Socionics is BAD

[Mal12345]

It's easy to castigate something as "bad" based on one aspect, even a minor one. With Socionics, it is the "typing by face" aspect. Typing by face is an unproven method of typology. But it isn't specific to Socionics, and in fact I've known some Enneagrammists to base e-type on facial features.

Socionics has done something right, however; and that is, to change the nomenclature by which types are named. INTP in Socionics theory is INTj. This is the way things are going anyway, even in MBTI circles. The J is nothing more than to place dominance on Thinking. Every dominant F/T type gets a j, and every dominant S/N type gets pegged with a p.

This effectively eliminates all descriptive content from the labels P and J which traditionally mean perceiving and judging as well as a slew of other things. For some, Se has even been limited to merely "looking." Such confusion has arisen from this function talk that even an intellectual such as Carl Jung is considered by some - an ISTP, as if he were some motorcycle mechanic or something.

So the way things are going, the Socionics labeling system may as well be adopted. At least we can see from its nomenclature that a Ti is not only a thinker and an introvert, but is also judging in accordance with those thoughts, as according to the idea of what is logical and what is not logical.

 

[KDude]

The trend for face typing came later in Socionics, from what I understand. It's funny that it's associated with it so much. It had nothing to do with it's creator, and not even the majority of her adherents/students. I think one practitioner (Filatova) had conducted some testing with a wide variety of people, and took corresponding photos, just for record keeping. After the fact, she had noticed some trends with expressions (not actual facial features). She left it at that. Others picked up on her comments and took it to what you see now.. "visual identification". I agree though, it's bogus.

 

[Savage Idealist]

Where are you getting your sources on this matter? Sure some socionics sites list types having physical differences, but that notion can be abandon entirely and is done so by many others who seriously practice socionics. I mean once you ignore the whole 'type by face' thing, socionics actually exceeds other typing systems; it actually strives to account how certain types of people interact with each other, which JCF/MBTI and Enneagram fail do accomplish.

 

[Mal12345]

Where are you getting your sources on this matter? Sure some socionics sites list types having physical differences, but that notion can be abandon entirely and is done so by many others who seriously practice socionics. I mean once you ignore the whole 'type by face' thing, socionics actually exceeds other typing systems; it actually strives to account how certain types of people interact with each other, which JCF/MBTI and Enneagram fail do accomplish.

I'm not saying Socionics is bad.

 

[Savage Idealist]

I'm not saying Socionics is bad.

Oh my bad

 

[Mal12345]

Oh my bad

Yes. You spoke out in favor of Socionics on this forum of all places. What next - Kiersey?

I can't be saying that Socionics is bad if I favor adopting its j/p nomenclature. Socionics face-typology, in case you haven't noticed, is strictly limited to Caucasian faces. So it is limited to race. The first time I heard of this method involved the Enneagram a couple decades ago. And it wasn't limited to any race.

 

[garbage]

Yeah. Baby, bathwater, etc.

While I'll never understand those who advocate Socionics so much and who don't particularly bother with validating the broader theory before they go off and define "subtypes" with insane logical rigor (rant!), its definition of sensing (but not of intuition) and its major dichotomies (but not the Reinin deals) seem to be a lot more useful than MBTI's.

 

[KDude]

In my opinion, Socionics is good because there I know my type. hah..more sure at least. Here, SiTe is practically alien. All because of associating Si with tradition and "memories". The only way to approximate Jung's Pi dominant types in some cases is an IXXP in MBTI. Not an IJ. I could give the reasoning, but... I've said this too many times as it is.

 

[chickpea]

I just don't understand the differences in mbi functions vs socionics ones. I always get as INFp but don't get why I'm Ni/Fe when I dont relate to those functions based on the definitions I know them by. also I think the descriptions are all poorly translated Russian which doesn't help matters. and yeah the photo typing is stupid, especially since the drawings are all based on Russian faces. although I do look a little similar to the IEI drawing.. but I'm also of eastern European ancestry.

 

[KDude]

I just don't understand the differences in mbi functions vs socionics ones. I always get as INFp but don't get why I'm Ni/Fe when I dont relate to those functions based on the definitions I know them by. also I think the descriptions are all poorly translated Russian which doesn't help matters. and yeah the photo typing is stupid, especially since the drawings are all based on Russian faces. although I do look a little similar to the IEI drawing.. but I'm also of eastern European ancestry.

Fe is another function botched by MBTI.. it always seems to be associated with "groupthink" or status quo morality.

In Socionics, Fe is accomodating, but it's more about visible intensity, expressiveness, effusiveness, and in some cases, theatrics.

 

[Mal12345]

In my opinion, Socionics is good because there I know my type. hah..more sure at least. Here, SiTe is practically alien. All because of associating Si with tradition and "memories". The only way to approximate Jung's Pi dominant types in some cases is an IXXP in MBTI. Not an IJ. I could give the reasoning, but... I've said this too many times as it is.

I'm not sure if the Jungian function theory discussed around here has been a return to Jung, but the theory as it is portrayed nowadays looks more like Jung's illegitimate love-child.

A Pi dominant gets things all messed up, unlike the Ji or Je.

 

[chickpea]

Fe is another function botched by MBTI.. it always seems to be associated with "groupthink" or status quo morality.

In Socionics, Fe is accomodating, but it's more about visible intensity, expressiveness, effusiveness, and in some cases, theatrics.

what's Fi in socionics supposed to be?

 

[Mal12345]

what's Fi in socionics supposed to be?

Fi-dom is IXFj.

Edit - I think I answered the wrong question somewhere. The best answer may be here>
http://www.socionics.com/prof/infj.htm

 

[Mal12345]

Which page is it, the INFj or the INFp for Chana?

 

[chickpea]

Fi-dom is IXFj.

Edit - I think I answered the wrong question somewhere. The best answer may be here>
http://www.socionics.com/prof/infj.htm

no I mean just the function Fi, like how does it differ from Fe in socionics. but yeah the INFj description sounds nothing like me. but I don't think I'm especially expressive or dramatic either.

 

[Mal12345]

no I mean just the function Fi, like how does it differ from Fe in socionics. but yeah the INFj description sounds nothing like me. but I don't think I'm especially expressive or dramatic either.

Yes, and the ISFj doesn't sound like my wife (ISFP). So this site is using the MBTI naming convention.

I thought a clue to your question regarding Fi would be found at that site. Because I have no idea where he's getting his info about Fe from.

 

[nanook]

@OT

glad you figured out half of the story. weekly 'fox mulder award' goes to you.

 

[Mal12345]

Does anybody know where functions are discussed in Socionics theory? This is the INFp page, which is really INFP:
http://www.socionics.com/prof/infp.htm

Here is wikipedia's entry on the Socionics Fi, which I just found:
"Fi is responsible for understanding the quality, nature, and proper maintenance of personal relations; makes moral judgments; and aspires to humanism and kindness. Fi has a strong understanding of the social hierarchy and how people feel about each other, their attitudes of like or dislike, enthrallment or disgust, repulsion or attraction, enmity or friendship."

There you go.

 

[nanook]

>Does anybody know where functions are discussed in Socionics theory?
i like this site well enough:
http://www.wikisocion.org/
search for labels like LSI

 

[Mal12345]

@OT

glad you figured out half of the story. weekly 'fox mulder award' goes to you.

You mean there's another half to the story? And what would that be?