flow, what will hold and maintain the liquid so it doesn’t get lost and wasted. Contraflows are the movement and the ones constantly transforming it. They are the "force”, what allows this pool of liquid to transform and renew itself to not “perish” and rot. So, in other words, synflows IVs will follow this flow however “it moves” as synflows are all about maintaining the shape and actual movement while contraflows are the ones changing the shape and movement of it constantly.

Mature contraflows will realize that “power” while immature won’t and will fail both at answering their instincts and actually be that “force” that ironically serve their instincts.

This is why Contraflows will still stand out in their own way and be the main influences of how “it moves”, but will somehow always challenge and transform it without ever really following it. Synflows are made to “merge” while Contraflows are made to “challenge”. You need both to constantly renew human interactions and create opportunities for growth. An immobile pool of liquid becomes stagnant and eventually unusable, and a constant chaotic and directionless movement lose any purpose and gets lost and wasted. So in the end, by combining both, it creates balance, and ultimately, by “embracing” their chaotic nature, contraflows kinda become the flow themselves, which can arguably look like they are more “in tune” with the flow.

So, you can say they somehow are more in tune with the flow when they learn to actually use their contra aspects. It then can give the impression they are more in sync with the flow when they are actually pushing it in every directions the flow wasn’t going to yet, aka still going against its initial direction.

And for mature synflows; by containing this movement they can give the impression of resisting the flow and going against it as it is actually changing and transforming. When, in fact, they still need to be “merged” with the flow to be that invisible force that keep the countenance of the flow.

Idk if the illustration is clear, but that’s the best way I found to illustrate those two opposition in IVs. So, a mature Contra will still be very contra, and I’d say even more than immature ones. Immature contra somehow tends to just try to make the least “waves” possible in the flow by favoring one instinct and discarding the other instead to not hesitate to juggle between their two instincts and create that contra effect. When immature contra switch of instinct (which inevitably happens) they of course create that effect of contra since the priority of their instincts is naturally made to create that sort of repulsive effect. Mature ones have simply learned to answer both their instincts even if it creates such a chaotic effect. They look like they are in tune when they are in fact the main responsible for provoking a disruption.

Anyway, idk if it is clear at all. If not, well you can always tell me what’s not clear for you and I’ll try to explain it in other words. If you have any other questions, don’t hesitate to ask.

Instinctual Variants: About Contraflow…

Here finally comes that post I hadn’t the guts to post for the longest time. This is about the Flows from the Instinctual variants. I based it off some personal observations and experiences, but also from a thereotical understanding. Therefore, take it as a personal take until time proves it right, wrong or partially both. 

So, I have seen this trend where people tended to say Contraflow causes the two instincts to go against each other… After a long time thinking about it, it became to make little to no sense to me. Instincts are meant to assure one’s survival among a larger whole, in part thanks to it. So, how come some instincts, that assure your survival, would end up causing a continual obstacle to your survival? 

However, I have seen and fully agree that there is two distinct effects created by the instincts. From my understanding, Contraflow never meant instincts going against each other, but rather instincts creating an effect of going against the “flow," flow being other people, not your own self. The flows are simply about how you follow the flow of human interaction and also, how you use it to serve your needs. Do you follow/merge with the flow most of the time or do you clash/ go against it most of the time? It is not an always/never rule, like anything in typology, but Synflow instincts usually allow to create cohesion by merging with it while contraflow somehow tests it by going against it.

Therefore, the repulsive effect of Contraflow still exists, thus the charming “contra” word to describe those instincts. This effect is not caused due to “instincts going against each other”, but rather because the instincts purpose is more individualistic, more self centered. It priorises the self over the flow.

I also don’t deny that the effect of instincts going against each other exists, it is the reason why it happens that I disagreed with. From my understanding, when instincts goes against each other, it is rather caused by the "healthy/unhealthy” factor of the personality rather than the inherent nature of the instincts. And more precisely, when someone is either in unhealthy range of their personality or either go into rough patches and have problems adapting and coping to the ongoing situation due to having few to no strategy to adapt to it.

