A very cogent essay on Reinin dichotomies

[Jonathan]

Rick has written a very compelling piece on Reinin dichotomies here...http://socionist.blogspot.com/.

In addition, I think the same arguments can apply to "+/-"...and, I would say, to such dichotomies as "internal" (=N or F) and "external (=S or T).

Personally, I think that speculating about these dichotomies is a fun experimental exercise, and I'm always willing to explore even the most remote possibilities related to them (to the point that people sometimes wonder what on earth I'm thinking). I never tire of thinking that considering a new variant will lead to a new discovery.

But given the heavy discussion on derived dichotomies on this forum, and the degree of seriousness with which people take them, it's probably worthwhile to read this article.

[aestrivex]

@ rick

+ 10^(ln(491103990000))


@ jonathan, for bringing this up (i hadn't seen it yet)

+ 2.3

[aestrivex]

But say, we change it up and use, Aristocratic, Democratic, or Static and Dynamic. For a philosopher, perhaps these concepts are not as imbued with content, but for the political content and scientific content there is a synthesis.

i say we change it up, throw away all of the dichotomies except static/dynamic, and use IM elements.



anyone who disagrees with me does not understand socionics.

[aestrivex]

I think that was one of my first post here, but I have since throw that post and position away, it's way too absolutist, gotta leave a little wiggle room.

...

[Creepy-bg]

no dichotomies, no im elements

from now on we type only by penis length and bush size

[Expat]

i say we change it up, throw away all of the dichotomies except static/dynamic, and use IM elements.



anyone who disagrees with me does not understand socionics.

Fair enough, except for this -- some "dichotomies" are actually nothing more or less than quadra values, like Reasonable/Resolute, Merry/Serious etc.

I think the ones that are really more trouble than they're worth are Process/Result, Positivist/Negativist, and Asker/Declarer.

On the latter, I was faced with the following situation -- I know a guy who, under any reading of the available descriptions of actual behavior, is an Asker, obviously so. Yet everything else, after interacting him nearly daily for 3 years, points out to EII as his type. Everything. Alternatives such as EIE, IEI or LII create more problems. So I have to conclude that that dichotomy can't really be relied upon. A cop-out answer is to say that he's intuitive subtype, but then what it means is that that dichotomy wasn't helpful to find his type anyway.

Where I agree with niffweed17 (if that's what he meant) and disagree with Rick (we didn't discuss it in Duesselforf as I had hoped) is in this -- I think that even the 4 Jungian dichotomies, extroverted/introverted, senser/intuitive, ethical/logical, irrational/rational can be easily misused (Rick has clearly stated that IM elements should be used over the 4 dichotomies, in his blog, but his repeated referrence to the dichotomies makes that be overlooked).

[munenori2]

no dichotomies, no im elements

from now on we type only by penis length and bush size

Aha! Finally there is an objective method available. Socionics is at last an empirical science!!!!

[FDG]

If Rick can't understand and apply dichotomies IRL, that doesn't mean they don't exist. Simple as that.

[liveandletlive]

I don't think they're necessary either. They may be helpful in learning socionics to help get a better idea of how the types and IM elements work together though.

[Jarno]

i say we change it up, throw away all of the dichotomies except static/dynamic, and use IM elements.

anyone who disagrees with me does not understand socionics.

IM elements are the core of a type. Like the engine is to a car.

But looking only at the car's engine and not to it's exterior (and other things), makes discovering the brand/type more difficult then necessary.

Anyone who disagrees with me does not understand socionics.

[Kristiina]

i say we change it up, throw away all of the dichotomies except static/dynamic, and use IM elements.

anyone who disagrees with me does not understand socionics.

IM elements are the core of a type. Like the engine is to a car.

But looking only at the car's engine and not to it's exterior (and other things), makes discovering the brand/type more difficult then necessary.

Anyone who disagrees with me does not understand socionics.

'

I agree. And it's very of you to make a working analogy which turns socionics into a car. But lol, doing a Phaedrus here, right? (bolded part)

[machintruc]

I don't know any Declaring EIE, any Negativist LSI, or any Process LII.

Augusta herself said that Statics/Dynamics can be usable as a dichotomy. But why FIVE of the Reinin dichotomies would be usable ? Why FIFTEEN or just only the Jungian FOUR ? Where's the logic ? Haven't you seen some difference in temperament between, for example, Result IJ types and Process IJ types ?

In my opinion, the problem is not that Reinin dichotomies don't work or are wrong, it's that they are still defined unaccurately. Thus when used, they may generate bogus results. Thus they appear as wrong.

Talanov has made research on REAL FACTS (I have seen a table once) to prove the worth of some obscure dichotomies like Carefree/Foresight or such. He agrees that some behaviours/traits appear more frequently to Carefree types, and that some behaviours/traits appear more frequently to Foresight types, and so on.

