Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
thus the simplest answer to the question is dimensionality of functions is by definition something that you can only be good at precisely half of the total
I didn't mean being for example both negativist and positivist, that is understandable that one can't be good at both, I meant the underlying reasoning for the dichotomies is not clearly explained in some cases. and that is a flaw for a theory as good as socionics. overall the fact that there are contradictions in it make it scattered, at least for a person who is not russian and reads about socionics on the internet. if it was less scattered it could have been more widely and more professionally used, than for example say typing celebrities.
reinin dichotomies are derived from the idea that you apply certain formulas that are actually quite simple and are really just variations on how to slice numbers (6 or "half dozen" or 3 x 2, etc), and then they assigned descriptions to what those numbers represented. in other words they took something like sensing + logic in valued blocks (ego or superid) and said hey, we see "aristocratism" as a consistent pattern emerging from those factors we divided up. the reason you cant be both aristocratic and say negativist and decisive and emotivist essentially boils down why you cannot define 10 as (3+3+3+3) it entails a downrange contradiction
do you know of a good article which explains how reinin dichotomies were invented?
and that sounds a bit silly, to find a pattern randomly and then generate numbers for it..humans just don't work that way