Socionics Personals
North America
Western Europe
North America
Join now!

The whole lot of useless nothing
by Sergei Ganin

By now, due to some available translations, it is regrettably known that classical socionists are really keen on 11 additional dichotomies, discovered by St. Petersburg's mathematician Grigory Reinin back in 1984, who was awarded a title of Doctor of Philosophy in the field of Socionics for increasing the number of ...
Bookmark and Share

Your Comments: 1+ 23+
C1 I’m simply seeking clarification on the terms. For: ·"Static" vs "Dynamic" do you mean sedentary vs active? ·“Positivist" vs "Negativist" do you mean optimistic vs pessimistic? ·“Questim" vs "Declatim" do you mean inquisitive vs indifferent? ·“Constuctivist" vs "Emotivist do you mean system-oriented vs people-oriented? ·"Left" vs "Right" do you mean left handed vs right handed (or brained)? ·"Farsighted" vs "Careless" do you mean farsighted vs nearsighted? ·"Resolute" vs "Reasonable" do you mean resolute vs irresolute? ·"Merry" vs "Serious" do you mean cavalier vs considerate? -- I/O
C2 Not really, they mean something else so you can't go by the name alone. -- SG
C3 The Reinin dichotomies are defined simply in terms of the original dichotomies, producing 11 new ones. Also, Reinin dichotomies are really an alternative to Model A, and not a derivative of it (+/- is an attempt to relate the two). See -- thehotelambush
C4 Thanks for the clarification on Reinin dichotomies, it is even worse than I initially thought. Basically, what suggested is that Reinin dichotomies derive from a certain way of combining the 4 preferences. Why exactly that way or not some other way or not all possible ways as demonstrated in this article? You either look at all ways of combining the preferences or PROVE that there is only 1 way - your way. Where is the proof that Reinin's little formula is the only way of combining the 4 preferences? It could be mathematically valid, it could be encrusted with gold and diamonds, but if you can't prove that it is the only valid way, it is worthless. I am sorry, but I've seen enough people pulling theories out of their arses based entirely on bugger all to say that. -- SG
C5 I think there's a dragon over there holding your medal, you just have to go ask him politely for proper recognition and he'll hand it over, just like that. -- Al Reed
C6 I agree with C4, it is like saying that apples, pears, peaches are fruits, but an apple is *THE* fruit. Silly. -- Anonymous
C7 Bravo, SG! -- Anonymous
C8 Did you actually read on the meaning of Reinin dichotomies ? Model A can actually describe them. -- machintruc
C9 @C8, what is your 'take' on the reinin dichotomies? for my observations they are as of so little consequence that knowing them or not wouldn't have any impact on someones ability to use socionics, except maybe if one took the inclination to confuse someone. I get the impression that you think they are useful? Whatever it is is you do seem perhaps to see more use of them than I do? If you would care to publish an article of your own in regards your views I for one would be interested in reading it, thank you. -- Cyclops
C10 There is now a much better explanation of what the Reinin dichotomies represent at the same article. It is not enough for half of a dichotomy (such as logic or merriness) to represent a group of types; a dichotomy is a vector just like a type is, but there are only 16 such vectors, and hence 15 total dichotomies (since anything plus the 0 vector is itself). 4 original dichotomies + 11 new ones = 15. It's not arbitrary at all. Get it? -- thehotelambush
C11 My philosophical interpretation of the four dichotomies roots them in simple information theory and the greatest dichotomy of all: Mind/Body. And this is why "four" is all you need and not worth exceeding. I have constructed my own little typing test from this. Mind/Body + Input/Output + Enhanced/Suppressed And one assumption: Mind is biased in favor of Mind. It either enhances Mind, or suppresses Body. So the four dichotomies, in their order of diminishing importance (IMO), are 1 - Body Input Suppressed - which corresponds to Judging - I call it Condemning 2 - Mind Input Enhanced - which corresponds to Intuitive - I call it Ideological 3 - Mind Output Enhanced - which corresponds to Thinking - I call it Technical 4 - Body Output Suppressed - which corresponds to Introvert - I call it Stifled So on a day to day basis I can quickly run a type test by asking is this person Condemning, Ideological, Technical, Stifled. Normal conversation pronounces on these themes rather quickly. I know the terms are rather pejorative. But it does expedite the logic. And by the way, my paradigm identifies a scientific control: ESFP. All to say I happy Mr Ganin can see four types are plenty. I know a few people of each type, and I now find I spontaneously adjust my conversation and attitude accordingly. It works great, and more refinement would have the whiff of bureaucracy. WHICH I DON'T WANT: I am ESFP. Overall I'd say the 16 types arise from *Mental Interference*, so I believe the various 16-Type theories derive their power from Zen, or Tao. THE TAO Cross-eyed now Is mind and matter Tao's two Towers together Split is heart Yours and mine Tao's but One divine Pull the drapes Take a pose Consummate As it goes There is neither Rate nor duty Only light's Emergent beauty ~mlh -- MLH