[aestrivex]

Where I agree with niffweed17 (if that's what he meant) and disagree with Rick (we didn't discuss it in Duesselforf as I had hoped) is in this -- I think that even the 4 Jungian dichotomies, extroverted/introverted, senser/intuitive, ethical/logical, irrational/rational can be easily misused (Rick has clearly stated that IM elements should be used over the 4 dichotomies, in his blog, but his repeated referrence to the dichotomies makes that be overlooked).

i agree with this as well.

[aestrivex]

If Rick can't understand and apply dichotomies IRL, that doesn't mean they don't exist. Simple as that.

true, but irrelevant.

i strongly agree also with what rick said that dichotomies don't necessarily not exist (i don't know if they do or not), but that rather they refer to information which is absolutely trivial and useless, and completely unreliable in comparison with legitimate information metabolism preferences.

[machintruc]

If Rick can't understand and apply dichotomies IRL, that doesn't mean they don't exist. Simple as that.

Yeah but why can I ?

[Not A Communist Shill]

I remember there was an article somewhere about a Socionics orgy, and the people read and used these in great detail to type someone - they came up with ESTj for someone who was a ISFj or something similar - if they can't use them to a high level of success (O.K., it was only one person...), then I doubt we can (well, I doubt I can at least ) - I think Rick is right to warn of the perils of the added -ness.

Having said that, I think the Static-Dynamic dichotomy is a pretty important one - though if people cannot understand it (or think they understand it when they don't - just in case I fit into this category).

[Blaze]

no dichotomies, no im elements

from now on we type only by penis length and bush size

huh what if ya keep your bush trimmed? not that there's anything wrong with that....

[Blaze]

no dichotomies, no im elements

from now on we type only by penis length and bush size

huh what if ya keep your bush trimmed? not that there's anything wrong with that....

Brazilian?

brabrabrazillllliiion hahaha

ok just to comment on the Reinin's. they're interesting but kind of like a parlor game, not (at the risk of mixing my metephors) the real meat of socionics and with limited diagnostic value.

lol

[FDG]

If Rick can't understand and apply dichotomies IRL, that doesn't mean they don't exist. Simple as that.

true, but irrelevant.

i strongly agree also with what rick said that dichotomies don't necessarily not exist (i don't know if they do or not), but that rather they refer to information which is absolutely trivial and useless, and completely unreliable in comparison with legitimate information metabolism preferences.

Again, this depends on how good you are at perceiving renin dichotomies over other metabolism preferences. So your proposition cannot be universalized, sorry.

[discourse]

Actually, I haven't never really understood the idea of dichotomies, specially the Reinin's. For me the socionics is how they define it- the sience of diagnosing other people's TIM and suggestions on proving it. So I try to understand people's informational fillings and how it procceeds, instead of typing behaviors. Which means that a socionist should work in hands with psychologists. But since I am an hobby socionist, I don't have the ethical duty to cure people, but it also means that I don't know psychology enough to diagnose them right. Or neither work relationships out, when they have troubles. So I can't go puclic with my typings. I don't have the social position to work as an opinion leader in socionics and psychology.

But typing, I think that any method is good and even ad hocs can be that, until the result has a consensus with others and can be falshified by other socionists.

[Gilly]

no dichotomies, no im elements

from now on we type only by penis length and bush size

huh what if ya keep your bush trimmed?

You're a sensor, silly.

[aestrivex]

If Rick can't understand and apply dichotomies IRL, that doesn't mean they don't exist. Simple as that.

true, but irrelevant.

i strongly agree also with what rick said that dichotomies don't necessarily not exist (i don't know if they do or not), but that rather they refer to information which is absolutely trivial and useless, and completely unreliable in comparison with legitimate information metabolism preferences.

Again, this depends on how good you are at perceiving renin dichotomies over other metabolism preferences. So your proposition cannot be universalized, sorry.

you really don't understand this at all.

[strrrng]

i strongly agree also with what rick said that dichotomies don't necessarily not exist (i don't know if they do or not), but that rather they refer to information which is absolutely trivial and useless, and completely unreliable in comparison with legitimate information metabolism preferences.

yup.

working with Jarno's analogy, it doesn't matter what style of brake calibers, or what brand of tires, the car has.

[Creepy-bg]

no dichotomies, no im elements

from now on we type only by penis length and bush size

huh what if ya keep your bush trimmed? not that there's anything wrong with that....

it makes my cock look bigger

[Jarno]

i strongly agree also with what rick said that dichotomies don't necessarily not exist (i don't know if they do or not), but that rather they refer to information which is absolutely trivial and useless, and completely unreliable in comparison with legitimate information metabolism preferences.

yup.

working with Jarno's analogy, it doesn't matter what style of brake calibers, or what brand of tires, the car has.

Nope. You are abusing my analogy or simply don't get it.

I've never said you should look at features of the car that can be found on every type of car...

You should look at easy to spot type specific features, or at least things that narrows down the range of possibility's.

[FDG]

or on the hand hand: maybe how good you are at _imagining_ them.

Yeah maybe, but if works for me, I don't see the problem?