Article: Reinin Dichotomies

[dreikin]

You can view the page at http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...nin-Dichtomies

[silke]

Examples:

Positivism vs Negativism

Negativism

• "There are very few people here I don't like, and you aren't one of them. As for the question from the OP, maybe it's because I'm an Fi negativist, but I seem to only be able to think of people I don't want to get to know better. LOL. And, again, it's only a few people." - IEE
• "You can't win at a game you aren't playing" - IEE
• I find myself saying things like: "she isn't a mean person." instead of "she's a nice person" and "I'm not sad" instead of "I'm happy." It feels more realistic and tempered and I don't know. Negativism isn't being negative, it's stating even positive things in a way that makes them more neutral...in my mind, at least." - IEE
• "Hey, that's not bad" - LSE, giving a compliment
• "I do not see Barack as EII - he is not ethical enough or intuitive enough and I know my Mirrors, and I do not think Michelle is LSI - she is not intellectually pragmatic enough or Introvert enough." - IEE, many negating constructions
• "I acutely feel poor attitudes — towards myself or between other people. I can see it right away and I am never wrong in this. But when it comes to good relations I orient rather poorly ... Two days ago my boyfriend introduced my girlfriend to his friend. I watched the couple the entire evening, but couldn't discern if his friend liked her or not. There were no signs of negative attitude, that's for sure, but I couldn't estimate the degree of good relations either." - ESI
• Jenna McCarthy, ESI - TED talk, many negativist constructions in her talk

Positivism

• "Yahoo answers are, of course, intellectual, good place to get your information." - SLI while ironizing. Her intent is to indicate that Yahoo answers is a poor source of info, but as a positivist type she makes an affirming ironic statement to get this point across rather than a negating statement.
• "Yes, Ti is autism" - IEI while ironizing, same as SLI in the example above she condenses the entire post to a single affirming ironic statement to point out the absurdity of what was said in that post (involution + positivism)
• "These parts of the profile apply to me" [proceeds to highlight the applicable parts] - EII, while reading socionics profiles. As a positivist type, she emphasizes the parts that work, instead of picking at those that don't work, thus affirming the profile.

positivist-negativist discussion


Tactics vs Strategy

Tactics: focus on winning the battle right now
Strategy: can lose a battle for long term goal of winning a war

Tactics: "I know how to do xyz / I know I can do xyz right now, but I don't connect these things into one main goal."
Strategy: "I have a goal, but I don't know what intermediate goals that would lead me there, what I can/should do to reach my main goal."

Tactical types seem to move through life in a scattered manner, bouncing like ping-pong balls from one minor goal to the next - they achieve by accomplishing large amount of small goals. Strategic types sometimes seem as if they are helpless, stating what their goal is but not knowing all the possible means, the intermediate steps and minor goals, that would lead them towards their main goal.


Process vs Result

• Process types - Information output, expansion. Concepts are found, verified, plan is put into place, progress forwards. Result types - Information removal, consolidation, verification, reformation, rejection of incongruent and weak parts.
• Process is the supplier, extender while Result is the consumer, expender. Process-EIIs don't demand people to follow some rules, but they seek to discover, unearth, produce rules that later come into demand. Result-ESIs aren't supplying rules by themselves, but they're consuming rules, enforcing those which were already supply.
• Process types can be called "Localists" - they see the "Micro" at first, then build up to "Macro". Result types "Globalists" - they see the "Macro" at first then fill in the "Micro" afterwards.
• For a Process type to think deeply on a problem is to examine it's specifics, whereas for a Result type to think deeply on a problem is to infer it's generalities.

Reinin dichotomies summarized

Static: Ji element in ego block (IJ and EP temperaments)
Dynamic: Je element in ego block (IP and EJ temperaments)

Merry/Subjectivist: Ti-Fe valuing (Alpha, Beta)
Serious/Objectivist: Te-Fi valuing (Gamma, Delta)

Judicious: Si-Ne valuing (Alpha, Delta)
Decisive: Se-Ni valuing (Beta, Gamma)

Aristocratic: F blocked with N, S with T (Beta, Delta)
Democratic: F blocked with S, S with N (Alpha, Gamma)

Tactical: Contact Sensing (and Inert Intuition).
Strategic: Contact Intuition (and Inert Sensing).

Constructivist: Contact Logic (and Inert Ethics).
Emotivist: Contact Ethics (and Inert Logic).

Carefree: Evaluatory Si/Ne (and Situationary Se/Ni).
Farsighted: Evaluatory Se/Ni (and Situationary Si/Ne).

Yielding: Evaluatory Te/Fi (and Situationary Ti/Fe).
Obstinate: Evaluatory Ti/Fe (and Situationary Te/Fi)

Process: Nx-Tx, Fx-Nx, Tx-Sx, Sx-Fx in ego block (Irrationals Alpha+Gamma, Rationals Beta+Delta)
Result: Tx-Nx, Nx-Fx, Sx-Tx, Fx-Sx in ego block (Rationals Alpha+Gamma, Irrationals Beta+Delta)

Asking: judicious and logical, decisive and ethical
Declaring: judicious and ethical, decisive and logical

Jungian dichotomies summarized

Extraverted (Exxx) / Introverted (Ixxx)
Sensing (xSxx) / Intuitive (xNxx)
Ethical (xxFx) / Logical (xxTx)
Rational (xxxj) / Irrational (xxxp)

[glam]

^ hah, socionics is like a puzzle. once you grasp that everything always implies something else, all of that stuff clicks together & you can really start understanding it a deeper level. then it involves less memorization of all the little details, and more understanding of how the system works.

without thinking about it in the context of the whole system, it would be more difficult to memorize things like the characteristics/dichotomies of the Benefit & Supervision rings (e.g. Right Supervision ring is Process, Static, Positivist = Causal-determinist thinking)

of course this may be obvious to people who have been studying socionics for a while, but some newbies might be able to benefit from trying to think of it that way.

[Zero11]

Aristocratic: F blocked with N, S with T (Beta, Delta)
Democratic: F blocked with S, S with N (Alpha, Gamma)

Process: Nx-Tx, Fx-Nx, Tx-Sx, Sx-Fx in ego block
Result: Tx-Nx, Nx-Fx, Sx-Tx, Fx-Sx in ego block

better:
Aristocratic: NF, ST (Beta, Delta)
Democratic: SF, NT (Alpha, Gamma)

And why so complicated?

Process: Irrationals Alpha+Gamma, Rationals Beta+Delta
Result: Rationals Alpha+Gamma, Irrationals Beta+Delta

[silke]

better:
Aristocratic: NF, ST (Beta, Delta)
Democratic: SF, NT (Alpha, Gamma)

And why so complicated?

Process: Irrationals Alpha+Gamma, Rationals Beta+Delta
Result: Rationals Alpha+Gamma, Irrationals Beta+Delta

The purpose of that table is to show the functional basis of dichotomies. It may look complicated, but sometimes breaking something up and inspecting its constituent pieces allows you to think of it in another way. Recognizing that Intuitive and Feeling aspects are blocked together is kind of imperative for understanding the Aristocratic quadra. I'll add the other one in brackets.

[strangeling]

Hey, dreikin, nice article. I just realized though the typing pit has been vacant for quite awhile and I see you haven't had the opportunity to be put in with the barrel of monkeys yet. So how's about you make a typing thread and we can get on with the tradition?

[strangeling]

Oh, that post is from 2011. Alright then, nevermind.

[DaftPunk]

i like it a lot