Please take this test (Yaaroslav's Reinin calculator)

[Tallmo]

This is Yaaroslav's statistical Reinin calculator. I think this is the best test I've ever tried. (I don't like tests, but this one is nice to play with)

It's useful because you don't have to decide on dichotomies, instead you can use the slides to go by more vague impressions. And you don't necessarily have to guess your Jungian dichotomies right. It still gives you a probable type.

I was wondering why nobody is talking about this, because people tend to like tests in this forum.

Please take the test and post your result.

Test in English: https://isocionics.com/file_archive/...einincalc.htm#

Yaaroslav's original thread with discussion: https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...es-Now-ONLINE-)))

[Sol]

Is's not a test. It's "calculator" by Jung and Reinin traits.
Show probable types based on _your own_ opinion about what the said traits you have and in what degree.

Where Reinin traits are baseless nonsense.

[Squirrel]

Where Reinin traits are baseless nonsense

Some traits have basis, it came from functions , for example: decisive ( Se / Ni ) vs Reasonable ( Si / Ne ) , Tactical and Strategist ( N or S functions as inert function ), Emotovist and Constructive ( F function as inert vs contact function ), and so on

But some of them doesn't have basis in model A , such as positivist / negativist and process / result

[Squirrel]

ILE 4.24%

SEI 2.28%

ESE 10.09%

LII 12.22%

EIE 3.52%

LSI 0.58%

SLE 14.82%

IEI 1.09%

SEE 1.46%

ILI 1.20%

LIE 2.72%

ESI 5.06%

LSE 0.78%

EII 10.58%

IEE 4.17%

SLI 25.18%

[Beautiful sky]

2BFB6CE3-AADB-424B-AB9D-44B0B3B23C14.png

[Nunki]

Top seven results:

INFp: 25.65%
ESTp: 17.35%
INTj: 14.96%
ISFp: 11.07%
ESTj: 9.97%
ENTp: 4.74%
ISFj: 4.15%

[lavos]

It worked better than I expected (and even though that I vaguely remembered what some of the dichotomies meant and I didn't care to look them up--- I went solely by the denomination). However, this test is very easy to game, like Maritsa probably did.

[BrainlessSquid]

ENFP or INFP. Decent enough

[The Reality Denialist]

It is actually quite simple method. Value 50 is non biased. Other values will give a weight per dichotomy. Giving a full range is pretty much same as selecting the type that has most matches per dichotomy.

[Amoeba]

What does Questim vs Declatim mean? left that one blank.
Calculator.PNG

[nifl]

What does Questim vs Declatim mean? left that one blank.
Calculator.PNG

https://wikisocion.github.io/content...declaring.html

[The Sublime Relianum]

ILE 4.24%

SEI 2.28%

ESE 10.09%

LII 12.22%

EIE 3.52%

LSI 0.58%

SLE 14.82%

IEI 1.09%

SEE 1.46%

ILI 1.20%

LIE 2.72%

ESI 5.06%

LSE 0.78%

EII 10.58%

IEE 4.17%

SLI 25.18%

Identicals confirmed?!?!

[The Sublime Relianum]

Not really a test when you already know all the dichotomies. Well anyway, 100% SLI, no other results lol.

[Amoeba]

Not really a test when you already know all the dichotomies. Well anyway, 100% SLI, no other results lol.

This stuff is kinda new to me coming from an mbti background. Once you understand the concepts it's pretty easy. But yeah ILI creeps up on me as always.

[Riven]

I tried to answer it as honestly as possible. Some dichotomies I just don't really understand (like static/dynamic), others I could see myself being both (specially merry/serious, process/result). Others I see myself as both but I think I tend more towards one side, like obstinate over yielding (although this one isn't the "right one" for an ILE). A bunch of them feel too similar in content though when reading the definitions.

