Complete subtype theory --- Reinin dichotomies

[JohnDo]

I asked myself if Reinin dichotomies might be useful to determine complete subtypes. The answer to that is yes...

I also asked myself if the fact that many people consider the Reinin dichotomies useless has something to do with complete subtype theory. The answer to that is yes...

Every type has 7 of 15 dichotomies in common with every other type (except for identicals). So your subtype will probably have only 7 dichotomies in common with your base type (if your base type and subtype are not identical). That means, for most people it should be easy to determine a Reinin trait in only 7 cases and hard in 8 cases. That's why so many consider them useless...

Example:
I'm an INTj-INFp. The 7 traits INTj and INFp have in common are:
introverted, intuitive, farsighted, emotivist, merry, result, asking
So an INTj-INFp should relate most to those 7 traits and might have problems with the 8 others...

How to dermine your complete subtype:
(It can only work if you are sure about your base type and have a good understanding of the Reinin dichotomies.)
Determine the 7 traits you relate most to. If you can't do that your subtype might be the same as your base type. If your choice is correct you should know your subtype then. If you get an inconsistent result like introverted*intuitive*obstinate*emotivist*...* you either made a mistake or your subtype is the same as your base type (because only an INTj is introverted, intuitive, obstinate and emotivist).

[krieger]

I mentioned this to tcaudilllg back when we were still talking about this stuff.

Under dual type theory every dichotomic trait exists in 4 possible graduations.

- trait present in both types (strongest)
- trait present in the top type but not in bottom type (somewhat strong)
- trait present in the bottom type but not in top type (somewhat weak)
- trait absent from both types (weakest)

; this assumes the top type has the strongest impact on behavioral traits, which seems obvious from the fact this type was discovered first.

This would go for regular Jungian traits as well as for Reinin traits. I agree that this could be a reason for the difficulty identifying Reinin traits, although there are many other problems (vague descriptions, lack of empirical studies on the traits, questionability of actual existence of certain traits, etc).

[JohnDo]

- trait present in both types (strongest)
- trait present in the top type but not in bottom type (somewhat strong)
- trait present in the bottom type but not in top type (somewhat weak)
- trait absent from both types (weakest)

Exactly.

this assumes the top type has the strongest impact on behavioral traits, which seems obvious from the fact this type was discovered first.

Óf course. That's the main reason why nobody believes in dual-type theory. It is simply ridiculous to assume that the second type is more important and easier to determine than the first one what tcaudillg still does...

I agree that this could be a reason for the difficulty identifying Reinin traits, although there are many other problems (vague descriptions, lack of empirical studies on the traits, questionability of actual existence of certain traits, etc).

The only forum members who work a lot with the Reinin dichotomies seem to be smilingeyes, hkkmr, you and me. Are there others? Shouldn't we try to bring the wikisocion pages about the Reinin dichotomies on an acceptable level? I tried to improve them a bit but I'm not a native speaker and have only studied them for about half a year...

[The Exception]

Hmmm, I get the same subtype as my base type going by that which doesn't seem right.

[717495]

This sounds kind of gay. Why would you want to be 2 different types and make it way over-complicated, and why would you be a "dual type" that's not even your real dual's type? That's like automatic Socionics fail. How could you even think of that...

Everyone knows that your conflictor has the most reinin dichotomies alike, so there's essentially going to be more conflicting duals, or whatever you maggots are prizin and sparklin about with your retainer teeth. Last time I checked, your dual's type isn't supposed to be a completely different type.

[717495]

Sorry. Important Ti clutter that I don't understand I guess. As you were.

[Trevor]

The only forum members who work a lot with the Reinin dichotomies seem to be smilingeyes, hkkmr, you and me. Are there others?

There aren't.

[Crispy]

I do
My best guess for my dual-type is INTj-INTp but last time I talked to tcaud he thought I was INTj-ENFp. I'm not confident of my dual-type enough to test reinin dichotomies on it yet. I might wait until we find out if DCNH is the same for both IM and EM, or if it's just part of EM.

[Trevor]

The only forum members who work a lot with the Reinin dichotomies seem to be smilingeyes, hkkmr, you and me. Are there others?

Crispy.

