Sociotypograph - determine your type by selecting 3-4 Reinin traits

[Mikhail Zhilkin]

I've created this (hopefully) easy-to-use sociotypograph, which allows to determine a person's sociotype by selecting 3 or 4 of Reinin traits, they surely have. One can also use it to look up a sociotype's traits.

Take it for a spin and please let me know what you think, or if you find any mistakes.

If you really like it and would like to get involved: I'm looking for a designer, mobile app developer and copywriter/editor/proof-reader.

Cheers!

mikhail@zhilkin.com


Added: also see sindri's dichotomy calculator

[fen]

That's really cool and useful. Makes it pretty easy!
Just wish the table of types was centered on the screen and not to the right. Maybe it's just my browser though.

[Pa3s]

Thanks for the test. I'm pretty sure that I'm introverted, constructive, asking and judicious (here: reasonable?). That only leaves SLI as a result (without conflicting any of those choices). It's definitely easy to use and I actually like that Reinin-based way of typing (not just because it supports my self-typing). The site also looks good, simple and practical.

[Ver]

I like it a lot. Thanks.

[ashlesha]

neat little tool.

introvert, static, and constructivist. eii or esi.

..yup.

I played around picking ones I'm not totally sure about and ended up pushing it either way and removing all the types lol.

[Roro]

Nice. I like Reinin. Anyways, it only gave me one possible outcome: LSE.

[anndelise]

I don't normally like Reinin's dichotomies, but this was the clearest and easiest format I've ever seen them in. I'm impressed. (and even better, it's not flashbased...I was able to use it on my iPad. Yay!

My most obvious aspects are:
Ethical, Intuitive, Tactical,
Irrational, Results-oriented, Carefree,
Reasonable, Objective

[Mikhail Zhilkin]

My most obvious aspects are:
Ethical, Intuitive, Tactical,
Irrational, Results-oriented, Carefree,
Reasonable, Objective

You seem to know too much about yourself :-) No type has all these traits. Why don't you choose only the most bullet-proof ones? At first, I thought you were "Yesenin", but the last three traits don't fit. (Note that some traits aren't that easy to define. For example, subjective/objective, aristocratic/democratic are usually hard to pin down.)

[anndelise]

You seem to know too much about yourself :-) No type has all these traits. Why don't you choose only the most bullet-proof ones? At first, I thought you were "Yesenin", but the last three traits don't fit. (Note that some traits aren't that easy to define. For example, subjective/objective, aristocratic/democratic are usually hard to pin down.)

When reading through them,
1) if I couldn't really see either fitting, then I left it blank.
2) if I could see both possibly applying...as in unsure which would apply more than the other one, I left it blank.
3) if I could only see one of the pair being applicable to myself, and the other no way in heck as fitting, I chose the applicable one.

It turns out..Huxly does have all these traits.

I would think it would be easier to know one's self than to know what's going on in another person.

For example, when I used your (cool) tool to see if I could figure out why a certain member on this board and I have so much difficulty with each other (according to reinin's traits), the only ones I felt confident applied to how she interacts with me and other members is Rational, Obstinate, and Subjective. This left LII, ESE, LSI, EIE as the possibile options.
(Which helps explain a few things to me. But as confident as I am in those three dichotomies for her, I'd still rather wait to see what other people would choose for this member before forming a firmer opinion. That would be for a different thread though.)

The point of that example, though, was to show that it's easier to know what's going on in my own mind, and to notice how I act in other settings and contexts than forum interactions. And to know which ones keep showing up consistently. While when typing someone else, the typer is limited to certain contexts, and doesn't get to see the whole picture of the person being typed.


Edited to add:
I just used this to see which ones seem to fit my 16 year old daughter.
Ethical, Sensing, Farsighted
(edited to delete static and obstinate, didn't know how to do a strike through)
(seems to help support my SeFi typing for her)

I'm leaning torwards process-oriented for her, especially since her major difficulties of tuning in and out and switching between things easily is a major part of what led to her moderate-to-severe autism issues (causing the majority of her social issues). But it could be a toss-up between if process-oriented issues led to autism diagnosis, or if autism led to process-oriented option. I'm more inclined to think the former, though.

