Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: The Mathematical Basis of Reinin Dichotomies

  1. #1
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,630
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default The Mathematical Basis of Reinin Dichotomies

    Reinin dichotomies were derived using group theory, a field of math I know very little about. This site gives a thorough explanation. Unfortunately it is in Russian, and online translators obviously don't do very well with the mathematical terminology. That said, maybe misutii and any resident mathematicians could help out.

    I'll try to explain my current understanding of it as simply as possible. The idea is that the socion, with its dichotomies, is a Klein 4-group. This means, given a few initial dichotomies, you can produce all other possible symmetric dichotomies. (I'm not sure what symmetric means in this context.)

    New dichotomies can be formed by combining the original four dichotomies. If I, N, T, and J are represented by 1 (true) and their opposites by 0 (false), comparing them with the boolean operation of equivalence (=) yields new dichotomies. For instance, a type is "static" if I and J are both true or both false. Mathematically, I=J. (The above article uses the clumsy but equivalent notation (I & J) v (~I & ~J) instead.) Any other commutative (i.e. symmetric) operation, such as XOR, could also be used.

    4C2 = 6 dichotomies are formed by comparing pairs of the original four dichotomies.

    farsighted: I=N
    obstinate: I=T
    static: I=J
    democratic: N=T
    strategic: N=J
    emotivist: T=J

    (Note that the resulting names are all applicable to INTj, because of the way we chose our truth values at the beginning. Unfortunately there are no neutral names for each dichotomy; one is forced to say Static-Dynamic. However, it's easy to do this based on any other type.)

    These new second-order dichotomies can be compared to create even more dichotomies.

    For example,

    reasonable: static=N : (I=J)=N
    subjectivist: static=T : (I=J)=T

    However, the number of distinct combinations is limited by the properties of equivalence. (I=J)=T is the same as (T=I)=J, because equivalence is associative--that is to say, the order doesn't matter--as well as commutative. Given that, you might as well just get rid of the equals signs and parentheses, and write the original dichotomies that each new dichotomy depends on.

    Including the original dichotomies, for completeness:

    I: I
    N: N
    T: T
    J: J
    farsighted: IN
    obstinate: IT
    static: IJ
    democratic: NT
    strategic: NJ
    emotivist: TJ
    negativist: INT
    reasonable: INJ
    merry: ITJ
    result: NTJ
    questioner: INTJ

    There is but a single fourth-order dichotomy: Questioner-Declarer. I have heard that Aushra identified this one herself. Coincidence?

    Except for the first- and second-order dichotomies, it is a bit difficult to use these definitions in practice. Scroll to the bottom to see a more useful list, adapted from anndelise's summary.

    My result shows a constraint on what kind of dichotomies are allowed: it must either always switch when one of the original dichotomies is switched, or be completely independent of that dichotomy. For example, changing J/P always changes Static-Dynamic, but changing N/S never does.

    Since a dichotomy can depend on 1, 2, 3, or 4 of the original dichotomies,

    all in all we have

    4C1 + 4C2 + 4C3 + 4C4 = 15 dichotomies.

    Remember Pascal's Triangle? sum(nCr over r=0...n) = 2[sup:52435fcc25]n[/sup:52435fcc25]. Therefore, since we exclude the null dichotomy (which isn't really a dichotomy at all) there must be 2[sup:52435fcc25]4[/sup:52435fcc25] - 1 dichotomies in all; 4 original and 11 Reinin. I suppose there is also a group-theoretical explanation for this. An interesting consequence is that in any dichotomy-based type theory the total number of dichotomies is 1 less than the number of types!

    I mentioned before that every pair of non-identical types shares exactly 7 dichotomies. Why 7? (This is another question for our imaginary mathematician.)