[redbaron]

How to dermine your complete subtype:
(It can only work if you are sure about your base type and have a good understanding of the Reinin dichotomies.)
Determine the 7 traits you relate most to. If you can't do that your subtype might be the same as your base type. If your choice is correct you should know your subtype then. If you get an inconsistent result like introverted*intuitive*obstinate*emotivist*...* you either made a mistake or your subtype is the same as your base type (because only an INTj is introverted, intuitive, obstinate and emotivist).

someday I would like to sit down and figure this out. not today.

[tcaudilllg]

JohnDo you are not LII-IEI.

I noticed that I have only a passing interest in what you write. It's not that I disagree with it (although from what I've read of it I do)... I just have little interest in it.

Your approach reminds me of Gulenko's. You wouldn't happen to VI with say... Jude Law, would you?

[JohnDo]

My best guess for my dual-type is INTj-INTp but last time I talked to tcaud he thought I was INTj-ENFp.

I still think you are INTj-INFp. INTj-ENFp is impossible from V.I.
It is difficult to find enough other INTjs and to subtype them so that reliable comparisons can be made. But I'm pretty sure I know (or knew) at least one INTj-INTp in person.

INTj-INTp: Mister Spock
INTj-INFp: Peter Parker

I might wait until we find out if DCNH is the same for both IM and EM, or if it's just part of EM.

JohnDo you are not LII-IEI.

Alright. I'm INTj-INFp then.

I noticed that I have only a passing interest in what you write. It's not that I disagree with it (although from what I've read of it I do)... I just have little interest in it.

Probably because I don't agree with you. If my understanding is correct your dual-type theory becomes meaningless. That's why you can't be interested in what I write...

Your approach reminds me of Gulenko's.

My approach reminds you of Gulenko's?! Gulenko's subtype systems are the only ones I use. It isn't even my approach...

You wouldn't happen to VI with say... Jude Law, would you?

Not really.

[Creepy-male]

ITT: Identical conflict.

Which makes me wonder, how would Si bases conflict? Lol.

[tcaudilllg]

I don't see INFp handiwork anywhere in your thinking. Where is the fixation on anime, for example? Something's missing.

[Crispy]

Bahaha, I take it you think it's the latter

What's the VI difference between LII-ILI and LII-IEI?
Do they both use that same provisional description?
Also, what does this russian LII VI as?

ITT: Identical conflict.

Which makes me wonder, how would Si bases conflict? Lol.

Food Fight

[tcaudilllg]

Forget it. I shouldn't have interacted with him in leu of his subtypes stance. Now people are probably confused.

Forget I ever said anything.

[Crispy]

lol, I'm well aware of both your perspectives of the subtypes. I'm not easily confused and I doubt most others will be either.

[JohnDo]

I don't see INFp handiwork anywhere in your thinking. Where is the fixation on anime, for example? Something's missing.

I often watch anime.

What else do I have to do to justify my INFp-subtype?

What's the VI difference between LII-ILI and LII-IEI?
Do they both use that same provisional description?
Also, what does this russian LII VI as?

The russian LII looks like our identical, don't you think so? LII-IEI...

Those provisional descriptions are only provisional. Sooner or later we will have to write better ones. Or hope that the Russians write better ones and someone translates them...
It describes the intuitive LII as Meged/Ovcharov see this type. Compared to Gulenko's brief description it rather looks like the H-LII in DCNH. But the problem is that that there are certainly fundamental differences between LII-ILI, LII-IEI, LII-SLI and LII-SEI...

The V.I. difference between LII-ILI and LII-IEI is simply that they look different.
I still haven't detected the fourth V.I. dichotomy. It is just too subtle and I simply don't know enough people. I don't even know any other LII-IEI in person except for myself. The only LII-ILI I know I haven't seen for about 2 years. My sister might be the only LII-SEI I know. There is another person where I'm not sure if he is LII-SEI or LII-SLI.
That's the problem, I should go out more often and get to know more people - but I am LII

[Crispy]

Well it would indeed be strange if a lot of us happen to be LII-IEI but it could be explained with certain type/subtype combos being attracted to certain for(u)ms of communication. And yes I do believe that pic is our identical. The similarity is eerie, and to me it hints at the wonders of the genome. I'm still working on typing everyone around me accurately with regular type, so I haven't got anywhere with subtype yet. When I finish with regular type, I guess I'll try to meet new people so I can start sub typing as well. Also, I've watched anime all the time in my younger years, and still watch from time to time now, so IEI subtype might work out for me (assuming LII-ILI doesn't have the same fixation).

