Reinin's Book
Last edited by silke; 07-14-2016 at 06:31 PM. Reason: added link
This book is awesome. Started reading it last night.
To anyone in the know:
Does Reinin's functional model (1st/2nd/3rd/4th, Plus/Minus) sync up pretty well with Model A, or is it better to interpret this stuff with a completely blank slate?
I pulled an all-nighter to (more or less) finish the thing; and, surprisingly, really, really liked it, as he described and defined types/functions/relations in ways I've never really seen or heard before. Hence, the question: Is that because he's looking at things from a very different angle, or is he just kinda flat-out wrong?
IMO, he's got a lot of things very right, and I do like the model he uses better. The symmetry of it helps explain the elements in their functional spots better for me. The polr (-3 function in the steering wheel model) is described as problem-solving, rather than some sort of massive weak area, which is more accurate as far as I've seen, and it's the DS that is a vulnerability for us, because we're so dependent on others here, which is true. You don't have to forget about model A to use/interpret it, but a few things have a different slant or focus.Originally Posted by CILi
PS. There used to be a visual of the steering wheel model on socionics.com I think. It's not there anymore.
Last edited by squark; 10-11-2010 at 10:11 PM.
Damn, It is 1 am and I have work to do, but I'm just reading this book.
Who translated it? Where does it come from?
Thanks!
Best Descriptions Ever.
“The world should live in harmony, people deserve to be happy", says a Robespierre, "so let's take a guillotine and chop off heads of all bad people who hamper our creation so that only good ones remain and everyone will be happy. Let's build a society free of the bad people, oppression, violence, injustice … But this purpose is achieved by means of a guillotine”. This is how this type expresses his creativity.
Fuck yeaaaaaaa.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
Good questions...
Where the heck does it come from...?
Both
The book is thought-provoking but not so great as a socionics reference.
Cool. Will download this onto my iPad.
Te-INTp/ILI, my wife: Fi-ISFj/ESI, with laser beam death rays for ESTp/SLEs, lol
16 years of bliss in an Activity relationship
I can only voice for myself, but that's (I mean - the one in this book) definitely the best ENTj description I've read. Captures many essential aspects which aren't usually explained by, say, socionics.org descriptions.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I'm sorry to say the EII description is not as "full" as many of the others, but the ILE description was honestly the best I've read. Every detail about it fits me to a T, which is never the case in other type descriptions I read, and not the case in any other of these descriptions from the book. I always score ILE in Reinin dichotomies.
I would guess yes it does compute, though it has its different focuses and interpretations (and description-wise I would conclude it accurate) but he basically collaborated with Aushra about the theory, to where Reinin dichotomies were considered Classical Socionics, and she approved of much of his research. An angle such as Fe dominants constantly involving and adapting themselves in the relationship aspect, so they can better "act" accordingly, versus Fi dominants staying true to their personal attitudes toward people (with possibly some deeper explanation of Fi), which essentially stems a different definition of the word "relationship" if I'm not mistaken, and let's think about static and dynamic, seems quite reasonable and valid to me.
NA KURCU TE NAWESOME.
The book is interesting but very unconventional. In my opinion the descriptions of intertype relations are very bad:
So who is the best teacher now?! An identical or a dual?!
Have you ever considered a mirror boring or a quasi-identical interesting?! Okay, quasi-identicals of the opposite sex may be interesting if they are good-looking or if they have an interesting subtype at least. But in general I consider my quasi-identiticals the most boring people of all types. And I never ever saw a mirror I would have considered "boring". Those descriptions really sound ridiculous to me...
Most interesting thing imo was the order of functions in super-ego and id. As far as I can see they are different than in model A. It is good to get some new perspectives other than model A.
I'm not thoroughly convinced this isn't a case of meaning being confused in translation. While in English, "best" is commonly understood to mean the singular apex of a series, it can also mean that something is of a high calibre. (IE: "This soup is the BEST! Certainly, one would not mean by this statement that such a soup is superior to all others in existence; it is understood that one is merely indicating the soup to be of high quality.)lol, i saw this too and i was like
does anybody know if this book was a draft or something?
</Te-ignoring: "this actually fits the rule; you just don't realize it">
Identical is the best Teacher. Dual is the best Babysitter.So who is the best teacher now?! An identical or a dual?!
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
Duals and identicals are the best teachers. Duals in my experience are better of course.
No idea what on earth you're talking about. Most people are in a grey area and it's not even ever a given that one's own actions - no matter how well intended - have net positive effect on the world. INTjs are typically 'wise' enough to realize this. Also binary logic is Te.No it's reinen's way of focusing on LII's tendency to use binary logic to put all people in a good and bad category.
ps. stop attributing your personal character flaws to type
Thank you for sharing this. I haven't read it yet, but it seems appropriate to me to thank you for posting it.