    Since Reinin dichotomies treat the socion symmetrically, there is a slight mismatch between functional and dichotomal interpretations. For instance, in asymmetrical relations, sometimes one's Supervisor shares the Reasonable dichotomy, and sometimes not. However, all the symmetrical relationships are consistent in this respect. When I can, I will post a table showing the dichotomy changes for each relationship. I think the ones for Duality, Conflict, and the other intra-quadra relations may be especially revealing.

    farsighted = IN + ES
    careless/happy-go-lucky = EN + IS

    obstinate = IT + EF
    compliant = ET + IF

    static = Ij + Ep
    dynamic = Ip + Ej

    democratism = Q1 + Q3 = NT + SF
    aristocrats = Q2 + Q4 = ST + NF

    tactical = Np + Sj
    strategic = Sp + Nj

    constructivist = Fj + Tp
    emotivist = Tj + Fp

    process/rightist = PQ1 + JQ2 + PQ3 + JQ4 = NTp + SFp + STj + NFj
    result/leftist = JQ1 + PQ2 + JQ3 + PQ4 = NTj + SFj + STp + NFp

    cheerful/gay/subjectivism: Q1 + Q2 = ITj + EFj + IFp + ETp
    serious/objectivist: Q3 + Q4 = ITp + EFp + IFj + ETj

    reasonable = Q1 + Q4 = INj + ESj + ISp + ENp
    resolute/decisive = Q2 + Q3 = INp + ESp + ISj + ENj

    positivist = EQ1 + IQ2 + EQ3 + IQ4 = ENT + ESF + IST + INF
    negativist = IQ1 + EQ2 + IQ3 + EQ4 = INT + ISF + EST + ENF

    asker/taciturn = NQ1 + NQ2 + SQ3 + SQ4 = TQ1 + FQ2 + FQ3 + TQ4
    declarer/narrative = SQ1 + SQ2 + NQ3 + NQ4 = FQ1 + TQ2 + TQ3 + FQ4

  2. #2
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: The Mathematical Basis of Reinin Dichotomies


  3. #3
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,630
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thanks for the reference. I didn't realize the extent of Smilingeyes's writings on the dichotomies. Cool stuff.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thanks...I was trying to remember the name of this. Years ago I was trying to relate to MBTI to group theory and was trying to remember the names of some stuff in this post http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...ighlight=group.

    As Smilex pointed out to to me, any group of four types may be seen as symmetrical, depending on which base dichotomies one uses.

    Without question, the idea of the Reinin dichotomies is very powerful. What I have always been skeptical about, however, is the descriptions. How do we know that the descriptions are accurate? Unlike the calculation of how many dichotomies one can come up with, etc., the descriptions of behavior for each dichotomy isn't derived mathematically, as far as I know. Rather, it's based either on observations on some people, or on a person's theoretical conception on what that dichotomy should be like, or both.

    Recently, I was questioning the reasonable/resolute dichotomy. The description of reasonable sounded so much like Ip behavior, and that for resolute sounded so much like Ej behavior, that I questioned if they're really valid. Expat suggested that one should apply the Reinin dichotomies only after having settled the more basic dichotomies. But that leaves open the question of whether the descriptions for each are correct or helpful.

  5. #5
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,630
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, I was more interested in the math behind it, which as far as I know has not yet been fully described anywhere but on the page I mentioned.

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

    Default

    Does anyone know why Augusta & co. say these dichotomies resulted from a 'wrong hypothesis'?

    Did they ever explicitly state what is wrong with them?

  7. #7
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Mathematical Basis of Reinin Dichotomies
    I think the mathematical structure of the dichotomies is more of a result than a cause.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Does anyone know why Augusta & co. say these dichotomies resulted from a 'wrong hypothesis'?

    Did they ever explicitly state what is wrong with them?
    This is interesting to me; where did you hear Augusta/etc say that? I've often mentioned my own assessment that there are different schools within Socionists; this would be a confirmation.

    Although I don't know what was said about them, I do know some possible problems and reasons why they may to conflict with Augusta's approach. As I've mentioned, certain dichotomy descriptions may be confounded with rat/irrat or other distinctions, and thus appear to conflict with the common Socionicis view of what each type is like.

    But the main problem occurs if a person starts to think of each dichotomy as equally important.