[necrosebud]

this one gives me IEI, skimmed/read the descriptions of dichotomies on wikisocion to answer the questions

[I am a frog]

[CR400AF]

I only used the signs that I'm quite sure about myself, and it gave me the correct result:

Don Quihote ENTP7.02%
Duma ISFP0.09%
Hugo ESFJ0.04%
Robespiere INTJ74.59%
Hamlet ENFJ0.49%
Maxim ISTJ1.32%
Zhukov ESTP2.12%
Esenin INFP1.50%
Napoleon ESFP0.17%
Balzak INTP3.76%
Jack ENTJ1.75%
Dreizer ISFJ1.81%
Stirlitz ESTJ0.53%
Dostoevski INFJ1.21%
Huxley ENFP1.95%
Gaben ISTP1.63%

[CR400AF]

Let's use this to calculate the type of Jung. Since many claim that he is IEI and not sure about whether he is a rational type or an irrational type. I don't use these dichotomies. And many dichotomies are not easily detectable in the texts. Even when I'm typing myself I find many dichotomies to be quite hard to decide.

• E/I: absolutely introverted：5
• N/S: quite intuitive: 75
• Static/Dynamic: quite static: 75
• Judicious/Decisive: This is essentially whether he values Si/Ne or Se/Ni. I think actually it's not very hard to decide that he values Ne instead of Ni but since it's controversial, I ignored this dichotomy.
• Merry/Serious: This is essentially whether one values Ti/Fe or Te/Fi, I think it's quite obvious that he is Ti/Fe valuing: 75
• Process/Result: He did preferred to write in a Result manner, similar to me: 25
• QuesTIM/DeclaTIM: He seems to like to asking questions in order to answer it: 75.

These dichotomies give me the result that Jung is 61.66% LII, 20.55% IEI, 6.85% ESI. I think the result is fairly accurate.

[FreelancePoliceman]

Reinin.png

I left J/P and F/T in the middle and gave the "wrong" answer for at least three questions (carefree and dynamic are answered correctly based on how I felt; on this screenshot I changed the slider from Merry to Serious to see if it would change anything). So this result was surprising.

[Sol]

Let's use this to calculate the type of Jung.

Try astrology. It uses the same approach as Reinin traits.

[nifl]

some Reinin traits attributed to certain types blatantly contradict more basic theory. even astrology tries to obfuscate its incosistencies more
''strategic'' SEI and SLI, for one. as if irrational Si was generally observed to be quite far thinking. only consistent mistakes in typing could lead to that idea

They consciously set goals and have difficulty scrapping them. May experience confusion if they are forced to change a goal.

Without having a conscious goal, Strategists feel as if something is missing and their life is incomplete. They experience discomfort and feel disoriented.

[Amoeba]

some Reinin traits attributed to certain types blatantly contradict more basic theory. even astrology tries to obfuscate its incosistencies more
''strategic'' SEI and SLI, for one. as if irrational Si was generally observed to be quite far thinking. only consistent mistakes in typing could lead to that idea

It has to do with Si types planning ahead of time bot nessisarily plotting to take over the world

[Tallmo]

some Reinin traits attributed to certain types blatantly contradict more basic theory. even astrology tries to obfuscate its incosistencies more
''strategic'' SEI and SLI, for one. as if irrational Si was generally observed to be quite far thinking. only consistent mistakes in typing could lead to that idea

As you might know the Reinin traits are not necessarily about the base function, but about how some (more complicated) patterns of (weak) functions give rise to certain attitudes. And I don't think "strategic" in the Reinin traits means that the type actually is good with strategic thinking. Anyway, I find the Reinin traits very hard or impossble to observe, but it's a nice try at extending the theory.

[The Reality Denialist]

As you might know the Reinin traits are not necessarily about the base function, but about how some (more complicated) patterns of (weak) functions give rise to certain attitudes. And I don't think "strategic" in the Reinin traits means that the type actually is good with strategic thinking. Anyway, I find the Reinin traits very hard or impossble to observe, but it's a nice try at extending the theory.

Static/Dynamic seems to be in favor of many non verbal typists. Sometimes it is amazingly clear.

Aristocratic/democratic attitude may also be observable. It is between lines which also means that it is diverse.

(I think technically Reinin dichotomies are a super set of Jungian dichotomies so irrational/rational, feeling/thinking, intuition/sensing, extroversion and introversion are also part of it) .

[The Reality Denialist]

[nifl]

It has to do with Si types planning ahead of time bot nessisarily plotting to take over the world

done the least by Si leads, as they're irrational, sensory and prefer imagination to be less about the future than Ni valuers.

@Tallmo

As you might know the Reinin traits are not necessarily about the base function

the base function is the most pronounced, and thus occupies the mind and steers the behaviour the very most. which means, under normal circumstances, on average less thinking about the future than other types. although the difference with the auxiliary is small and not so easy to directly see; but can be seen in the fact that rational Si has a somewhat greater tendency for this.

