Reinin dichotomies --- How they can help to avoid mistypings

[JohnDo]

Why is it so unreliable to type a person with the Jungian dichotomies alone? Because it can be very hard to find out a person't preferences. That's the reason why MBTI typings are worth nothing.

Using Reinin dichotomies, we can easily see why dichotomous typing it is so difficult. Some examples:

People who tell a lot of stories are not necessarily extraverts. They might be introverted*declaring instead...
People who seem to have an analytical mind are not necessarily logical. They might be ethical*static instead...
People who seem to be unemotional are not necessarily logical. They might be ethical*serious instead...

More examples:
Focus on wellbeing of own group: Ethical XOR Logical*Aristocratic
Think about the future: Rational XOR Irrational*Farsighted
Focus on goals: Rational XOR Irrational*Strategic
and so on, and so forth...

This might also be a good explanation for strange typings in MBTI: Those MBTI practicioners seem to believe that people who focus on goals are always Judging, they don't consider Perceiving*Strategic for them.

Dichotomus typing is not a bad method - but you have to use all the 15 dichotomies then...

[Trevor]

Information gain due to being more specific.

Add, dunno, 4 extra dichotomies for subtypes (thus making it altogether 255 reinin dichotomies), find out what their empirical content is, and you'll be on your way towards superior typing skills.

[JohnDo]

Add, dunno, 4 extra dichotomies for subtypes (thus making it altogether 255 reinin dichotomies)

Why 255?

We don't need extra dichotomies for subtypes. My subtype is INFp and works with the same 15 dichotomies as the base type. In my opinion it makes sense to use Reinin dichotomies even for subtyping, see http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...chotomies.html.

Complete subtype theory (or dual-type theory as tcaudillg calls it) works with 256 types. Each of them has 15 traits, 7 stronger and 8 weaker ones. If base type and subtype are identical, all the 15 traits are equally strong. In my case:

very introverted (because both INTj and INFp are introverted)
very intuitive
very farsighted
very emotivist
very merry
very result
very asking

quite logical (because INTj is logical, INFp ethical)
quite judging
quite obstinate
quite static
quite democratic
quite strategic
quite negativist
quite judicious

[Brilliand]

Why 255?

What's IM-Aristocrat XOR EM-Merry?

[JohnDo]

What's IM-Aristocrat XOR EM-Merry?

Doesn't make much sense to me. If a person is IM-Aristocratic, the interesting question is if (s)he's EM-Aristocratic, too.

XOR logic makes sense to derive 1 Reinin dichotomy from 2 others because, for example, both logical*judging and ethical*perceiving types have contact ethics which makes them emotivist.
But what does it mean if a person is IM-Aristocrat XOR EM-Merry?

This approach would not lead to 256-1 = 255 traits. It would lead to 15*15 = 225 traits...

EDIT: wait... 15*15 + 15(IM) + 15(EM) = 255, indeed... I have to think about it again...

The full description of n types is possible by means of n-1 criteria. Both theory and practice prove that. The most effective personal questionnaires used all over the world such as Kettel's or Smishek's questionnaires have 15-16 scales.

I don't know the theory which proves that. But it is possible to divide n types into n-1 symmetrical halves. In the case of the Reinin dichotomies "symmetrical" means that 8 Farsighted types are introverts and 8 are extraverts, 8 of them are logical and 8 are ethical and so on.

[Brilliand]

I don't know the theory which proves that. But it is possible to divide n types into n-1 symmetrical halves. In the case of the Reinin dichotomies "symmetrical" means that 8 Farsighted types are introverts and 8 are extraverts, 8 of them are logical and 8 are ethical and so on.

Let's think of the types in terms of base dichotomies - that is, dichotomies that can't be derived from each other. Core Socionics uses 4 base dichotomies, rendering 2^4=16 types. In general, the number of types will always be 2^n, because each dichotomy doubles the number of types. Now, the number of dochotomies that can be derived from this set will also be 2^n, but that's counting the null/non-null dichotomy... so the useful dichotomies will be 2^n-1.

It would probably be pretty hard to draw useful conclusions from only two dichotomies with 8 base dichotomies, as that's still 64 types in the category. To get an interesting pairing, let's try looking at it the other way around. What combination of dichotomies would indicate that the type has a contact feeling IM element paired with Ne EM?