    It seems the core of Augusta's research had to do with understanding why certain groups of people seem to get along more easily than others (at least in long-term relationships, etc.). This of course has to do with the concept of functions being in the same I/E orientation. It can be shown, however, that if one views all the possible dichotomies as equal, then one could synthetically produce alternative functions that, while having the same structure as the original model, would contradict Socionics hypotheses on what types do best together.

  9. #9
    meatburger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    A Quazar named Northern Territory
    Posts
    2,570
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: The Mathematical Basis of Reinin Dichotomies

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    HOLY SHIT
    ENFp (Unsure of Subtype)

    "And the day came when the risk it took to remain closed in a bud became more painful than the risk it took to blossom." - Anaïs Nin

  10. #10
    Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Former USSR (global nomad)
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    2,050
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
    Does anyone know why Augusta & co. say these dichotomies resulted from a 'wrong hypothesis'?

    Did they ever explicitly state what is wrong with them?
    I think Dmitri Lytov says this, but I don't know about Augusta. She talks about some of them in her books.

  11. #11
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Expat suggested that one should apply the Reinin dichotomies only after having settled the more basic dichotomies. But that leaves open the question of whether the descriptions for each are correct or helpful.
    I don't remember having quite suggested that -- but it doesn't matter. I agree with this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan
    Unlike the calculation of how many dichotomies one can come up with, etc., the descriptions of behavior for each dichotomy isn't derived mathematically, as far as I know. Rather, it's based either on observations on some people, or on a person's theoretical conception on what that dichotomy should be like, or both.
    The only way dichotomies or other groupings of human behavior can be useful is if they are validated by observations of real people. I have found that, if understood, and applied carefully, dichotomies indeed "move together" as expected. However, it's a big mistake to use them, individually, in a black-and-white way, to rule out types - as in, "she's not an asker, so I will rule out all the asker types in her case" etc.

    Personally, if I'm observing someone IRL, I hardly ever actually use the dichotomies to type them - other traits, such as temperament and quadras, become visible first.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  12. #12
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,630
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    The Mathematical Basis of Reinin Dichotomies
    I think the mathematical structure of the dichotomies is more of a result than a cause.
    Huh? The thread title refers to how they are derived from the basic structure of the socion.

  13. #13
    misutii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    1,234
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: The Mathematical Basis of Reinin Dichotomies

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    Reinin dichotomies were derived using group theory, a field of math I know very little about. This site gives a thorough explanation. Unfortunately it is in Russian, and online translators obviously don't do very well with the mathematical terminology. That said, maybe misutii and any resident mathematicians could help out.
    lol i'm flattered but using my name in the same paragraph as one that uses the term "math" that many times is probably a federal offense... just warning you now in case the FBI comes knocking down your door this week with bazookas and the swat team taking aim from the building across the street as riots break out due to the genocide of neanderthals by our hands and 15,000 years of repressed human rage over the common question "what is the meaning of life?"

    anyways I'll take a look at the page later when this damn exam is over -_-
    INFp-Ni

  14. #14
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,630
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    lol, thanks.

    So little time...

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    992
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would love to see these Reinin dichotomies tied to practical observations more closely.
    They seem to make a lot of sense, but is it just in my head?

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    The only way dichotomies or other groupings of human behavior can be useful is if they are validated by observations of real people. I have found that, if understood, and applied carefully, dichotomies indeed "move together" as expected. However, it's a big mistake to use them, individually, in a black-and-white way, to rule out types - as in, "she's not an asker, so I will rule out all the asker types in her case" etc.
    Very true.
    "Arnie is strong, rightfully angry and wants to kill somebody."
    martin_g_karlsson


  16. #16
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This group-theoretical explanation of the dichotomies is interesting, but still a bit sketchy. Does it follow from the mathematics which reinin attributes connect which concrete and abstract attributes? Was the concreteness/abstractness of functions, and with those the arrangement of functions in a cycle derived from the math, or were these founded on an independant observation?

  17. #17
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,630
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's funny to read this now that I actually understand group theory. Here is an updated version:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bxs...ew?usp=sharing

Posting Permissions

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