Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Reinin dichotomies versus Model A

  1. #1
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Reinin dichotomies versus Model A

    Whatever his type (clearly ILE ), this is an excellent example of how people often confuse the Demonstrative and Base functions when typing. I think it's an area the English-speaking Socionics community (including me!) could bear to work on and clarify a bit.
    More likely it is a case in which it is exposed how pointless it is to identify fictional entities like "functions" in socionics. ENTp and ENFj are just types with a lot of traits in common, superficial and deeper ones. Intuition, Merry and Extrovert are all traits that can be identified in their own right, without regard to the "function" they give rise to in combination with other things.

    The pianist Glenn Gould is another person that leaves me undecided between ENTp and ENFj.

  2. #2
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    More likely it is a case in which it is exposed how pointless it is to identify fictional entities like "functions" in socionics. ENTp and ENFj are just types with a lot of traits in common, superficial and deeper ones. Intuition, Merry and Extrovert are all traits that can be identified in their own right, without regard to the "function" they give rise to in combination with other things.

    The pianist Glenn Gould is another person that leaves me undecided between ENTp and ENFj.
    So, if I understand you correctly, you deny the validity of Model A, and only acknowledge the Reinin dichotomies? Or am I misunderstanding you?
    Quaero Veritas.

  3. #3
    norph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    TIM
    NotINotNNotFNotj
    Posts
    186
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    So, if I understand you correctly, you deny the validity of Model A, and only acknowledge the Reinin dichotomies? Or am I misunderstanding you?
    The characteristics he mentioned are not Reinin dichotomies.

  4. #4
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So, if I understand you correctly, you deny the validity of Model A, and only acknowledge the Reinin dichotomies? Or am I misunderstanding you?
    Its mainly just redundant and excessively rigid. In a sense "Ti" is just the combination of Merry, Logic and Static. The model introduces a symbol for this combination of traits, but not for, for example, Reasonable, Logic and Rational. One could argue this is an unwarranted bias and certain people have done this. The models that Hitta likes to cite, for example, interprets the Te of an ESTj to have a common symbol with the Ti of an INTj (although they don't supply a name beyond Te+/Ti-, I have suggested calling it Tt after Taciturn Logic), much like the Ti of an INTj would have a common symbol with the Ti of an ISTj in model A.

  5. #5
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norph View Post
    The characteristics he mentioned are not Reinin dichotomies.
    Reinin dichotomies - Wikisocion

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    Its mainly just redundant and excessively rigid. In a sense "Ti" is just the combination of Merry, Logic and Static. The model introduces a symbol for this combination of traits, but not for, for example, Reasonable, Logic and Rational. One could argue this is an unwarranted bias and certain people have done this. The models that Hitta likes to cite, for example, interprets the Te of an ESTj to have a common symbol with the Ti of an INTj (although they don't supply a name beyond Te+/Ti-, I have suggested calling it Tt after Taciturn Logic), much like the Ti of an INTj would have a common symbol with the Ti of an ISTj in model A.
    Hmm, interesting. I've tended to view it as precisely the opposite: that the Reinin dichotomies are an attempt to describe the actual structure of the mind -- Model A -- using only dichotomies, resulting in a number of dichotomies with little or no empirical support (which is not, of course, to say that they do not exist). In other words, that Model A is "real" and the Reinins "fictional".

    However, I'm interested in reading more about these "models that Hitta likes to cite," if you have links handy.
    Quaero Veritas.

  6. #6
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmm, interesting. I've tended to view it as precisely the opposite: that the Reinin dichotomies are an attempt to describe the actual structure of the mind -- Model A -- using only dichotomies, resulting in a number of dichotomies with little or no empirical support (which is not, of course, to say that they do not exist). In other words, that Model A is "real" and the Reinins "fictional".
    For one thing model A doesn't have empirical support; it is asserted based on authority and consensus alone. For another, the real structure of the mind (aka, that which exists hidden behind the scenes and occasions indirectly what we observe and measure) is more difficult to appropriate than the measurable facts about the mind. The latter of these are dichotomies: something is true of the mind, or something is false of it. This is how dichotomies are more closely related to a "laboratory setting" approach to socionics. It is how they are more compatible with empiricism.

    However, I'm interested in reading more about these "models that Hitta likes to cite," if you have links handy.
    I don't have any handy, so a post history search on Hitta is the recommended way to retrieve them.

  7. #7
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I hope you don't all mind but I moved this discussion into its own thread. It'll get more responses that way.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  8. #8
    norph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    TIM
    NotINotNNotFNotj
    Posts
    186
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    What's your point? The dichotomies mentioned (intuition, extroversion, and merry) are not Reinin dichotomies. Merry is listed on the page, of course, but that doesn't make it a Reinin dichotomy.