[tcaudilllg]

Off to the ignore list with you, Crispy.

[Crispy]

Uh oh, I may need to call the waambulance. Entertaining extended subtype theory is no stranger than entertaining dual type theory. I'm not saying they are necessarily the same; more understanding of both is required for me to make that kind of judgment.

[tcaudilllg]

Crispy I'm not knocking you for entertaining his "interpretation" of Gulenko. But there is a strong correlation between the quality of a person's character and the accuracy of their propositions.

What I mean to say is, if a person's personality sucks, they probably aren't worth your mental energy to understand. (unless you're a psychologist)

[krieger]

Well it would indeed be strange if a lot of us happen to be LII-IEI but it could be explained with certain type/subtype combos being attracted to certain for(u)ms of communication. And yes I do believe that pic is our identical. The similarity is eerie, and to me it hints at the wonders of the genome. I'm still working on typing everyone around me accurately with regular type, so I haven't got anywhere with subtype yet. When I finish with regular type, I guess I'll try to meet new people so I can start sub typing as well. Also, I've watched anime all the time in my younger years, and still watch from time to time now, so IEI subtype might work out for me (assuming LII-ILI doesn't have the same fixation).

The simpler explanation is that all INTjs have emphasized introversion and intuition, and weakened logic and judging. This can be explained using a set of existing theories:

Strengthened introversion: supported by smilingeyes' view that NT club strengthens introversion (social closedness)
Strenthened contrast between sensing/intuition: supported by the view that INTj has Se PoLR; their weakest, least valued function is sensing
Weakened contrast between logic/ethics: supported by the view that INTj has Fi Role (reasonably strong ethics)
Weakened contrast between judging/perceiving: supported by the view that Judging (decisiveness, productivity) has connotations with Se and Te, both of which INTj does not value

I also end up at INTj-INFp when looking just at the strength of the 4 jungian dichotomies, ftr.

[Crispy]

Strenthened contrast between sensing/intuition: supported by the view that INTj has Se PoLR; their weakest, least valued function is sensing
Weakened contrast between logic/ethics: supported by the view that INTj has Fi Role (reasonably strong ethics)

These two make some sense since LII's in general are known to have high moral values, even if they don't discuss them.

Strengthened introversion: supported by smilingeyes' view that NT club strengthens introversion (social closedness)
Weakened contrast between judging/perceiving: supported by the view that Judging (decisiveness, productivity) has connotations with Se and Te, both of which INTj does not value

These can't be accepted unless the math portion of socionics is totally broken. In fact if these are true at all, I'd say socionics is useless.

For any of this to be true, all LII's would have to identify with the concept of a would be INTj-INFp. What about LII's who consider themselves to be Dominant or Creative in DCNH? Do they not consider themselves to be Extroverted Introverts and therefore INTj-EXXx?

[krieger]

These can't be accepted unless the math portion of socionics is totally broken. In fact if these are true at all, I'd say socionics is useless.

Care to explain what you mean by this? There is no "math portion" to socionics.

The fact that INTj is to an abnormal extent socially abstinent is something that is already generally accepted in socionics and is even listed as a characteristic trait in several descriptions of the type.

What about LII's who consider themselves to be Dominant or Creative in DCNH? Do they not consider themselves to be Extroverted Introverts and therefore INTj-EXXx?

Where are these people? *cricket chirp*

(I see people choosing the Creative subtype all the time out of attraction to the novelty of it, but these people are not in a visible way different from those that choose an introverted subtype. Most will admit to not being "socially extroverted" or "extroverted introverts" by any description when asked about it. As for "dominant" INTjs, tcaudilllg is the closest thing to it that I've seen so far, and even he doesn't call himself one.)

[JohnDo]

I also end up at INTj-INFp when looking just at the strength of the 4 jungian dichotomies, ftr.

That's not how it works. You have to know a lot of LIIs and compare them to yourself.

Using DCNH I know or knew in person:
D-LII: 1 former classmate, 1 former teacher, 1 grandfather and 1 acquaintance
C-LII: 1 former classmate, 1 fellow student and 1 acquaintance
N-LII: 1 former classmate and 1 professor
H-LII: 2 former classmates, 1 sister and 1 professor

Well, I had to type some of them from my memories alone so the reliability might be questioned. It is certainly better to type persons while talking to them...

This list of different LIIs still makes sense to me...