And I don't think "strategic" in the Reinin traits means that the type actually is good with strategic thinking.

it means that they think ahead more than the tactical ones, as they ''consciously set goals'' and even ''have difficulty scrapping them'' (for irrationals? no). it's not true for SEI/SLI

[CR400AF]

done the least by Si leads, as they're irrational, sensory and prefer imagination to be less about the future than Ni valuers.

@Tallmo

the base function is the most pronounced, and thus occupies the mind and steers the behaviour the very most. which means, under normal circumstances, on average less thinking about the future than other types.


it means that they think ahead more than the tactical ones, as they ''consciously set goals'' and even ''have difficulty scrapping them'' (for irrationals? no). it's not true for SEI/SLI

I agree that some Reinin signs might be wrong. At least, an example is that Gulenko seems to have renamed judicious/decisive as central/periphery and interpret that central types are generally successful in the society.

When one is typing people via Reinin signs, a problem is that it might lead to circular proofs: type people via certain Reinin signs, and the show that his/her understanding of Reinin signs is correct via the typings. Such circular proofs are illogical. It might finally lead one's understanding of types to be away from the types discovered by Jung.

As for tactic/strategic, I don't really understand their difference and I find it hard to observe. Theoretically I find that the types supposed to be strategic has intuition in either Creative or Role. On the other hand, tactic types have sensing in either Creative or Role. According to the model, Creative is helping the Leading and Role is a role-playing to adapt the society. Hence both are used in a situational manner. While Leading and PoLR are evaluatory. Perhaps it has something to do with what's observed by the theory of Reinin signs such that strategic types are more intuitive in detailed situations while are more realistic in goal evaluations.

Of course, such an explanation is a bit far-fetched. This is just an attempt to create an explanation for Reinin signs. It goes a little too far, and the logic is not particularly convincing. Also, there are some descriptions of symbols that can easily cause confusion. In the case of tactic/strategic, for example, its description of goals and methods can easily be confused with process/result.

Also, there are some functional descriptions that are also confusing. Se=force, for example, which is correct in itself. Then, people misunderstand that everything related to holding power and engaging in management is related to Se.

[Tallmo]

@Tallmo

the base function is the most pronounced, and thus occupies the mind and steers the behaviour the very most. which means, under normal circumstances, on average less thinking about the future than other types. although the difference with the auxiliary is small and not so easy to directly see; but can be seen in the fact that rational Si has a somewhat greater tendency for this.


it means that they think ahead more than the tactical ones, as they ''consciously set goals'' and even ''have difficulty scrapping them'' (for irrationals? no). it's not true for SEI/SLI

You have to look at what the Reinin theory is actually about. This is about some tendencies and attitudes arising from some intricate combinations of weak functions. This is not about the strengths of the type from the base function perspective. I'm not a fan of Reinin but there seem to be some intersting things involved. For example, I've often noticed how "tactical" the ILE can be. Like, they want to master all the details when solving a problem.

[Tallmo]

As for tactic/strategic, I don't really understand their difference and I find it hard to observe. Theoretically I find that the types supposed to be strategic has intuition in either Creative or Role. On the other hand, tactic types have sensing in either Creative or Role. According to the model, Creative is helping the Leading and Role is a role-playing to adapt the society. Hence both are used in a situational manner. While Leading and PoLR are evaluatory. Perhaps it has something to do with what's observed by the theory of Reinin signs such that strategic types are more intuitive in detailed situations while are more realistic in goal evaluations.

Tactical: NP, SJ
Strategic: NJ, SP


Theoretical properties of tactical and strategic types

Tactical/strategic corresponds with the inert/contact dichotomy for irrational information elements:

• The tactical types have contact sensing and inert intuition.
• The strategic types have contact intuition and inert sensing.

Source: https://www.wikisocion.net/en/index...._and_strategic

[idol]

I got ESI - ISFj with over %40 with only using reinins im sure of (non of the mbti 4).

static/yielding/tactical/negativist

when i use perceiving over J, it becomes ILE>IEE>SLE>ESI over %15 percantage.

[Muira]

Here are my results, pretty much. My results are confusing, and explain why I question my own socio type every 2 days or so.

Screenshot-2023-05-15-11-14-21-AM.png