Socionics quadras - How one behavioral group experiences another.

[Zarathustra]

I don't think they're very useful.

I think they're bad stereotypes that don't actually represent the supposedly constituent members.

ENTJs and INTJs in one group: yes.

ESFPs and ISFPs in that same group? No.

I get that they share all four normal functions (in MBTI), but...

Acting as if they share the same temperament, or something, because of it...

One group tends to reject the approach of the other group, at least on a "conscious" level.

That doesn't exactly bode well for fitting them into a group that sees/does stuff the same way.

Granted, on an "unconscious" level they might, but it's still not good for useful grouping.

As such, the quadras are an excellent example of how Socionics overreaches.

Same goes for the Reinin dichotomies, amongst other stuff.

Socionics is like too much Ti(Ne) just run amok.

I'm sure it's internally consistent and all...

It just... doesn't (imo) seem to connect with reality.

SFPs are much more the opposite of NTJs than they are the same.

 

[KDude]

I don't think they're very useful.

Finally, INTps have this very special relationship with Socionics. They are like plague, eating its very foundation. They are like ever growing tumour that turns once solid and sound principals into a formless jelly. Just like a bunch of angry termites on rampage, they feed on anything structural, bearing clarity and simplicity... by turning it to dust.

http://www.socionics.com/prof/intp2.htm

 

[Zarathustra]

Finally, INTps have this very special relationship with Socionics. They are like plague, eating its very foundation. They are like ever growing tumour that turns once solid and sound principals into a formless jelly. Just like a bunch of angry termites on rampage, they feed on anything structural, bearing clarity and simplicity... by turning it to dust.

Yes, I'm familiar with this line.

Broken English and all.

 

[KDude]

Yes, I'm familiar with this line.

Broken English and all.

The other thing about the NeTi bias is how it defines Se. It tells me more about Alpha NTs who invented the system than it does anything Se. They seem to turn Se into something obnoxiously competitive and belligerent. Se gets defined through their own avoidance of it.

 

[Zarathustra]

The other thing about the NeTi bias is how it defines Se. It tells me more about Alpha NTs who invented the system than it does anything Se. They seem to turn Se into something obnoxiously competitive and belligerent. Se gets defined through their own avoidance of it.

8------D

 

[Zarathustra]

I don't think they're very useful.

I think they're bad stereotypes that don't actually represent the supposedly constituent members.

ENTJs and INTJs in one group: yes.

ESFPs and ISFPs in that same group? No.

I get that they share all four normal functions (in MBTI), but...

Acting as if they share the same temperament, or something, because of it...

One group tends to reject the approach of the other group, at least on a "conscious" level.

That doesn't exactly bode well for fitting them into a group that sees/does stuff the same way.

Granted, on an "unconscious" level they might, but it's still not good for useful grouping.

As such, the quadras are an excellent example of how Socionics overreaches.

Same goes for the Reinin dichotomies, amongst other stuff.

Socionics is like too much Ti(Ne) just run amok.

I'm sure it's internally consistent and all...

It just... doesn't (imo) seem to connect with reality.

SFPs are much more the opposite of NTJs than they are the same.

Then again...

 

[Entropic]

SFPs are much more the opposite of NTJs than they are the same.

Actually, Dario Nardi's research disagrees with you. He recently participated in a thread on Reddit where he had a Q/A session and he mentioned how seasoned INTJ brains look a lot like the ISFP brain and vice versa and it would be very difficult to tell the two apart if he didn't know their type already just judging on what areas they use during the EEG scans.

Just because we reject our unconscious it doesn't mean it's not there. That was Jung's point too which is why he's even mentioning his theory of shadow integration to begin with.

 

[Zarathustra]

Actually, Dario Nardi's research disagrees with you... he mentioned how seasoned INTJ brains look a lot like the ISFP brain and vice versa and it would be very difficult to tell the two apart if he didn't know their type already just judging on what areas they use during the EEG scans.

Yes, I know this.

Just because we reject our unconscious it doesn't mean it's not there. That was Jung's point too which is why he's even mentioning his theory of shadow integration to begin with.