  9. #9
    norph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    TIM
    NotINotNNotFNotj
    Posts
    186
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tuturututu View Post
    You're an idiot.
    I agree.

  10. #10
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    For one thing model A doesn't have empirical support; it is asserted based on authority and consensus alone. For another, the real structure of the mind (aka, that which exists hidden behind the scenes and occasions indirectly what we observe and measure) is more difficult to appropriate than the measurable facts about the mind. The latter of these are dichotomies: something is true of the mind, or something is false of it. This is how dichotomies are more closely related to a "laboratory setting" approach to socionics. It is how they are more compatible with empiricism.
    Hmm, you have a point there on empiricism. I can definitely concede that. Still, I think calling Model A "fictional" is unwarranted, unless you have evidence or reasoning which strongly contradicts the theory, in the same way that calling dark matter or quantum entanglement "fictional" would be unwarranted. They're theories which are consistent with the evidence discovered so far, i.e., not falsified. Even if a theory is unfalsifiable, it's still an unjustifiable logical leap from "unfalsifiable" to "fictional".

    Yeah, I know, I'm being pedantic. I can't help it.

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    I hope you don't all mind but I moved this discussion into its own thread. It'll get more responses that way.
    Thanks, I was thinking of doing that myself.

    Quote Originally Posted by norph View Post
    What's your point? The dichotomies mentioned (intuition, extroversion, and merry) are not Reinin dichotomies. Merry is listed on the page, of course, but that doesn't make it a Reinin dichotomy.
    I'm curious as to what you think the Reinin dichotomies are.

    Here's another link: Dichotomies - Wikisocion, and quotes extracted from that page:
    In socionics each type is characterized by one trait (or pole) of each of the following 15 dichotomies. The first four are referred to as the "Jungian foundation," and the other 11 are referred to as "Reinin dichotomies", named after the socionist Grigoriy Reinin, who mathematically demonstrated the existence of a total of 15 orthogonal dichotomies. Technically speaking, the Jungian foundation is a subset of the Reinin dichotomies, although they are given much more attention in socionics and are not questioned.
    Jungian foundation (or first-tier dichotomies)
    Extraverted / introverted (sometimes called 'Extratim / Introtim')
    Sensing / intuitive (Sensing is sometimes called 'Sensory')
    Third-tier dichotomies
    Merry / Serious (sometimes called 'Subjectivist / Objectivist')
    Quaero Veritas.

  11. #11
    norph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    TIM
    NotINotNNotFNotj
    Posts
    186
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post


    I'm curious as to what you think the Reinin dichotomies are.

    Here's another link: Dichotomies - Wikisocion, and quotes extracted from that page:
    That's bullshit, only in the most hopelessly mathematical interpretations like the one presented on this page could Jungian dichotomies be seen as a subset of Reinin dichotomies since Jungian dichotomies conceptually preceded Reinin dichotomies entirely. The fact that somebody invented a mathematical concept suggesting that there are all these other dichotomies that exist neither makes that so nor remotely puts Jungian dichotomies on the same conceptual plane.

    Similarly, static/dynamic, merry/serious, resolute/judicious, democratic/aristocratic are not only the result of combinations of Jungian dichotomies. Technically these three might be considered Reinin dichotomies inasmuch as Reinin wrote about them, or if considered very strictly on the basis of what Reinin described, but in practice I've never seen a single person do that and instead people use them to refer to differences in quadra values, which undermines any aspect of them as a Reinin dichotomy. (As it so happens, I believe the static/dynamic and democratic/aristocratic dichotomies, despite not being Reinin dichotomies, are not meaningful at all). The remainder I see as bona fide Reinin dichotomies, and incidentally also as completely worthless.

  12. #12
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norph View Post
    That's bullshit, only in the most hopelessly mathematical interpretations like the one presented on this page could Jungian dichotomies be seen as a subset of Reinin dichotomies since Jungian dichotomies conceptually preceded Reinin dichotomies entirely. The fact that somebody invented a mathematical concept suggesting that there are all these other dichotomies that exist neither makes that so nor remotely puts Jungian dichotomies on the same conceptual plane.
    The 11 new Reinin dichotomies are derivable from the 4 Jungian ones. But any of the Jungian ones is also derivable from 4 of the 11 new ones. It works like a circle.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  13. #13
    norph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    TIM
    NotINotNNotFNotj
    Posts
    186
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    The 11 new Reinin dichotomies are derivable from the 4 Jungian ones. But any of the Jungian ones is also derivable from 4 of the 11 new ones. It works like a circle.
    If you find the mathematical construction used to derive the Reinin dichotomies valid in the first place, you could use this argument, but conceptually they don't remotely compare.