This test might have actually helped point me into further directions to explore in my attempts to help her. Thank you, again. You've no idea how much this alternative means to me. This weekend I'll run this test by her and see what she thinks of it.

[FoxOnStilts]

This is cool, but I think it helps if you have a little background in the Reinen traits. I haven't really looked into them a lot (read: at all) and some of them were a bit confusing in definition. So I probably wouldn't hand this to someone who wasn't already into socionics. Which was probably the point, but nonetheless.

edit- Maybe I just over think when doing it for myself, because I tried it out on a couple of my friends and it worked really well. Also, the benefit of not having to select one for each pair is very nice as well, because I can skip over ones I don't fully understand.

[Mikhail Zhilkin]

It turns out..Huxly does have all these traits.

Oh, yes, indeed. My mistake.

[Nowisthetime]

Really great tool. Thanks!

declaring - emotive - process - yielding

[PistolShrimp]

This is much better than many Socionics tests I've taken because the questions don't focus on the IEs directly; those tests become useless when you know enough about Socionics.

Dynamic, Yielding, Asking- I'm not LSE by any means, so IEI it is.

[Pa3s]

One question, though: Is subjective/objective the equivalent of merry/serious?

[ashlesha]

One question, though: Is subjective/objective the equivalent of merry/serious?

yeah, from what i can gather.

when i was messing around i picked subjectivist because i don't think i can escape my subjectivity. and then i realized it was merry and i was like hmm and i saw that objective believes in the existence of truth outside of perception which i also agree with. sigh.

[anndelise]

One question, though: Is subjective/objective the equivalent of merry/serious?

Thanks for asking the question. I was just wondering where was merry/serious, then thought maybe it was carefree/farsighted, but that didn't make any sense because when I checked my answers, it had enfp as carefree. I've since looked and found that istp, isfj, entj are also carefree fi/te types. So it's obviously not that.

Thank you for checking for which set it actually is.
(you too, @lungs )

[willekeurig]

Introvert, Intuitive, Static, Declaring, Yielding Farsighted & Reasonable. EII, blah

[redbaron]

omg this is fantastic!!

[Absurd]

Thanks, I'm going to abuse it.

[Gilly]

Fucking awesome.

Welcome to the forum

[Red Villain]

I didn't get a result. Your test is garbage.

EDIT: Nevermind. I was doing it wrong.

[ashlesha]

lol rob

[glam]

One question, though: Is subjective/objective the equivalent of merry/serious?

Subjective = Ti-valuing
Objective = Te-valuing
Merry = Fe-valuing
Serious = Fi-valuing

at least, this is how i've always understood it. so for example, when you refer to "Merry", you're referring to the fact that the type values Fe, and when you refer to "Subjective", you're referring to the fact that the type values Ti. of course, when you refer to one you imply the other by default, since you can't separate Fe-valuing from Ti-valuing, etc.

[Pa3s]

Thank you, glam. I didn't know that.

[Absurd]

Thank you, glam. I didn't know that.

It is fairly common

[Pa3s]

Well, I knew that Ti/Fe and Te/Fi are linked, but I have not associated the dichotomy subjective/objective with Ti/Te. But now that I know it, it makes sense.

[Radio]

INTj
thanks for this btw, this is pretty cool

[Suz]

That is a fun chart to use and sort of see which reinin traits belong to which types.

The big problem though that I've found in using these dichotomies for typing in general, is knowing how the Reinin traits actually manifest. The descriptions aren't too helpful that way. Like, i can read both descriptions and I can see each one fitting, or like anndelise mentioned, neither fitting, etc, or i'm not sure which one would fit more accurately.

[Nowisthetime]

Some of the examples in the type descriptions are really interesting: Obama as LIE, Michael Jackson as EII and Nietzsche as EIE.

[Absurd]

Well, I knew that Ti/Fe and Te/Fi are linked, but I have not associated the dichotomy subjective/objective with Ti/Te. But now that I know it, it makes sense.

Oh, I see. Cool.

INTj

What's the word that starts with S and ends in T? Absurd.

[anndelise]

That is a fun chart to use and sort of see which reinin traits belong to which types.

