Interactive Type Dichotomy Tutorial

[Lao Tzunami]

I've finally finished an interactive Reinin dichotomy tutorial. It will teach you everything you need to know about the type dichotomies and how they connect to make the foundation of Model A.

This is the culmination of a two year project I've been working on when I have time. This is my final draft of sorts, and I need people to test it and make sure it looks good before I ask one of my Russian friends to translate it for me.

Tutorial 1.png Tutorial 2.png Tutorial 3.png Tutorial 4.png Tutorial 5.png

Download
Open in excel (or apparently LibreOffice works too! You might need to make the font a little smaller to see certain values)
Enable editing (to make interactive)
Enable content (aka macros, which makes some cells into buttons. It will still work without this, but you have to do a few things manually)
The tutorial is on the first tab at bottom labeled "Interactive Tutorial"

Feel free to critique

EDIT: I've included the full excel program, in case you get curious, but this thread is specifically about the interactive tutorial, not the test or analyzer

[Sol]

baseless Reinin's heresy tutorial

[Singu]

That's actually pretty cool. Have you ever thought of using your talent in more scientific psychology? It's all math-y.

[Spermatozoa]

Make what you like of that...

[Chae]

Two years?!!

[Lao Tzunami]

That's actually pretty cool. Have you ever thought of using your talent in more scientific psychology? It's all math-y.

No, I'm not a Psych major, but I would love to make a testable methodology for socionics. I'm in the process of teaching myself multi dimensional factor analysis so I can apply it to socionics.

Make what you like of that...

You must have tried the test mockup. I just copied the wikisocion descriptions as placeholders, they are not very good. I'm in the process of operationalizing the 2003 reinin study which should work better.

As you can see, your highest type is less than 50% and more than half of the traits are in the red, so obviously it is not conclusive. However, if you are still trying to figure out your type, you could read the Model A descriptions for LIE, ILE, SLE, EIE, in that order, and see if one fits.

You can also look more into the traits. I'd look into quadra, especially if you value +, or +, which will help you decide between ILE and LIE, SLE, EIE respectively. As you study the theory, you should replace the values in the input with what you learn (make sure to use decimals). Especially look of the 2003 st petersburg reinin dichotomy study if you want better definitions.

btw, did you try the tutorial?

[squark]

Posting to remind myself to look at this later when I can give it more time =)

[Desert Financial]

baseless Reinin's heresy tutorial

Dude, this is like the 5th time I've seen you consider a theory as "heresy."

Considering how much serious work you've put into this forum, do you view Socionics as religious doctrine or some shit?

[Hope]

Dude, this is like the 5th time I've seen you consider a theory as "heresy."

Considering how much serious work you've put into this forum, do you view Socionics as religious doctrine or some shit?

[Velvet]

Haven't you already posted it somewhere?
Anyhow I got LII 60%. The other two options are IEI and SLI, both 33%.

[Bertrand]

this is really cool, but it really relies on knowing what the words mean when trying to use reinin to type oneself, because it leads to the same results when just trying to pick an "image" of oneself based on a private understanding of the terms. however based on cuvineins example, it tracks the "self image" and "word selection" so precisely which I see as a very impressive achievement in of itself. if you can make it so it somehow can isolate and remove some of that subjective bias or ambiguity with reinins terms you'll have a massive breakthrough in socionics on your hands

[Desert Financial]

55% ILE, 44% LII, 48% SEI

[Sol]

Considering how much serious work you've put into this forum, do you view Socionics as religious doctrine or some shit?

lol
There's classical Socionics theory: Jung's concepts of types, model A, dichotomies, IR theory.
Heresy is not religious term only, but anything outside of classical part.

Reinin's traits are too baseless, too far from Jung, too badly developed by Augustinavichiute (what she notes in own text) to use them seriously. The only reason they were spreaded is Augustinavichiute's text with their baseless descriptions. There are no reasons to trust to this hypothesis.

Even model A has parts with different degree of trust. For example, valued functions, strenght of functions - easy to check in practice. While descriptions of how functions work in different places of the model - already deserves some doubts, as this has no good theoretical or practical basis - only subjective observations by Augustinavichiute of not so clear things to notice. But model A is classical part anyway which should be known, not rejected, but better used with limitations according to what I said. In case you want to reduce chances of mistakes because of possibly wrong theory.

Socionics may be integrated as one of methods in borders of religious/social doctrine. You may read my IR test theme with my thoughts about it. But I'm using the term "heresy" not in religious context.

[Hope]

@sindri
What version of excel (open office) do I need to use for having it working with buttons?

[Lao Tzunami]

baseless Reinin's heresy tutorial

Dude, this is like the 5th time I've seen you consider a theory as "heresy."

Considering how much serious work you've put into this forum, do you view Socionics as religious doctrine or some shit?

Look, I'll be the first to say that in its current form, Model A is much more useful and reliable than the reinin dichotomies.

I'm happy to debate the specific definitions of dichotomies, although not in this thread, because this tutorial is strictly about teaching the dichotomy structure, not the definitions. If we actually started debating the 30 traits, 140 small groups, 240 dyad pairs with the 16 types, we would get absolutely nowhere because the task is too big, especially if we started trying to put all of it in terms of information metabolism. This is exactly why I think it is so important to understand how these concepts relate, because then we can organize the debate into manageable pieces.