INTjs never discount information. In this case a hypothesis would be formulated as to how the off base measurement came about due to personal mistakes or unaccounted variables. Then occam's razor would be applied to see whether this theorem is more likely to be true than a theorem explaining why the thousand of other measurements didn't apply to the situation in the way first envisioned.The atomic weight of Fluorine after thousands (I'd imagine) of trials is 18.9984032 Grams Per Mole (This builds up into Ti understanding). You just did an experiment that resulted in the atomic weight at a value of 18.562. Did the value shrink over time? An ILI might argue so because he uses Te on a case-by-case basis. The LII will know fo sho his understanding is correct and will ignore this evidence. This is because the LII knows that the laws that make up the universe Never Change, Ever, Ever.
Reinen did not explicitly state the evidence is proof (evidence is almost never proof). He just stated the evidence pointed towards something other than what the LII understands, and the LII discounts it as fallacious because he has come to understand otherwise.
I disagree with the statement on laws. You don't know at any time whether a "rule" that you found holds universally or just locally. It is an extremely arrogant thing to claim you have found a law that holds universally. History is full of examples of people who had the hubris to do this and were proven wrong eventually.
I really don't think the INTp and INTj outlook on this issue differ significantly.
I think ILIs do what it states above, but I accept it depends on personal development, as I find it's the more immature ones who argue such (to me) pointless points.
In saying that, i'd maybe have done the same thing, but not about the atomic weight subject, something more practical, until I realised it just pissses people off and it's better to just, not...still, it's still there.
Oh, re INTjs, I find that they ignore the evidence in favour of the rule, it takes a lot of evidence before they re-adjust their global outlook.
When I consider something a "rule", it is usually because there have been a lot of indications (or maybe even evidence) supporting it. A single new indication doesn't weigh up to the indications that already exist towards the issue. The image of stubborness and subjectivity is only raised by the fact that the indications are difficult to share and not visible to the person criticizing the INTj.Oh, re INTjs, I find that they ignore the evidence in favour of the rule, it takes a lot of evidence before they re-adjust their global outlook.
But again, are other types really so much different in this regard?
We must be practicing two different systems here because I can't envision a personality type that 'knows that the laws that make up the universe Never Change, Ever, Ever.'
I disagree. Descriptions describe Ne, new ideas, new information, new evidence (whatever you want to call it) as the lifeblood of the LII and ILE. The ILE actively seeks objects of novelty out while the LII may simply use them to support or investigate something he is interested in; nonetheless, both types are apt to consider or embrace something new.
Recieving information through Ti isn't an ignoring process; it's a comparative process. The information being recieved is being related to systems that are already held. Ti types do not simply 'ignore' anything that contradicts them; rather they would be more likely to either refute it based on what system they related it to which disproved it (rules rules rules) or they would accept it after due deliberation and a comparative process. This is apparant in most of the descriptions of Ti, perhaps less so when described as being held by an Se type.
thank you for this!
Just been reading this (SLI ignoring function):
Which I find quite interesting. Something that's puzzled me recently, is myself and my SLI friend tend towards a more unkempt appearance. I've struggled at times to look good, look presentable in the world, something I forget to pay attention to.objective sensoring (): the zone of ignoring. People of this type may be inattentive to their own appearance, to the interior of their house, to other people’s behavior even if their actions influence them directly. They are not fit for any monotonous work, for example, for work at the conveyor assembly line. They need to pay special attention and make extra efforts to keep up their appearance. They do not have a natural feeling for style in clothes. They often ignore parents or peer pressure. Children of this type may seem to be very stubborn.
I've wondered at times, as i've read that Si is to do with looking good, appearance and such, which I would not rate as my strength, although I do have more of a means for it now, can do it some more, but still....
On another note, i've tended to compensate with being in reasonable physical shape, on the thought of ok... perhaps look a bit unkempt etc, but at least it's balanced out with a healthy body, which is probably acompensation attitude.
Ahh I enjoyed the book.Especially the behavior descriptions. Thanks OP.
Socionics will be the death of me. Lol
Are there any more available?
(i)NTFS
An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI
♫ 31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
My work on Inert/Contact subtypes
Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
Socionics Tests Database
Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites
Fidei Defensor
This looks awesome; thanks for sharing it. Always a treat to find comprehensive stuff on socionics in coherent English.
I didn't find the delta type descriptions all that good.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
I don't have microsoft word. Is there a way to open this without giving mr. william gates money?
can u try opening it as a .txt file, like in a notepad? From what you said, I assume your computer is probably not a PCI'm unfortunately not too familiar with using macs.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Can someone explain to me why the text looks like a rainbow?
I feel tempted to just colour everything in black for more unity.
By the way, it is "C. G. Jung", not "K. G. Jung".
People like to shit on Reinin's dichotomies but I think he has one of the best ILI descriptions I've read and possibly the most succinct, correct definition of Ni.
His typings could use some work though.
That line: "Reinin self-types as ILE, however, several other socionists agree on ILI."
he does not sound like LII. ILI could make some sense based highly subjective descriptions (dichotomies and so on).
There is an interview of him:
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...7&d=1317745744
I think that would be it.
Thank you. It went missing for some reason. I relinked it on the front page.
ILE is how he self-types I believe.
list of types of socionists: http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...ory:Socionists
his profile page in wiki: http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...inin,_Grigoriy
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