To be clear, by my definition, healthiness/unhealthiness is related to one’s ability or inability to adapt oneself and its needs to an external aspect (environment, people, situation, etc.) and its needs. Adaptability is extremely circumstantial of course, and I won’t start to cherry pick on this, just get that it implies being able to answer your needs and respect your boundaries and also the ones given into an environment/situaton/group/person with its own resources, needs and boundaries. And the healthier you are, the better you are at answering your own needs and respect the external circumstances around you. So, it implies being able to know what you need and answer those same needs at the same time as respecting the limitation created by the environment, including other’s boundaries. Unhealthiness would imply a rigidity and an imbalance, either failing to answer your own needs or either disrupting the external element (situation, people, environment, etc.) at their expense.

The disctinction between the two flows unhealthiness is that Synflows get to lose themselves in the flow, they end up throwing away their needs at their expense for whatever is demanded upon them by the external aspects, while contraflows totally expulse themselves from the flow, as they become extremely self centered to the point of refusing to compromise with the flow’s demand. In either case, it jeopardizes the fulfillment of their needs as both needs to answer both the self’s needs while respecting (enough) the external limitations since it is imperative to answer the self’s needs. 

Healthiness would imply that synflows know when to go against the flow and contraflows when to follow it. But, even if healthy, I still believe Synflow will still be more “in tune” with the flow, while Contraflows “off” of it, and thus that there will always be that feeling of attraction/repulsion going on. But maybe the effect of the flow would simply be lessened up when healthy. Though, I have never met both a synflow and contraflow that were fully integrated to judge if it would be true or not.

I might publish later how I conceive the interaction of contraflow instincts, since there are plenty of posts talking about their instincts clashing, and how I conceive synflows when unhealthy, since they are also well enough portrayed when all rosy dovy.

Contraflow vs synflow is the worst part of instinctual variants in my opinion. I’m only accepting this Instinctual Variant ask to bring up my beef with it.

The basic theory is that synflow types (sp/so, so/sx, sx/sp) move essentially with their human nature and are thus more likable and functional on their own. Contraflow types (sp/sx, so/sp, sx/so) move in a way that’s dysfunctional and conflict with their dominant instinct and so they’re less likable and functional.

This theory has two major problems.

The first problem is inconsistent logic. So with sx/sp, the secondary sp cuts the sx off from overcommitting itself, but supposedly soc dominants are prone to overcommitting itself in a different way, so why isn’t secondary sp also healthy for so/sp? Sx intensifies and gets people out of their comfort zones, so why doesn’t secondary sx make sp/sx more healthy? Stuff like that.

The second problem is confirmation bias. Say you have a dominant social user, but you’re having a hard time figuring out their second instinct cause people are people who have the ability to have close relationships and stay physically safe at the same time most of the time, so you type them as so/sp cause they’re not likable. Later, when you head to their house and realize they should clearly be sp blind but you’ve already typed them as contraflow and they’re so damn obnoxious anyway that they have to be so/sp with weak sp. Meanwhile, a social user with clear sp boundaries and no particular massive passions to speak of is incredibly likable so you decide they have to be synflow and you have a fake so/sx on your hands. Both examples pulled from my and my friend’s experience trying to type with instinctual variants. It doesn’t follow the original theory but now that you can sort people into people you don’t like and people you do like and have some seemingly concrete reasoning behind it. So you get more warped ideas of the types and start attributing certain behaviors to certain types until the typing process becomes insular and not particularly based on any data.

TLDR- don’t think about synflow and contraflow

Yay I’m functional

hello my lovely contraflows!! :) i decided to make us a contraflow pride flag - it’s time we stood up to our oppressor (the synflows) and show pride in who we are!!! if anyone is curious, katy perry stands for so/sp, the axe murderer stands for sp/sx, and the witch stands for sx/so :) :) :)  i hope all of my contras are staying safe today - it can be scary living in a synflowarchal society!!!