The big problem though that I've found in using these dichotomies for typing in general, is knowing how the Reinin traits actually manifest. The descriptions aren't too helpful that way. Like, i can read both descriptions and I can see each one fitting, or like anndelise mentioned, neither fitting, etc, or i'm not sure which one would fit more accurately.

Which is why it helps to pick the ones that stand out the most to you. Whether of yourself, or the person you are typing. As Mikhail said, the bullet-proof ones.

On the plus side, it can also be used to help figure out some of the differences between identical types. Rather than having to choose Ne subtype, Fi subtype, or no subtype, you get 15 traits to choose from to help distinguish identicals of one type. Add in the different combination options, and the number of subtypes of say NeFi alone is astounding.

[marooned]

I got LSE.

I really was sure about being Tactical > Strategic. I think I do tend to make decisions based on the current state of things and abandon other decisions because they are no longer appropriate to the current state. It's often difficult for me to have an unchanging goal in sight. It's much easier to adjust the goal to something else mid-way I think. (Unless I'm playing chess which I'm not really any good at, but I've noticed it's hard for me to abandon my plan even if some things are happening that I should be paying attention to instead. I just want my plan to be carried out so I can get the "checkmate" feeling.)

And I really did think Yielding > Obstinate. I wish it were more difficult to change my mind. I think I naturally tend towards compromise.

And I thought Emotive > Constructive. I think that I'm actually quite emotionally reactive in my mind at least. I think that the feeling of something can bombard me and that I may start adjusting to it or seeing it over anything else. I think this can occur on a subtle cognitive level.

And then I picked Reasonable > Decisive. I do find it hard to function on the spot without external motivation. I am typically pretty indecisive.

I'm really not LSE though. I could understand SLI, but not LSE.

[Suz]

one thing i want to note though is that the type descriptions on there are atrocious.

[Suz]

Which is why it helps to pick the ones that stand out the most to you. Whether of yourself, or the person you are typing. As Mikhail said, the bullet-proof ones.

On the plus side, it can also be used to help figure out some of the differences between identical types. Rather than having to choose Ne subtype, Fi subtype, or no subtype, you get 15 traits to choose from to help distinguish identicals of one type. Add in the different combination options, and the number of subtypes of say NeFi alone is astounding.

that's the thing though... none of them are...

[Slacker]

I'm generally very skeptical of anything that uses Reinen dichotomies, but I like the way you've described them. Awesome!

[Cuddly McFluffles]

* Farsighted, Reasonable, Subjective - Alpha Rational (o_O )

* Farsighted, Reasonable, Obstinate - Alpha Rational (o_O; )

* Farsighted, Reasonable, Rational - Alpha or Delta Rational

Looking at them again, it's actually difficult to choose between Subjective/Objective and Obstinate/Yielding, as I can see bits of myself in both.

[ashlesha]

I really was sure about being Tactical > Strategic. I think I do tend to make decisions based on the current state of things and abandon other decisions because they are no longer appropriate to the current state. It's often difficult for me to have an unchanging goal in sight. It's much easier to adjust the goal to something else mid-way I think.

if this is what tactical means then i'm definitely tactical. i picked it at first and then i got confused and unclicked. i hate how all the little pieces of wording in all these different descriptions throws me off.

And I thought Emotive > Constructive. I think that I'm actually quite emotionally reactive in my mind at least. I think that the feeling of something can bombard me and that I may start adjusting to it or seeing it over anything else. I think this can occur on a subtle cognitive level.

Can become 'emotionally hooked', and can have a strong reaction to a particular part or section regardless of their feelings towards the entirety.
- wikisocion constructivist description
?????

this post is pointless and confusion-breeding. i think you're some Ni base ftr. just thinking out loud from seeing your post.

reinin dichotomies are hard!

[Cuddly McFluffles]

reinin dichotomies are hard!

I absolutely do not get some of the descriptions on that test... but the wiki descriptions inspire an urge to smack something.

[DirectorAbbie]

Must you use semi-famous people as type names? I don't even remember which one is supposed to be LSE. (And I probably couldn't spell it if I did.)

[Cuddly McFluffles]

Must you use semi-famous people as type names? I don't even remember which one is supposed to be LSE. (And I probably couldn't spell it if I did.)

Stirlitz. If you hover over each type name, the letter code is in the description.