  14. #14
    wants to be a writer. silverchris9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,107
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've never been a fan of the Reinin dichotomies. They seem too limited to me, just by the nature of the terms that are associated with them. "Introverted thinking" is so broad a term as to be practically meaningless in and of itself, allowing us to find out own meanings and apply them to the terminology, so that "introverted thinking" or "Ti" can become a label for a phenomenon. Democratic vs. Aristocratic, on the other hand, comes bundled with so many irrelevant associations, that they make for very weak and limited terms. I mean, it's inclined to make you think that democratic types love everyone equally while aristocratic types want the peasants to die or something.

    Also, can someone please explain to me how it makes sense to say that ESEs and EIEs "tend to minimize the emotional elements of interaction, preferring to focus on the 'business' elements"? This just seems silly to me.

    Anyway, I tend to think that the reinin dichotomies derive meaning from Model A, not the other way around. Certainly on the wikisocion page, all the explanations of the Reinin dichotomies boil down to a few oversimplified traits that are little better than your average type description in helping people find their actual types (that is, it can get you in the ballpark, but probably study of the functions is needed to nail down a best fit type).

    I'm not smart enough to know, but I'd assume that yes, dichotomies are more empirically measurable, but I've never been interested in going about socionics in an empirical way. More power to ya if you are, I guess.
    Not a rule, just a trend.

    IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.

    Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...

    I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.

  15. #15
    JohnDo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    LII-IEI
    Posts
    638
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    Also, can someone please explain to me how it makes sense to say that ESEs and EIEs "tend to minimize the emotional elements of interaction, preferring to focus on the 'business' elements"? This just seems silly to me.
    It sounds paradoxically but is actually true if understood correctly. LII and LSI are logical types - but they try to enter the emotional state of others because they are Emotivists. ESE and EIE are emotional Constructivists - they try not to get affected by negative emotions, focus on solving the objective problems.

    Emotivists try to solve the emotional problems first. Constructivists ignore emotional problems and and try to solve the objective problems immediately. You will certainly observe that if you take care...

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    Anyway, I tend to think that the reinin dichotomies derive meaning from Model A, not the other way around.
    I think it is just another way of looking at things.

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    Certainly on the wikisocion page, all the explanations of the Reinin dichotomies boil down to a few oversimplified traits that are little better than your average type description in helping people find their actual types (that is, it can get you in the ballpark, but probably study of the functions is needed to nail down a best fit type).
    I still consider comparing type descriptions the best way to determine your type. Reinin dichotomies are certainly not a good place to start but I think they are very useful for advanced socionists. Asking/declaring might even be useful for typing...

  16. #16
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norph View Post
    That's bullshit, only in the most hopelessly mathematical interpretations like the one presented on this page could Jungian dichotomies be seen as a subset of Reinin dichotomies since Jungian dichotomies conceptually preceded Reinin dichotomies entirely. The fact that somebody invented a mathematical concept suggesting that there are all these other dichotomies that exist neither makes that so nor remotely puts Jungian dichotomies on the same conceptual plane.

    Similarly, static/dynamic, merry/serious, resolute/judicious, democratic/aristocratic are not only the result of combinations of Jungian dichotomies. Technically these three might be considered Reinin dichotomies inasmuch as Reinin wrote about them, or if considered very strictly on the basis of what Reinin described, but in practice I've never seen a single person do that and instead people use them to refer to differences in quadra values, which undermines any aspect of them as a Reinin dichotomy. (As it so happens, I believe the static/dynamic and democratic/aristocratic dichotomies, despite not being Reinin dichotomies, are not meaningful at all). The remainder I see as bona fide Reinin dichotomies, and incidentally also as completely worthless.
    I'm curious, where did you learn socionics? Did your strangely negative opinion on Reinin arise from there, or is it something you've arrived at on your own? It's just that I've never seen anyone try to argue what you're arguing, and I'm trying to figure out where you're coming from.

    And somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Reinin himself invent the terms "static/dynamic", "democratic/aristocratic", etc., i.e., everything but the original Jungian four? It just seems odd to me to claim that they're somehow not Reinin dichotomies.
    Quaero Veritas.