The end goal of this project is a synthesis, critical analysis and a scientific test of all concepts and all schools in socionics. At this point, I think this is far beyond the effort of any single person. This is why I think the math is so important, because you can use computers to analyze gigantic data sets, as long as you know how to program them. This tutorial teaches that basic understanding of how you could go about it.

As for people who are dismissive of the current form of the dichotomies, that's okay, as long as they are fair about it. I am setting the stage of really testing a verifying these concepts. No matter which side of the isle you are on, you should support putting theory to the test. If they have any better way of trying to falsify the dichotomies, they should do it. But what I don't like is whiners. They've made up their mind and they just like being difficult. Especially if someone doesn't know the proper use or spelling of hearsay, probably best to ignore them until they make a point worth talking about. I totally share you sentiment, but I'd rather not have this thread cluttered with a pointless argument.

[Lao Tzunami]

@sindri
What version of excel (open office) do I need to use for having it working with buttons?

I'm pretty sure this will only work with Excel, not open office. I made this in excel 2010, but I wouldn't be surprised if it works perfectly fine in the older versions of excel. If you are using a really old version, then some of the diagrams won't be as pretty because there is no anti-aliasing. The button code is written in visual basic, which should be universal, and is only used as a reset. Everything else is handled with form controls, which I think go back a long way but I'm not sure.

[Lao Tzunami]

Haven't you already posted it somewhere?
Anyhow I got LII 60%. The other two options are IEI and SLI, both 33%.

55% ILE, 44% LII, 48% SEI

I've slowly added this, along with other things I've made, to my pyramid diagram article thread, but I thought this deserved its own thing. I'm specifically asking about the tutorial in this thread, nothing else, although I'm happy to answer questions. I should have been more clear, I'll edit the OP.

[Sol]

The end goal of this project is a synthesis

You are using non-classical hypothesis like it has the trust close to classical part. It's not acceptable. Reinin's traits are not even close to Jung's dichotomies in the sense of basis. They are like other typology, as there is nothing good to think those traits are linked to Jung's types like it's claimed. Even their descriptions differ between different authors, even own Augustinavichiute's text has contradictions, unclear and strange parts (look Lytov's article). It's low quality hypothesis, while you mix it with core Socionics theory like equal.

[Tigerfadder]

Two years?!!

Te vulnerable? Thats why

What does the colors and lines mean, they connect who share the same?

[Chae]

Te vulnerable? Thats why

Incredible. We need to hire @Viktor to put his foot down for once so this won't be inefficient anymore!!

[Lao Tzunami]

You are using non-classical hypothesis like it has the trust close to classical part. It's not acceptable. Reinin's traits are not even close to Jung's dichotomies in the sense of basis. They are like other typology, as there is nothing good to think those traits are linked to Jung's types like it's claimed. Even their descriptions differ between different authors, even own Augustinavichiute's text has contradictions, unclear and strange parts (look Lytov's article). It's low quality hypothesis, while you mix it with core Socionics theory like equal.

I'm in the process of reading the article (which may take a while) and I understand that some empirical definitions do not fit the model A descriptions, but let me ask you this. If you consider quadra to be "classical", then should quadra depend on the four Jungian dichotomies, or can any type be in any of the four quadras (effectively increasing the number of types to 64)? If quadra does depend on type, then that is a testable hypothesis. You can have a test for quadra, and a test for type, and they have to statistically coincide, or one or both tests are wrong.

I also understand that synthesis is not the same as integration. There are lots of bad ideas in the socionics community that should not be used. What I want to do is rank them based on how well they work with other dependent combinations. Sort of like Cronbach's Alpha, it would be a measure of internal consistency. You could then iteratively try different combinations until you found the best combination.

EDIT: I finished skimming though the article. The author seems to care very much about the names of the traits rather than the actual empirical items. If it would make people happy, we could refer to all reinin dichotomies with their types code, like I could say I am <ET+, N+, ENP-, ETP+>, but no one would know what I am talking about. We could also change the names every times someone came up with a bright idea, and have as many ways of referring to the dichotomies as we have referring to the types (should I say I am IEI, INFp, Yesenin, the lyricist, a romantic, NiFe, NiFi, NiFx, Ni-F, TE, TR, , ?) Personally, I am extremely annoyed I have to learn every person's individual jargon, and want to keep and use the current reinin dichotomy names until we get everyone on the same page.

That being said, I don't have the time right now to analyze everything that is said in the article, but I can say that I have been pleasantly surprised when I have tried to actually apply the reinin dichotomies to people I am trying to type. Based on the descriptions, not the names in the 2003 reinin dichotomy study, this is my experience so far:

Great:
Irrational / Rational
Logic / Ethics
Intuitive / Sensory
Merry/ Serious
Yielding / Obstinate
Process / Results

Good:
Extrovert / Introvert
Carefree / Farsighted
Judicious / Decisive
Constructivist / Emotivist

Iffy:
Democratic / Aristocratic
Positivist / Negativist
Static / Dynamic

Unusable:
Tactical / Strategic
Asking / Declaring

But again, trying to evaluate all of them at once is too much to handle. Every if some of them do not work, we should go one at a time.

