Socionics "Result" Type Dual Pairs: LII-ESE, ESI-LIE, SLI-IEE, IEI-SLE
What do you think about this article?
It is short enough that I will post it up here:
On Dual Relationships of Result Types by Tsypin - Wikisocion
Introduction
This phenomenon has been noticed for a while, that
Process type dual pairs are more frequently encountered, while
Result type dual pairs are much rarer in comparison. In addition, Process (right) dual couples tend to coexist together for a long time, while Result (left) couples often quickly fall apart.
Why does this happen?
The hypothesis is as follows: Process (right) dual pairs have a "plus" sign in their program (leading function) aspects. This indicates the possibility of a gradual acceptance of a partner. Process types are ready to accept any manifestations on their "plus" program aspects. For the Result types the situation is completely different. The "minus" sign in leading functions inclines them to immediately reject the person (as "bad") or accept them right after acquaintance. However, there are no ideal people, thus Result types frequently make negative verdicts on their dual candidacies. The way they describe and justify it is different: "unappealing", "mean", "unpleasant", "untidy", "unattractive", etc. Result types seem to be always trying to shield themselves from unpleasant perceptions and feelings, which also happens to shield them from potential partners on grounds that they seemed unsuitable at a first glance. Getting into details and understanding a partner better seems uninteresting to Result types – people of these types prefer to make quick, far-reaching assessments.
The specificity of dual relations is such that initially there is an absence of mental resonance that would allow the people to find common themes and become captivated with each other through conversation. Here, what happens is an assessment of energy compatibility, which is verbalized with much difficulty. A reliable assessment of the degree of energy compatibility requires time, while Result type style of communication is based on quick assessments.
Thus, Process types are oriented at making dual relationships work. How do Result type fare?
Examination by type
ESE, ESFj (Hugo)
Often characterizes his dual as: "boring", "too indecisive", "helpless", "wimp", "unkempt", "dull person", "too quiet and monotonous". ESE usually gets attracted to bright, responsive, and practical partners. Often builds relationships with SEI, LSE, LSI, and EII as partners.
LII, INTj (Robespierre)
Often characterizes his dual as: "completely unpredictable", "chaotic", "utterly confused", "emotional dictator", "aggressive", "too straightforward", "too stupid", "has no knowledge himself, but continues to argue", "not interested in anything serious", "doesn't leave anyone alone". LII gravitates towards more calm and predictable (in his view) relations and often picks SEI, LSE, EIE, LIE as his romantic partners.
SLE, ESTp (Zhukov)
Typical descriptions of his dual: "wimp", "useless", "worthless", "failure at life", "inexperienced in life", "deadend", "too effeminate", "crybaby". The SLE is more interested in partners with whom he can, more or less on equal footing, discuss and resolve important "sensory" issues to himself – earning money, accumulation of material prosperity, arrangement of his "territory", building his career. Thus, he often chooses SEI and SLI as his partners from strategic considerations, and also gets interested in ESI, ILI, EIE, and LSI.
IEI, INFp (Yesenin)
In his eyes, his dual usually appears as: "too shallow", "too materialistic", "too appearance oriented", "uncultured boor", "vulgar dork", "a dictator", "a man in a skirt (about female duals)", "a martinet". Very often IEI doesn't feel comfortable meeting his dual and strives towards relationships that seem more soulful and intellectually resonant to him. Often his "partners in life" are types LII, LSI, ESI, SLI, and ILE.
LIE, ENTj (Jack)
The most common descriptions of his dual: "strict doll", "not a woman, but a kindergarden teacher", "petty bourgeois", "pathologically jealous", "total monotony", "dull and boring", "too gloomy", "can't say a word to him/her". LIE seeks partners that won't limit his freedom, who have a lenient outlook on his "adventures", and who won't teach him how to live and control his every step. He often chooses EII, LSI, ILI, SEE, and LII as his partners.
ESI, ISFj (Dreiser)
The perception of his dual can be characterized as following: "the inconstancy itself", "windbag", "womanizer", "lover of extreme situations", "consummate extremalist". ESI often prioritizes partners who are more promising of stability and calm way of life, as well as those who dedicate more consideration to questions of ethics and moral behavior. Often ESI ends up pairing up with LSI, ESE, EIE, and LII.
IEE, ENFp (Huxley)
Their issues with perception of their dual are characterized by the following adjectives: "nature's mystery", "lazybones", "ice queen", "bore", "incorrigible egoist", "too quiet", "has his own agenda". Far more attractive partners to the IEE are often sociable, open, and emotional people. It is difficult for the IEE to reconcile with the fact that for SLI everything soon gets boring. This is a typical misunderstanding between a static type, who is somewhat inert in own interests and tastes, and a dynamic type, who does not wish to get stuck and fixated on anything for too long. Thus, IEE, desiring to create a strong relationship, gravitates towards types ILI, SEI, SLE, and IEI.
SLI, ISTp (Gabin)
In his eyes, his dual often appears as: "superficial", "intrusive", "taking everything too close to heart", "chaotic", "noisy", "chatterbox", "neurotic". The SLI does not aspire to relationships where parameters are fixed once and for always; he needs certain freedom in behavior. Any restrictions and bans, even if they are expressed in a very mild form, he perceives rather painfully. Attempting to ensure emotional comfort and privacy of personal space, the SLI is inclined to pick EII, ESI, SLE, and IEI for life together.
Concluding remarks
1. Of course, the dual pairs of Result types are found in practice. But, firstly, they rarely make it together to an old age; and secondly, statistically in comparison with Right dual pairs they are relatively rare. In any case, this article should not be interpreted in a sense that Result dual pairs are impossible to form.
2. When two people are typed as a couple, often one of them is typed wrong because the typer falls under the influence of "the myth of duality" and convinces himself or herself that if one partner is LIE then other has to be ESI. Many couples thus continue living together under the impression that they duals, while in actuality their pair is characterized by another intertype relationship.
3. The article lists the most common pairings for Result TIMs, but this is not to be understood rigidly. In reality, there may be the most "exotic" pairings of types, and moreover these unions may be harmonious to a certain extent. There are, for example, supervision and conflict couples who live together for a very long time. They seem to come out of the difficult, stressful situations due to the richness of their personal qualities. A person choosing their marriage partner focuses mainly not on their TIM, but on their personal qualities, and therefore is able to get along with a representative of almost any TIM if the personal qualities of the selected partner are close and dear to him.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Number 9 large
valuing and a phobic 6 possibly. She doesn't trust your advice, and is probably a hypochondriac who only relies on certain authorities. She could be EII. Sounds like a case of Si HA. She seems to have weaker Logic. So I'd rule out Alpha NT and Delta ST.
In return, they can do your taxes for you. Or fix your door lock. 
What works better is to get outside and do new stuff.
I don't really see socionics as something that gives you power in practice really beyond understanding yourself and maybe some other people better, tho'. Idk if the people who charge money for typing promise infallible typings. That'd be a scam yah if so.
PoLR will have a very hard time "codifying" their thinking. I "can" do that myself given how it's demonstrative for me but, well, it takes effort. Give me an incentive and I can make a rulebook that codifies my thinking but, on the fly, I tend to ignore it. The "codes" are there and I follow them in a sense, but I also violate them on a whim. Pragmatism>Ideological Purity for my kind. Thing is, for a 