(synflows you can reblog)

i have no specific evidence but my gut tells me yes.

slipping into overfocus almost always happens out of frustration, which just happens more often with contraflow than with synflow.

sx/so: sp-shutting themselves off from others when their sx is disappointed by soc’s superficiality
sp/sx: blaming soc-society for their own inability to sx while being unwilling to leave their sp-comfort-zone (e.g. incels)
so/sp: feeling forced to fake-sx-ing with crushes; ignoring sp-boundaries in favor of high soc-expectations

i have a hypothesis abt contraflow development!!

okay so idk at what point people take on their first instinct but i don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume people are either born with it or it shows within the 1st year of life. and the natural path for every child is synflow so if they are born/show sx their natural evolution would be to have sp as the second instinct. i want to put forth that this is the default. if you let a child develop their second instinct without interference this is how it will develop.

so my hypothesis is that contraflows develop by having the unnatural instinct forced on them by their parents/community/circumstances! if a child is born with/shows sx and their parents force them to pay attention to soc because they believe it’s important the child will develop the contraflow orientation. so contraflows will likely develop when their parents’ or primary caretaker’s first instinct is counter to the natural orientation of the child’s first instinct.

i had this thought bc of @galacticlust thank you!! for explaining your experience it really helped me decide on this bc my experience with sp is similar to yours with soc!!

So looking into synflow vs. contraflow stuff in enneagram, I’m finding a lot of positive things about synflow, and negative things about contraflow

I’m just wondering if anyone might know how a contraflow might be able to find self-acceptance or self-love, something along those lines? Because reading up on contraflow doesn’t seem to be terribly helpful lol

No, contra isn’t necessarily the less healthy version of the core. But the principle of contraflow still applies. Think which is more useful, sp/so 1, where the self critical tendencies have an edge of mentorship and upholding oneself as good (a natural byproduct of self perfection anyway) or sp/sx which is not only self critical, but also focused on the reform of the world but without the commitment of an sx/sp?

Contraflow creates certain contradictions in personality, but an sp/so 1 of lower health could easily have more unhealthy sp1 self condemning tendencies than a average health sp/sx 1

I’m kin with “weirdos on forums talking bs”

Synflow vs contraflow typing for me is usually half vibes, a third of visual typing/observation, and whatever the rest is from conversation. I can’t teach you how to read vibes lol, but I can try to explain the other two. Also disclaimer, I can’t always type between so/sp and sx/so so I can help you with typing in general but you probably need to go to someone with sx that can easily tell the difference since sx-blindness = what is sx and why can I only see soc

The most basic of basic things in synflow vs contraflow typing is whether they have a habit of rubbing people the wrong way. If a lot of people avoid or dislike someone - with a couple exceptions of so/sps or sx/sos bc sock groups are Weird Like That - they are probably contraflow. Conversely, if someone avoids everybody or seems to dislike everyone despite not being disliked themselves, they are probably synflow (unless they are an sp/sx somehow good at not pissing people off or an sx/so all the sx-blinds stalk). I don’t see any so/sx actively avoiding everybody, but if you know they’re sp-blind and they blend in well with their social environment, they’re so/sx.

As you can see, there a some exceptions, but contraflow are grouped together bc their instincts work against each other and drive people away in the process, so contraflow are in my experience easier to spot than synflow. Look for quirks that show evidence of inner conflict or unconscious (or you know, sometimes conscious) unattractive behavior, bc a lot of contraflow people are actually pretty likable yet have these qualities that discourage others from approaching them before they get to see any likability. Lol that sounds so mean

Body language and facial expressions are e v e r y t h i n g, so if you have no Fe or Se, you’re going to have to train your Si a lot. You can find plenty of behavioral descriptions on other blogs, and I would recommend either @istj-hedonist or @mbtiguy for that since their dom Si and dom Se are great resources for fairly accurate observations.

When all else fails in a typing situation, not just for instinctual variants, holding a conversation with someone is best. You can listen to their speaking patterns, learn what and how they value things, their hobbies and experiences, etc. etc. Not only do you end up killing boredom and getting a better idea of their type, you may also end up with a potential friend, so if you’re not feeling shy I do think that talking with people is the best way to type them.

Synflow stackings just mean that the variants you use are in a more “natural” order where the variants work together instead of against each other. So sp/so makes sense where social connections ensure survival compared to so/sp where surviving is supposed to allow you to make as many social connections as possible. Synflow/contraflow doesn’t have anything to do with extraversion.