Typing by Reinin dichotomies

[BrainlessSquid]

I know a girl who's definitely "reasonable" (Doesn’t rush when it comes to making a decision, takes time to think it over. Normally he or she is relaxed. Finds it hard to function on the spot without external motivation.) and "irrational". I have been trying to type her for a while, suspecting that she's SLI based on my experience.

By these two dichotomies I can conclude that she's either SEI, SLI, IEE or ILE. (I'm 100% she fits these two dichotomies, it's impossible not to be, no arguments needed)

But there's the possibility that Reinin dichotomies are "heresy", which is the point of this thread.

So, do you type people by Reinin dichotomies if it's evident? What are the arguments in favor and against it?

If there's any data available concerning the accuracy of it, please share too!

If this topic has been discussed already, share the link, please!

[The Reality Denialist]

Just don't. The nature of it means you have to understand those types before you can understand to overlaid abstraction layer.

[eiemo]

I don't agree with typing by Reinin dichotomies. I would say that the only Reinin dichotomy that is acceptable for use in typing is rational vs. irrational.

[Sol]

There is normal theory. While Reinin's traits are baseless, so have good chance to be incorrect and to mislead.
Formally, they do not even relate to Socionics as Augustunavichiute did not used those dichotomies in her texts (except mb some as static/dynamic). In the only her work about them she claimed that as raw hypothesis, - not what should be used.

[Ryan]

I didn't care to share this since I figured that anyone that cared to learn about the actual theory would manage to find it just as I did, but since you asked.

Reinin's theory of traits. Essay on socionics. Written by: A.Augustinavichiute , 1985. Published in: "Socionics, mentology and personality psychology", 1998.

All this "heresy" talk is nonsense. Augusta collaborated with other socionics authors such as Gulenko and Reinin and praised their work.

Some people may fear innovation but it doesn't make it them correct, just outdated (see: Fundamentalism).

[Jarno]

So, do you type people by Reinin dichotomies if it's evident? What are the arguments in favor and against it?

I remember these kinds of questions rising every year or so. Let's just say I have yet to meet anyone who is excited about reinin dichotomies or uses them to type people.
Personally I used the 4 dichotomies when I started out, worked fine for me. Never used reinin. You are better of building a large database of types and just compare new people you meet with known traits.

[Lao Tzunami]

I made a Reinin dichotomy calculator a while back. It can your Reinin dichotomy measures are coherent enough to use or if it is too random.

[SGF]

I made a Reinin dichotomy calculator a while back. It can your Reinin dichotomy measures are coherent enough to use or if it is too random.

Here you go: http://www.zhilkin.com/socio/en/ <== its a type calculator by dichotomies .

Imo quadric traits and individual traits work... but diadic traits kinda never fit well.

IF I put in the stuff I'm sure of, such as introvert, static, subjective and artistocratic.. the only option left is LSI.. even tho I'd consider myself irrational or MBTI P type or DCNH initial type.

I do admit most of the traits from Maxim do fit: Subjective, Aristocratic, Carefree, Obstinate, Emotive, Declaring, Static, Logical, Introvert. IF I were to go by reinin traits before Gulenko typed me I'd have to chose SLE, but that sounds too much like enneagram type 8.

[persimmonism]

I don't use it to type other people, but back when I was typing myself and didn't know much about socionics, they were what I used to see if I am IEI or EII. But really, it was part of the final stage of typing myself, just a small supplement.

Overall I wouldn't use them for other people. i don't trust that my (or most people's) understanding of them is rock solid either.
every few months something will randomly hit me like, oh THAT'S what being decisive means!!! and i read a bunch of threads about the specific dichotomy. maybe at that point i feel confident enough to say i somewhat understand them and see them IRL properly.

I see them as being more as Food for thought than as a tool. It's fun to try and see them IRL. but I use type to inform dichotomies rather than other way around.

[Alomoes]

I am willing to try and solve the problem through reinens, it's easier for me than guessing. They seem to be more concrete than not. Careless and farsighted as an example. Is Batman careless or farsighted?

It is obvious that he is farsighted. This is due to the fact that he spends his days planning.

Is Thrawn carefree or farsighted. It is not obvious that he is carefree. However, he is. Why? Because in all of his solutions to problems, he does not plan for any eventuality to occur prior to being handed the problem. He does indeed aquire resources to dispense with to solve problems, however, he also does not hoard them. This eliminates basically all ITp types from thrawn's character, something I would agree with, and all ETj and ENT types from Batman's character, something I would agree with. It is true, that they are failable, however, I think the utility is apparent from this, if you use it sparingly.

Obama hated reading negative reports of himself, and had his aids censor the news. This implies emotivist. "If a conversation is emotionally negative, I consider it wasted."

But yes, I have considered that all of this could be very well a waste. However, I have also considered that it is more of a waste to care about typing than reinens, as those are direct results of character. I couldn't see how being INTj means more in determining action than whether you tolerate negativity in the workplace. It is obvious who pisses you off then. People who are unduly negative, and ignore such requests to stop. The obvious solution is to work out those differences. This is not explicitly defined to be true, however implied. As such, understanding the Reinens conceptually is a good idea to solving some specific problems when the opportunity arises, and predicting and understanding behavior once known or established.