In this article, we will examine how, within the framework of the “Imperative Socionics” concept, type traits (Reinin traits) are derived, and why we believe it is correct to identify eleven pairs of traits, rather than the fifteen pairs that are accepted in the “classical” theory. Let’s start by recalling the arguments that the founders of Socionics used when deriving these concepts.
As we previously wrote, the classic theory of Socionics is based on Jung’s typology: he described eight psychological types, which he believed all people could be divided into. In Jung’s familiar language, he distinguished the following dichotomies: Intuition/Sensing, Ethics/Logic and Introversion/Extraversion. He believed that in each person, a combination of one of the psychological functions and a direction of perception predominates, resulting in types like “extraverted logician” or “introverted intuitive.” Aushra, the creator of Socionics, went further and suggested that not only could types be divided into introverted and extraverted, but so could the qualities expressed in them. As a result, Sensing, Intuition, Ethics and Logic can also be either extraverted or introverted, which were then called information aspects. As there were eight of them in total, Aushra hypothesized that each type works with its own psychological function related to each aspect, which together were called “Model A”.
The next step was to propose the hypothesis that a type is a combination of two aspects “expressed in a person” and they must be of different directions: one extraverted and one introverted. An additional pair of traits was also introduced, Rationality/Irrationality, which describes the order in which these two aspects predominate over each other. Thus, types where Ethics/Logic predominates were named Rationals, and types where Intuition/Sensing predominates were named Irrationals. As a result of this transformation, the eight Jungian types were divided into sixteen Socionics types. For example, from Jung’s “extraverted logician” type, Socionics produced the intuitive “LIE” and the sensing “LSE” – they were named rationals, as both have Logic in their first function. Later on, to describe the nature of each function in Model A, Socionics introduced a number of distinguishing properties, such as stating that in each type, there are strong and weak, mental and vital, inert and contact, evaluative and situational, accepting and producing, as well as valued and unvalued functions.
The basis on which the socionic types were formed was called the “Jungian basis” for convenience, which included the traits of Ethics/Logic, Intuition/Sensing, Introversion/ Extraversion and Rationality/Irrationality. By combining them, any socionic type could be defined: for example, ILE is an intuitive, logical, extraverted and irrational type. Socionics also suggests that different types are interested in different kinds of information, which is referred to as “values”. To describe values, traits such as Merry/Serious and Decisive/ Judicious were introduced. Additionally, Static/Dynamic was added at the end, which determines which aspects are in our “Consciousness and Subconsciousness.
Soon after, the mathematician and socionist Grigory Romanovich Reinin hypothesized that mathematically, based on the existing methods of dividing the sixteen types into groups of eight, there should be fifteen such pairs of traits, leaving eight ways of dividing types unknown. His colleagues agreed, and they began to search for the semantic content of the proposed groups. Soon, at the country house of the founder of socionics, Aushra, necessary control groups were assembled, and an experiment was conducted, resulting in the discovery of the now-familiar Reinin traits.
It should be noted that the theoretical foundations for the existence of all these traits were found later, and some of them are not directly explained by the peculiarities of Model A, which is why not all researchers use them. It is also surprising that discussions in socionic circles about Reinin traits often boil down to whether or not they are accepted, rather than clarifying their meaning. It is strange that no one questions the results of an investigation conducted so long ago, especially considering that Aushra herself stated that Reinin traits are merely a hypothesis that needed to be tested.
Our project works on correcting these flaws in the theory described. Let’s return to the nature of the origin of Reinin traits from the perspective of our methodology:
The Nature of the Origin of Type Traits
As we have already discussed, for the theory of socionics to be scientific, all its propositions must be derived from one another in a demonstrative manner. We began with the need to derive seven pairs of IM-function properties to describe the eight functions. The basis for this was the properties of Mental/Vital, Accepting/Producing and Inert/Contact. By multiplying them, we also obtained four additional pairs of properties: Strong/Weak, Ordered/Cluttered, Tracking/Insulating and Valued/Unvalued. Based on this, we concluded that, for example, the Leading function is determined by the properties of Accepting, Mental, Inert, Ordered, Strong, Tracking and Valued.
On the other hand, using function properties, we can describe the characteristics of types in general, and this is what Reinin traits are used for. The easiest way to explain what is meant is by using the example of accepting and producing functions. As we have discussed before, this pair of properties was formed so that our TIM could separately process irrational and rational aspects of information. By combining them, we obtain the pair of type traits Rationality/Irrationality. Thus, rational types are those whose accepting functions process rational aspects of information, and whose producing functions process irrational aspects, while for irrational types, accepting functions process irrational aspects of information and producing functions process rational aspects.
Likewise, let us take the following pair of function properties, which forms the basis for the operation of IM functions: Mental/Vital. As we know, these properties are oriented towards working with dynamic and static components of information aspects. In a similar way, we can obtain the pair of traits Static/Dynamic from them. Thus, static types are those with mental static and vital dynamic aspects, while dynamic types are those with mental dynamic and vital static aspects.