Dichotomies determining position of feeling:
Feeling, Judging

Dichotomies determining position of Ne:
Extravert, Sensing, Judging

Dichotomies indicating what I described
IM Judging X EM Judging
IM Feeling X EM Sensing
IM Feeling X IM Judging = IM Emotivist

IM T/F XOR EM S/N and vise-versa are pretty good candidates for interesting IM-EM cross dichotomies.

[Trevor]

Just to add that these 4 extra dichotomies for subtypes can be pretty much anything. For example male/female.

Adding this in case someone thought i was referring to EM types exclusively.

[JohnDo]

IM T/F XOR EM S/N and vise-versa are pretty good candidates for interesting IM-EM cross dichotomies.

Let's see if there are others. I have nothing better to do...

IM dichotomies: with a capital letter
EM dichotomies: with a small letter

I'll mention only the traits of an ENTp-ENTp.



1.) 15 IM traits.

Ordinary Reinin traits. In my opinion all of them are very useful, even though some of them are frequently questioned. Abbreviations for the Reinins should be used. Unfortunately, one letter won't be enough...

Extraverted (E)
Intuitive (N)
Thinking (T)
Perceiving (P)
Carefree (Car)
Yielding (Yie)
Static (Sta)
Democratic (Dem)
Tactical (Tac)
Constructivist (Con)
Positivist (Pos)
Judicious (Jud)
Merry (Mer)
Process (Pro)
Asking (Ask)



2.) 15 EM traits.

I doubt if they are useful. Gulenko introduced the names contact/distant, terminating/initiating and connecting/ignoring for them (DCNH).
What I understand from it, "contact" just means "E*e or I*e", "terminating" just means "J*j or P*j". So it is probably impossible to diagnose those traits without knowing the IM type before.
Terminating = "very Judging OR quite Perceiving". So it shouldn't be possible to determine "terminating/initiating" without already knowing if the person is Judging or Perceiving, right...?
Tcaudillg probably disagrees because he considers EM type a completely different phenomenon than IM type. In this case it might be possible that those dichotomies have independent content. But I don't think so...

e - contact/distant
n
t
p - initiating/terminating
car
yie
sta - ignoring/connecting
dem
tac
con
pos
jud
mer
pro
ask



3.) 15 combinations of the same IM and EM trait.

Those are definitely useful. I already use them for typing. DCNH works with some of them (I/E, P/J clearly expressed or not?). My understanding of subtypes is based on them. That's probably the major difference between my understanding and tcaudillg's dual-type theory. He determines dual-types by hobbies and interests, he does not seem to use those dichotomies. I really don't know why not...

E*e - clearly expressed extravert or introvert / extraverted introvert or introverted extravert
N*n - clearly expressed intuitor or senser / intuitive senser or sensing intuitor
T*t - clearly expressed thinker or feeler/ feeling thinker or thinking feeler
P*p - clearly expressed perceiver or judger/ judging perceiver or perceiving judger
Car*car - and so on...
Yie*yie - and so forth...
Sta*sta - ...
Dem*dem
Tac*tac
Con*con
Pos*pos
Jud*jud
Mer*mer
Pro*pro
Ask*ask



Do the remaining 255-45 = 210 dichotomies really have meaningful content?
Lytov, Ganin and DeLong even believe that the ordinary 15 dichotomies are bogus:
"useless nothing" - Ganin
"trivial", "dead" - DeLong
"a mistake" - Lytov.
Those masters of socionics, who introduced socionics to the west, should probably think again... They would be shocked if they knew that we are talking about 255 meaningful dichotomies here...

[JohnDo]

4.) 12 IM-EM cross dichotomies based on the Jungian foundation

Probably very difficult to determine meanigful content there. Good luck, Brilliand...

E*n - I am INTJ-infp -> I*n. But what does that mean?
E*t
E*p
N*e
N*t - I am INTJ-infp -> N*f. But what does that mean?
N*p
T*e
T*n
T*p - I am INTJ-infp -> T*p. But what does that mean?
P*e
P*n
P*t

[Creepy-Snaps]

People who seem to be unemotional are not necessarily logical. They might be ethical*serious instead...

This has helped me a lot the past couple days in finally typing my Dad as ISFj. It explains why he can come across as so cold and severe, judge people so quickly, etc. Everything matches. I hadn't even considered him an F type though, but after considering that he may be ethical*serious, everything fits perfectly. Also explains why we don't get along so much, but that's a different story!

Do keep continuing with these dichotomies, I find them very interesting to read and learn about. Good food for thought.