[Lao Tzunami]

Te vulnerable? Thats why

What does the colors and lines mean, they connect who share the same?

In the tutorial, each line is a small group. The colors are just a way of organizing the different classes of dichotomies:
Black = temperament dichotomies + small group
Blue = irrational dichotomies + small groups
Red = rational dichotomies + small groups
Grey = superposition dichotomies + small groups
Light grey = small groups connecting a rational, irrational and superposition dichotomy.

[Lao Tzunami]

when will you find your delta dream daddy?

Since you're here, want to try the tutorial

[The Reality Denialist]

Seems to work with LibreOffce 5.4 (at least mostly).


As side project this requires some extra additional learning on a side while having focus somewhere else and transferable skills.

It is polished unlike my (massive messy) spreadsheets I have worked with.

[Lao Tzunami]

Seems to work with LibreOffce 5.4 (at least mostly).

Could you post a screenshot of it in LibreOffice with some traits selected?

[The Reality Denialist]

Reset Buttons seem not to work and maybe there are problems with other buttons
100 % match shows as ### ( font is resized in the screenshot)
otherwise adequate


https://imgur.com/a/ZTq7J

[Chae]

when will you find your delta dream daddy?

What's a dream daddy, never heard of it.

[Chae]

Since you're here, want to try the tutorial

Alright I guess gimme a sec

Good... good... just as planned....mwahaha
My job as the forum Fi Eros is done. Dualization in progress beep beep

[Bertrand]

I had never read that Lytov article but I feel %100 vindicated by it because I've independently observed exactly what he's talking about on these very forums, and in this exact thread

the problem is not with the dichotomies per se, but with their current formulation in language and their subsequent misuse, they operate as a sleight of hand where people think they're being more objective about type while being as subjective as ever. use only the mathematical language and see how many people employ them. it speaks to their purpose. however, if we could escape that it would be awesome, and I think such a thing is possible. anyway I still think this is very cool as a structural representation of the underlying idea that has a ton of merit

the correct application of mathematical principles does not guarantee the semantic content of the result

until the two can be reasonably connected they will only function to spread ignorance

[Chae]

I'm just making shit up and being silly Because delta STs are like chill cozy dads right? When are you gonna get some of that?

Why would you encourage a quasi-pedophilic relationship?

[hatchback176]

Here are 49 character quality dichotomies:
http://heresyintheheartland.blogspot...l-gothard.html
Referenced by the much stronger Mental Symmetry personality theory that largely integrates Socionics
http://www.mentalsymmetry.com/gothard.php
His brother has already taken the 8 information metabolism functions and integrated with modern Neurology by structuring them as the input-output functions of the brain's Hippocampus (Mind-Brain Neural Interface [MBNI])
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lane_Friesen
It's one hell of an improvement to actually be able to trace thought processes as they cohere and decohere in Working Memory while transiting through Long-Term and Short-Term Memory.

[Lao Tzunami]

Here are 49 character quality dichotomies:
http://heresyintheheartland.blogspot...l-gothard.html
Referenced by the much stronger Mental Symmetry personality theory that largely integrates Socionics
http://www.mentalsymmetry.com/gothard.php

uuuum, if EJ Arendee taught us anything, its that you should never try to combine Christianity and socionics!

[Number 9 large]

Why would you encourage a quasi-pedophilic relationship?

why so serious mate

[hatchback176]

uuuum, if EJ Arendee taught us anything, its that you should never try to combine Christianity and socionics!

The idea that you can contain the behavioral consequences of learning the complete structure of the brain to one area like science is plainly stupid given the diversity of human thought.

[Lao Tzunami]

Reset Buttons seem not to work and maybe there are problems with other buttons
100 % match shows as ### ( font is resized in the screenshot)
otherwise adequate

https://imgur.com/a/ZTq7J

Wow, that look great!! I didn't know it could work in other programs. Maybe if I make each cell a tiny bit bigger, then it will work seamlessly. Thanks man, I super appreciate it!

[hatchback176]

http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r350.pdf
IEI's understand statistics well enough then fail at the level of Causal Logic. If you expect to capture multiple fields of study as an interdisciplinarian then you will need stronger tools than Interface Design and Classification Schemes.

[Bertrand]

b b muh bayes'

[Lao Tzunami]

http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r350.pdf
IEI's understand statistics well enough then fail at the level of Causal Logic. If you expect to capture multiple fields of study as an interdisciplinarian then you will need stronger tools than Interface Design and Classification Schemes.

If you understand this paper, could I ask you for your thoughts when I finish my statistical algorithm?

[hatchback176]

of course

[Lao Tzunami]

@hatchback176, On the granular level, would you need to prove that certain behavior traits are caused by a person's type, or would it be enough just just to prove correlation? All I want to do is test the consistency of all fields of socionics with each other, but I suppose if the concepts were established by causal factors, that should be accounted for.