Continued from the socionics quadra discussion. I wanted to start a new thread on this topic and explore this concept separately.
Here is the problem that I have with this trait. Socionics Aristocratic types are said to view people in terms of their group affiliations which also impacts their impression of the person. Democratic types are said to form their opinions of a person separately from a group belonging. However, isn't consolidation and fracturing into groups and "us vs them" mentality inherent to all human beings? If one inspects the course of human history, many of the major events are the consequence of competition or cooperation between groups of individuals. If one goes even further, into the times when humans lived in tribes, the traits assigned to socionics Aristocracy, such as being able to tell the group affiliation of another human being you've just met and draw appropriate conclusions, were imperative to one's survival. If you were to bump into a member of a tribe hostile to your own, and were blind to what this means, this would put all of the so-called democratic type into disadvantage.
So how is this dichotomy supposed to work? Am I misunderstanding something or is it simply described inaccurately? I think that all human beings are mindful of group affiliations to some extent and capable of adjusting their opinions of each other accordingly.
Another point was brought up in the Reinin study article: Aristocratic traits overlap with Enneagram traits of social instinct, which is another problem of applying this trait in typings. If I meet someone who is sensitive to group affiliations, how am I supposed to figure out whether this is due to socionics aristocracy or enneagram social instinct?
Extended Reinin Study