  17. #17
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    And somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Reinin himself invent the terms "static/dynamic", "democratic/aristocratic", etc., i.e., everything but the original Jungian four? It just seems odd to me to claim that they're somehow not Reinin dichotomies.
    AFAIK, Augusta invented static/dynamic as one of the original information aspects alongside object/field and internal/external. When the Reinin dichotomies were derived, Augusta and Reinin personally filled in the properties of the different dichotomies and one of the dichotomies was assigned to static/dynamic.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  18. #18
    JohnDo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    LII-IEI
    Posts
    638
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    I'm curious, where did you learn socionics? Did your strangely negative opinion on Reinin arise from there, or is it something you've arrived at on your own? It's just that I've never seen anyone try to argue what you're arguing, and I'm trying to figure out where you're coming from.
    Everybody here who doesn't speak Russian has no other choice than learning socionics from Dmitry Lytov's, Rick DeLong's and Sergei Ganin's websites.

    What do these three English-speaking socionics gurus have in common? They all don't like the Reinin dichotomies. Ganin calls them "useless", DeLong says they are "dead" and Lytov criticizes them for their meaninglessness...

    Ironically, many or most advanced users of this forum use the Reinin dichotomies frequently. I never understood why the 3 gurus don't...

  19. #19
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    AFAIK, Augusta invented static/dynamic as one of the original information aspects alongside object/field and internal/external. When the Reinin dichotomies were derived, Augusta and Reinin personally filled in the properties of the different dichotomies and one of the dichotomies was assigned to static/dynamic.
    Cool. That actually reinforces my point that Reinin is/was not just some crank, but one of the "founding fathers" if you will of socionics. Not that that by itself should automatically lend his ideas any more credibility (ideas should be judged by their intrinsic worth, not by who came up with them), but it does make Norph's arguments very confusing.
    Quaero Veritas.

  20. #20
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Cool. That actually reinforces my point that Reinin is/was not just some crank, but one of the "founding fathers" if you will of socionics. Not that that by itself should automatically lend his ideas any more credibility (ideas should be judged by their intrinsic worth, not by who came up with them), but it does make Norph's arguments very confusing.
    Reinin and Augusta worked together on them. It wasn't actually Reinin who derived the dichotomies, some other mathematician did, but Reinin and Augusta filled in the content.

    AFAIK, what they did in a lot of cases was find properties that they shared and put them down as ILE traits (Reinin and Augusta are both ILEs) and put down the opposite traits into opposing dichotomies. They also came up with the names.

    It should be said that most of the descriptions on the Wiki have long been disqualified, especially by Augusta herself. I think as far back as 1990 she literally said that most Reinin dichotomies were meant as experimental and are pure garbage.

    Reinin doesn't use them in their original manifestation and thinks they should be consistent with Model A socionics. Excerpt from his meeting in London (Expat's posts): http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...in-london.html
    I tend to like Reinin's approach.

    Gulenko disregards most of them but uses process/result, positivist/negativist and static/dynamic as part of his forms of thinking model.
    I find Gulenko's approach the most interesting.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  21. #21
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Static/Dynamic is the only substance there is to the Object/Field (Introvert/Extrovert of functions/IE elements) dichotomy.

    If it is necessitated that the Irrational ego function is always opposite in Object/Field to the Rational function, this means there are only two combinations in the whole of the ego. These two possibilities are Static and Dynamic.

    Since functions can not be looked at directly but only via an act of interpretation of the behavior of a person of a certain type, the type is seen before the function is. This means that to see Object/Field in a function, people already apply Static/Dynamic.

  22. #22
    norph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    TIM
    NotINotNNotFNotj
    Posts
    186
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    I'm curious, where did you learn socionics? Did your strangely negative opinion on Reinin arise from there, or is it something you've arrived at on your own? It's just that I've never seen anyone try to argue what you're arguing, and I'm trying to figure out where you're coming from.
    I learned it from a small underground sufi muslim sect in Bandar Lampung who had never heard of Reinin dichotomies, or Socionics.

    And somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Reinin himself invent the terms "static/dynamic", "democratic/aristocratic", etc., i.e., everything but the original Jungian four? It just seems odd to me to claim that they're somehow not Reinin dichotomies.
    As jxrtes described Reinin did not invent the static/dynamic name.

    The other names I believe he invented. But, my point is not one about the history of Reinin dichotomies but their conceptual importance.

    Ironically, many or most advanced users of this forum use the Reinin dichotomies frequently. I never understood why the 3 gurus don't...
    What advanced users of this forum use Reinin dichotomies frequently?

  23. #23
    JohnDo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    LII-IEI
    Posts
    638
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norph View Post
    What advanced users of this forum use Reinin dichotomies frequently?
    See this poll.

    Beginners most often ignore the Reinin dichotomies because they don't understand them. That has something to do with misleading names.

  24. #24
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,626
    Mentioned
    156 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm with labcoat on this one. Reinin dichotomies are to be considered the fundamental particles of socionics, functions are akin to molecules - certain interactions and behaviors cannot be comprehended via functions alone, they require a more analytical approach, although functions may provide a good initial approximation for beginners.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •