romanov's alternative model of duality

[anotherperson]

so apparently romanov made his own version of what socionics types should really be duals:



i wanna hear thoughts on it

[Kurt Gabin]

Could you please give a link to the source where the principle of such duality is described?

[Adam Strange]

so apparently romanov made his own version of what socionics types should really be duals:



i wanna hear thoughts on it

I have some experience with some of these pairs. Let me tell you what I've found, after observing ten years of this.

EIE-SLE: I have never seen a couple composed of these two types, and really, it is hard to imagine.

SEE-ILI: I've seen this work for friendships, but never for a marriage. The ILIs seem to think that the SEEs are stupid. Fun, but stupid.

IEI-ILE: I personally know of four couples of this type. They all got married and eventually (after several years!) learned that their partner was a huge disappointment and that they hated each other, and now each couple is divorced and the individuals (especially the IEIs) don't have anything nice to say about their ex-partner.

IEE-SEI: I have never seen this. I have seen IEE-EII (kind of bad), and IEE-ILE (married, super bad, divorced) and SEI-EII (divorced, the EII hates her ex), but I have never seen this particular pairing.

SLI-EII: Again, I have never seen a couple composed of these two types. Not even friends. They seem to completely ignore each other.

LII-ESE: I actually have seen several couples of this type. While I don't have a lot of Alpha friends, the LIIs whom I know do seem to connect with ESEs. Some couples are married, seemingly happily.

LSE-ESI: I have never seen a couple composed of these types. Furthermore, my ESI interior decorator met my LSE friend and hated him in two minutes. She instantly hated my SEI tailor, too. This is notable because in the eleven years I've known her, I've never seen her hate anyone. And I've never seen her hate anyone instantly, upon first meeting, the way she did with these two guys. And I want to say, I think she is an excellent judge of character, even though I, personally, like both of these guys.

LSI-LIE: When I first got into Typology, through Myers-Briggs, I ran across several writers who said that the best match for an LIE is an LSI. Well, I've had two fairly long-term GFs of type LSI, and while they can be great friends and IME are great in bed, the relationship fails in the public arena. I'm pretty sure that the MB writers observed a few LSI-LIE couples and said "Hey, that looks like a great match!" And it is, until you are in it for a while, which the MB writers don't stick around to observe. More than anything else, my experience with this terrible advice, based on see-say and nothing else, convinced me that Socionics is the best theory we have so far.

I've been in relationships with a couple ESIs for years, and with a few more for shorter periods of time. I can take any of them anywhere and be proud of them, and the ones I've slept with were great in bed. I haven't married any of them because they all seem to have commitment issues and so, probably, do I. But if I had met them when I was 25, and if I knew then what I know now, I'd be married to an ESI right now.

My thoughts on Romanov's pairings are that he's batting 1 for 8. Not very good, if you ask me.

[anotherperson]

Could you please give a link to the source where the principle of such duality is described?

https://socionavigator-com.translate..._x_tr_pto=wapp

to get straight to it click #3

[anotherperson]

I have some experience with some of these pairs. Let me tell you what I've found, after observing ten years of this.

EIE-SLE: I have never seen a couple composed of these two types, and really, it is hard to imagine.

SEE-ILI: I've seen this work for friendships, but never for a marriage. The ILIs seem to think that the SEEs are stupid. Fun, but stupid.

IEI-ILE: I personally know of four couples of this type. They all got married and eventually (after several years!) learned that their partner was a huge disappointment and that they hated each other, and now each couple is divorced and the individuals (especially the IEIs) don't have anything nice to say about their ex-partner.

IEE-SEI: I have never seen this. I have seen IEE-EII (kind of bad), and IEE-ILE (married, super bad, divorced) and SEI-EII (divorced, the EII hates her ex), but I have never seen this particular pairing.

SLI-EII: Again, I have never seen a couple composed of these two types. Not even friends. They seem to completely ignore each other.

LII-ESE: I actually have seen several couples of this type. While I don't have a lot of Alpha friends, the LIIs whom I know do seem to connect with ESEs. Some couples are married, seemingly happily.

LSE-ESI: I have never seen a couple composed of these types. Furthermore, my ESI interior decorator met my LSE friend and hated him in two minutes. She instantly hated my SEI tailor, too. This is notable because in the eleven years I've known her, I've never seen her hate anyone. And I've never seen her hate anyone instantly, upon first meeting, the way she did with these two guys. And I want to say, I think she is an excellent judge of character, even though I, personally, like both of these guys.

LSI-LIE: When I first got into Typology, through Myers-Briggs, I ran across several writers who said that the best match for an LIE is an LSI. Well, I've had two fairly long-term GFs of type LSI, and while they can be great friends and IME are great in bed, the relationship fails in the public arena. I'm pretty sure that the MB writers observed a few LSI-LIE couples and said "Hey, that looks like a great match!" And it is, until you are in it for a while, which the MB writers don't stick around to observe. More than anything else, my experience with this terrible advice, based on see-say and nothing else, convinced me that Socionics is the best theory we have so far.

I've been in relationships with a couple ESIs for years, and with a few more for shorter periods of time. I can take any of them anywhere and be proud of them, and the ones I've slept with were great in bed. I haven't married any of them because they all seem to have commitment issues and so, probably, do I. But if I had met them when I was 25, and if I knew then what I know now, I'd be married to an ESI right now.