It should be noted that at the intersection of Accepting/producing and Mental/Vital another pair of function properties is formed: Ordered/Cluttered. It determines the peculiarities of how the function assimilates information through the extraverted and introverted aspects, and as a result of their intersection, the traits of Introversion/ Extraversion are formed: introverted types have ordered introverted and cluttered extraverted aspects, while extraverted types have ordered extraverted and cluttered introverted aspects.
It should be noted that the same relationship exists between the type traits formed from these pairs of function properties. Thus, introverted types are rational statics and irrational dynamics, while extraverted types are irrational statics and rational dynamics.
As we mentioned earlier, three independent pairs of function properties are necessary to form the eight IM functions. We have already considered Accepting/Producing and Mental/Vital, so let’s move on to Inert/Contact. As we know, these properties determine the features of information processing within the formed acceptance and production blocks of model A. There is the following pattern: if the type is inert in the aspect of Ni, then their aspect of Ne must also be inert and their aspects of Si and Se must be contact. In other words, this property applies to the entire information trait as a whole. However, it does not affect the processing of aspects from other vertical blocks of the model: for example, the inertness of Sensing does not affect whether the Logic or Ethics of the type is inert. It is also noteworthy that all other function properties we will discuss further also distribute information within the blocks of the Ni-Ne-Si-Se and Fi-Fe-Ti-Te aspects, forming two pairs of type traits. For convenience, we will call them the rational and irrational groups of type traits, and to start with, we will examine the first of these.
As we know, Inert/Contact in combination with irrational information aspects forms the type traits of Tactical/Strategic. Thus, types with inert Ni and Ne and contact Si and Se are considered tactical, while types with inert Si and Se and contact Ni and Ne are considered strategic.
Since Inert/Contact, Mental/Vital and Cccepting/Producing correspond to the formation of functions, we will arrange the resulting type traits at the vertices of the triangle (as in the previous article). Then, we will place Introversion/Extraversion at the intersection of Static/Dynamic and Rational/Irrational – as a pair of traits derived from them (highlighting them in orange to show that they are primary properties). Now, we can see that other traits can be placed at the intersection of other traits. Let’s try to derive them:
To derive the type traits, we first need to obtain the properties that underlie them: for this, we will multiply the function properties that formed the traits at the vertices of the triangle. Thus, Accepting/Producing underlies Rationality/Irrationality, and Inert/Contact underlies Tactical/Strategic. Combining them, we get Strong/Weak. By filling the resulting blocks with irrational aspects, we obtain the type traits of Intuitive/Sensing. So, intuitives are types with strong Ni and Ne and weak Si and Se, while sensors are types with strong Si and Se and weak Ni and Ne.
Here we can also see a connection between the resulting traits: intuitives are irrational tacticians and rational strategists, while sensors are irrational strategists and rational tacticians.
Furthermore, by multiplying the properties that underlie the Tactical/Strategic and Static/ Dynamic traits, we obtain the pair of properties Tracking/Insulating. Thus, inert mental and contact vital functions are tracking, while inert vital and contact vital functions are insulating. By filling these properties with irrational aspects of information, we obtain the type traits of Carefree/Farsighted. Carefree types are those with tracking Ne and Si functions and insulating Ni and Se functions, while farsighted types are those with tracking Ni and Se functions and insulating Ne and Si functions.
Once again, we see that these traits are related to other pairs of type traits: carefree types are tactical statics and dynamic strategists, while farsighted types are dynamic tacticians and static strategists.
Let’s place the resulting pairs of type traits in the gray blocks between the pairs of related type traits on our chart. Now we need to find the last pair of traits that connect the primary type traits to the traits they form. Let’s highlight this pair in bold orange.
As we know, the last pair of function properties is Valued/Unvalued, which should form the last pair of type traits. Because these properties are in the center of the triangle, we can approach them in three ways, so let’s consider each approach in turn.
First, Valued/Unvalued arises when Accepting/Producing and Tracking/Snsulating properties intersect. Thus, valued functions are accepting tracking and productive insulating, while unvalued functions are accepting insulating and productive tracking. Second, we can obtain this pair of properties by multiplying Mental/Vital and Strong/ Weak. Valued functions are mental strong and vital weak, while unvalued functions are mental weak and vital strong. Third, this pair of properties is formed at the intersection of Inert/Contact” and Ordered/Cluttered. Valued functions are inert ordered and contact cluttered, while unvalued functions are inert cluttered and contact ordered.
By being filled with irrational information aspects, this pair of function properties forms the type traits of Decisive/Judicious. Thus, decisive types are those with valued Ni and Se and unvalued Ne and Si, while judicious types are those with valued Ne and Si and unvalued Ni and Se.
Thus, we have four pairs of type traits resulting from the filling of function properties with irrational information aspects. For convenience, we can unite them under one framework, separating them from the traits resulting from primary properties (1-2-3):
As we can see, Decisiveness/Judiciousness is formed at the intersection of one orange and its opposite gray block each time. Thus, decisive types are carefree rationals and farsighted irrationals, static sensors and dynamic intuitives, as well as introverted tacticians and extraverted strategists, while judicious types are farsighted rationals and carefree irrationals, dynamic sensors and static intuitives, as well as introverted strategists and extraverted tacticians.