C12 C11 those are some interesting ideas... gives me something to think about. -- Anonymous
C13 @MLH, what do you mean by "expedite the logic"? The dichotomies are not quite as simple as you make them out to be (in the sense of being captured perfectly in a single English word). -- thehotelambush
C14 Reinin dichotomies are complete rubbish, even Aushra said that. Anyone with a bit of logic in their brains could see it is a trap. Stay away! -- Anonymous
C15 I think anyone who wants to use Reinin dichotomies has no interest in actually typing anyone really. They're just theory. And they're not even good theory. They're crap theory. They aren't even fit for my desktop garbage box they are so crap! -- Anonymous
C16 @C13 - By "expedite the logic" I mean decide quickly, easily. For instance, you may wonder a long time if someone is judging, or judgmental, or critical, or sarcastic, or accepting, or go-with-the-flow, etc. But if you notice a person is often dismissive out-of-hand, or somehow is always making you repeat perfectly clear statements, you can be sure their very brain is stopping input that doesn't meet whatever expectation, ie they condemn perception itself. I use the best single words I can figure for the purpose of arriving at a type. Just a means. I'm ESFp with a tinge of intuition. I've got my own codes too. From Null (ESFp), to CITS (INTj) and everybody in between S, T, I, C, TS, IS, IT, CS, CIT, etc. So little energy wasted squinting at MBTI. For instance CS means Condemning and Stifled. I call this one The Censor. It corresponds to Guardian, ESI, ISFj. Such fun. Even made my own plasticized flip card. Like for bird watching. -- mlh
C17 I agree, Sergei. Renin Dichotomies are bunk. -- Anonymous
C18 A little notice to Keirsey's temperaments: Keirsey and Berens didn't notice it, but it's very interesting. Keirsey's temperaments choice made them relate in the same way as the 4 summits of a tetrahedron relate. There are no opposite! Each temperament is totally different from the other 3 ones except about 1 thing: Rational (MBTI NT) and Idealist (MBTI NF) have in common "abstract" while Artisan (MBTI SP) and guardian (MBTI SJ) have in common "concrete". SP and NT have in common "utilitarian" while SJ and NF have in common "cooperative", NT and SJ have in common "structure" while NF and SP have in common "motive". This system DOESN'T work with socionics types while the correlation between MBTI and Keirsey's temperament is about 70%. BTW Berens'"interactions-styles" also relate in the same way as the 4 summits of a tetrahedron do. -- piccolo_michel
C19 Well, I hope you're not dismissing them entirely; if it wasn't for these dichotomies, I would never have realised i'm ENTP. -- formerly ISTj.
C20 :o) C19... you thought you were ISTj and after reading about Reinin Dichotomies you think you are ENTp?!? It's a joke, isn't it? ISTj = - ENTp = - so was your weakest and now it's the strongest?! And you learned that by reading about Reinin Crap?!? ) -- INTj
C21 oh dear it's so fun to read all these comments...everyones' got their own unique way of speaking. By the way i like SG's style of writing; you sound just like miles naismith who is my favorite SF character! And also an applause to contribute a very clear way of thinking about personalities. lovely to see such elegant way of rounding up complex concepts! I wondered for some moment if you belong to ENFP instead of ESFP because from what i've learned from experience, ENFPs are so adaptive that they sometimes confuse themselves... i apologize if this made you feel bad, i was just simply curious I always wonder if i am istj or infp, the more i learn about the type theories the more i feel unsure. maybe i am mature enough to become balanced? haha. Anyway it's so amazing that so many different people have their own unique soul...which i believe makes each one so divine... -- a
C22 I loved that line about the medal. -- tcaudilllg
Page 1 2
Would you like to add anything?
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)

Name: (leave blank for "Anonymous")