My thoughts on Romanov's pairings are that he's batting 1 for 8. Not very good, if you ask me.

i didnt expect a 1/8 success rate , figured some controversy but i was more optimistic. LSI + LIE is interesting though

although @Expansion is in a relationship with SEI just fine he said.

i also dont know if youre way of finding peoples types matches romanov's. (idk what socionics school you follow if any)

[Adam Strange]

i didnt expect a 1/8 success rate , figured some controversy but i was more optimistic. LSI + LIE is interesting though

although @Expansion is in a relationship with SEI just fine he said.

i also dont know if youre way of finding peoples types matches romanov's. (idk what socionics school you follow if any)

My way of finding people's types probably does differ from Romanov's. My method is to read the descriptions of the types, look at the type's two main functions along with descriptions of their behavior, and compare that to the way the person in question acts.

My method is far from perfect, and I've mis-typed a lot of people in my life, although I'd say I'm getting better with practice.

I also use VI a lot. I've found that a large percentage of people (but not all) can be typed by certain visual similarities that they have with other people. They can certainly be typed by their similar responses to questions on tests, when compared to people of a consensually known type, and I've just extended that a bit.

[Expansion]

AWellArnedCat is married to SEI, and he is IEE, and it reported to be fine in the learning curve.

In my immediate fam. we are all semi duals. LSI ESE pairs.

[Exodus]

so apparently romanov made his own version of what socionics types should really be duals:



i wanna hear thoughts on it

IEI-ILE - seems ok in practice but not better than SEI-ILE. Arguably some IEIs might prefer it.
LSI-LIE - just no

The other ones (semiduality, mirage, in-quadra relations) at least make some sense in theory, I haven't seen most of them in practice, but two Beta extroverts can go quite badly too.

I believe my aunt and uncle are EII-SLI and it seems fine but there is no clear reason why it should be preferable to duality.

Most hypotheses about relationships should be taken with a huge grain of salt - most likely they aren't based on a big sample size and they are subject to more uncertainty than individual typings.

[Kurt Gabin]

Here you need to understand the following:

1) Talanov’s questionnaire is initially based on data about the types that respondents assigned to themselves. That is, once upon a time there was a group of random volunteers who took a questionnaire and said, “Well, I think I’m Don Quixote.” Accordingly, the accuracy of Talanov’s questionnaire does not exceed the accuracy of self-typing by the average socionics enthusiast. These data indicate that only about 45% of those who passed the questionnaire correspond to their type, and the correctness of the typing of the rest is questionable.

2) However, this did not stop Ivan and he continued to essentially analyze the stereotypes reflected in the questionnaire data. For example, in the Russian socionics community there was once a trend towards self-typing gothic gloomy Hamlets into Balzacs. And so Ivan finds that in Talanov’s questionnaire these types are highly correlated. But instead of suspecting something was wrong, he makes the assumption that these types have similar values.

3) Another thing that you need to understand about the questionnaire is that it is NOT SOCIONIC. If you have taken it, then you know that its questions are not related to the way of thinking, but instead determine personality traits and physiological characteristics. At some point, Talanov got tired of coming up with questions and began using questions on things related to hormonal imbalances and mental disorders. Therefore, by analyzing the correlations in the erroneous part of Talanov’s data, Ivan actually found a relation between socionic stereotypes and a person’s hormonal background.

4) The result turned out to be similar to DCNH because DCNH is just a renamed / or reinvented DISC, and DISC essentially describes the ratio of the main hormones in the body and how they affect the mind.

5) However, it is interesting that the result was similar to the enneagram, which indicates that the enneagram type is the hormonal type of a person.

[anotherperson]

5) However, it is interesting that the result was similar to the enneagram, which indicates that the enneagram type is the hormonal type of a person.

want do you mean by this last part. can you elaborate

[Kurt Gabin]

want do you mean by this last part. can you elaborate

Ah, I forgot that pictures are not translated and you cannot read them. The one with the circle is very similar to the enneagram:

expansion of conflicts ->
investment in yourself->
perception of the new->
adapting to people->
conflict avoidance->
contribution to the environment ->
preservation of existing ->
dictate of will ->

[one]

I know 2 LSE and EII couples. They just look really well together lol. For one of them, apparently some people close to them joked that LSE is quite imposing or at least the one leading all the time, but EII made it known that he doesn't like how those comments come across when they are doing really well and so they all shut up as far as I know. LSE didn't want to say anything actually, maybe she felt guilty at some point because she knows she's the extrovert and when they are together she opens the conversation more. While they talk relatively equally, the EII will have his contemplative moments. But yeah they look really good together lololol idk you just have to see it. They've been married a long time.

[Chae]

that model seems far too crazy and experimental for me

two logical types? putting two stubborn sensors together? only the ESFx + INTx duals get a pass and carry on as usual?

look i don't want to mock this but... i guess he tried to be edgy and different making this up to get some clout lmao! and it worked: we're talking about it!


now seriously: to me, those seem to be couples by function towards the outside world, not by mutual interlocking chemistry and benefit for the other. either besties or co-workers type of energy. taking the opposites attract factor out of it.


PS: the pretentious "pole of ____ " terminology made me laugh, what is this

[anotherperson]

that model seems far too crazy and experimental for me

two logical types? putting two stubborn sensors together? only the ESFx + INTx duals get a pass and carry on as usual?

look i don't want to mock this but... i guess he tried to be edgy and different making this up to get some clout lmao! and it worked: we're talking about it!


now seriously: to me, those seem to be couples by function towards the outside world, not by mutual interlocking chemistry and benefit for the other. either besties or co-workers type of energy. taking the opposites attract factor out of it.


PS: the pretentious "pole of ____ " terminology made me laugh, what is this

if the model is based on DCNH (gulenko), then social role ships are likely

about the pretentious language that might be a result of its translation form russian