Thus, we have derived four pairs of type traits describing how types perceive, process and assimilate information according to the aspects of Ni, Ne, Si, and Se. We also know that each of these pairs of traits can be matched with another pair, but belonging to the rational group. They are interrelated because they arise from the same function properties. For example, Inert/Contact, when processing irrational aspects, forms the traits Tactics and Strategy, while processing rational aspects forms the traits Emotivism and Constructivism. To show this correspondence of traits, let’s place them all on a diagram (click to enlarge):
As we can see, there are eleven pairs of Reinin traits based on seven pairs of properties that define the functions of Model A. To avoid confusion with the diagram, let’s take a closer look at what these pairs mean. All the blocks are differentiated in different ways to divide primary, secondary, and tertiary type traits.
The diagram also shows the connection between all the traits. Secondary traits arise from the primary traits they are connected to on the diagram, such as 1-4-5, 2-5-6, and 3-4-6. Tertiary traits arise at the intersection of opposing primary and secondary traits, such as 1-6-7, 2-4-7, and 3-5-7. Additionally, most traits are divided into rational and irrational groups, which are connected through primary traits, acting as a sort of axis of symmetry.
Now, let’s return to the question of why the “classical” theory recognizes fifteen pairs of Reinin traits, while we have only identified eleven.
The nature of the false Reinin traits
As we can see, when defining the types’ traits, we utilized a model-based approach, basing each trait pair on certain function-related properties (for example, for Static/Dynamic, these were Mental/Vital). This resulted in eleven pairs of type traits. Additionally, we discovered that all the identified traits are interconnected due to the relationship between the properties they are based on.
Since the founders of Socionics had a somewhat different understanding of the nature of Socionic type, during the development of the “classical” theory, they derived four more pairs of traits than we did. As we mentioned at the beginning of the article, this was because they took a basis consisting of four pairs of type traits for their TIM work. By multiplying them (as we did with function properties), they obtained fifteen pairs of traits.
Then, to explain their workings, they invented function properties. As you understand, the founders of Socionics did not find suitable properties for the false type traits. But since these traits were already derived, the lack of corresponding properties did not become a reason not to use them in practice. As a result, the “false Reinin traits” are still considered an equivalent part of the theory of Socionics. They include aristocracy/democracy, process/result, asking/declaring and positivism/negativism. Let’s try to derive them in a similar way, starting where we left off. Let’s begin with the first pair.
As you may recall, we first took the basis function properties, from which we derived the fundamental type traits. Then we multiplied them together and, filling the resulting function properties with irrational information aspects, obtained the irrational group of type traits. Within this group, we indicated connections, how some traits lead to others. Similarly, we obtained the rational group of type traits. Based on the resulting scheme, it was possible to see that the traits of both groups are linked to each other through three remaining pairs of type traits.
Let’s see what we get if we directly multiply symmetric properties with each other: for example, we’ll connect Intuition/Sensing and Ethics/Logic. Thus, we get the trait of Aristocracy, which includes the intuitive ethics and the sensory logics, and Democracy – the intuitive logics and the sensory ethics. Similarly, we will get these traits if we multiply Tactics/Strategy and Emotivism/Constructivism, Carefree/Farsighted and Yielding/ Obstinacy, as well as Merry/Serious and Decisive/Judicious.
As we have already mentioned, such multiplications have no basis, since these traits are based on the same properties of functions and describe the work of the information metabolism with different information aspects. For example, Decisive/Judicious and Merry/Serious are based on the pair of properties Valued/Unvalued, and we cannot multiply it by itself. Moreover, they describe parallel processes that occur independently with rational and irrational information: one can say that when one of these traits falls into the plane of another, it loses its meaning.
For the same reason, we cannot multiply, for example, Tactics/Strategy with Ethics/Logic (since the former pair describes the processing of irrational information, and the latter – the assimilation of rational).
Next, let’s try to derive the remaining false traits. To do this, we will arrange the known traits as follows: the initial traits Rationality/Irrationality, Introversion/Extraversion and Static/Dynamic will be on the right, while on the left we will put the previously obtained Aristocracy/Democracy. By alternately multiplying the orange and gray blocks, we get Process/Result, Positivism/Negativism and Asking/Declaring. Thus, we will see the connections between the false Reinin traits.
So, what do we see:
– Process is irrational democrats and rational aristocrats, while Result is irrational aristocrats and rational democrats;
– Positivism is introverted aristocrats and extraverted democrats, while Negativism is introverted democrats and extraverted aristocrats;
– Asking is static democrats and dynamic aristocrats, while Declaring is dynamic democrats and static aristocrats.
For greater clarity, in a special table, we will show how these characteristics are expressed in different socionic types. Of course, this table should not be used for typing, as in practice, false traits can manifest in any way (up to the point that a person can be both a positivist and a negativist), and they will not tell us anything essential about a person’s type.
Thus, we have considered the logical sequence according to which the type traits, also known in socionics as Reinin traits, are derived. In addition, we have examined the structure of false type traits described in “classical” socionics theory and explained our opinion on why they should not be relied on in practice. I hope that now you have a better understanding of our methodology and how socionic types are organized.