Did you see my post above?

 

[Entropic]

The other thing about the NeTi bias is how it defines Se. It tells me more about Alpha NTs who invented the system than it does anything Se. They seem to turn Se into something obnoxiously competitive and belligerent. Se gets defined through their own avoidance of it.

I agree that this is a problem but I would hardly hold that against socionics because we could raise the same argument regarding the MBTI and even Jung. That's why we got socionists after Augusta who has helped to redefine the system further such as Gulenko.

Also, if you look beyond the rough surface of what Augusta was trying to say regarding Se, you'd realize she's not that far off. Just that she's expressing it very poorly.

 

[KDude]

I agree that this is a problem but I would hardly hold that against socionics because we could raise the same argument regarding the MBTI and even Jung. That's why we got socionists after Augusta who has helped to redefine the system further such as Gulenko.

Also, if you look beyond the rough surface of what Augusta was trying to say regarding Se, you'd realize she's not that far off. Just that she's expressing it very poorly.

Gulenko is Alpha NT too (INTj).

 

[Zarathustra]

I agree that this is a problem but I would hardly hold that against socionics because we could raise the same argument regarding the MBTI and even Jung. That's why we got socionists after Augusta who has helped to redefine the system further such as Gulenko.

Also, if you look beyond the rough surface of what Augusta was trying to say regarding Se, you'd realize she's not that far off. Just that she's expressing it very poorly.

Agreed, but I thought pretty much all the Socionists were NTPs.

 

[Entropic]

Did you see my post above?

I did and I fail to see your point. Your conclusion is that xSFPs are very different to xNTJs and I'm saying that cognitively this isn't true and the divide you perceive has more to do with your ego rejecting your shadow. That, or you're potentially not an xNTJ and in fact a mistype which could explain why you think the system doesn't hold up either.

I don't think the intertype system is perfect but if you got the functions right for your quadra it fits surprisingly well more often than not based on what I've observed.

 

[KDude]

Agreed, but I thought pretty much all the Socionists were NTPs.

One other prominent one is Filatova, but she's INFj, I think. Still removed from Se.

MBTI has it's share of NTP and NFP writers as well, but I know Thomson is INTJ.

 

[Entropic]

Gulenko is Alpha NT too (INTj).

He was just a random name-drop because he was one whose name I could remember. But he's hardly the only socionist which was my point.

 

[Entropic]

One other prominent one is Filatova, but she's INFj, I think. Still removed from Se.

MBTI has it's share of NTP and NFP writers, but I know Thomson is INTJ.

Possibly, I don't remember, and I'm not too fond of her portraits personally. I also think that just because you have an Ne preference it doesn't mean you won't get the other functions. To be honest as an EII, I have a harder time understanding Ti and Fe than I do Ni and Se. Anyway, if you want a decent Se description then maybe turn to Jung. I've seen people theorize him as an IEI but I could see an argument for ILI too.

 

[Zarathustra]

I did and I fail to see your point.

That is apparent.

 

[Zarathustra]

MBTI has it's share of NTP and NFP writers as well, but I know Thomson is INTJ.

So is Nardi.

He was just a random name-drop because he was one whose name I could remember. But he's hardly the only socionist which was my point.

They're still all NPs.

 

[Entropic]

That is apparent.

Then maybe please explain your point?

They're still all NPs.

And both of you missed the point why I mentioned him. I didn't mention him because he's an alpha NT, but I used him as an example of a person who's redefined the system since then and adding new details to it. Then we can argue further whether he is cognitively biased or not or whether his observations mean little but that was aside the point.

 

[KDude]

It's not missing the point when the bulk of theory and literature is based on Augusta and Gulenko. I'm not trying to just isolate them. It's that their approach dominates socionics.

I don't even know what type Jung was tbh. MBTI started off with more balance though. Myers is the INFP, but Briggs INFJ. While the MBTI manual today is refined more by statistics than theory.

edit: Oh, and another thing about Socionics.. and it may sound funny.. but if they had bad impressions of Se, it's because they lived in SOVIET RUSSIA. lol

 

[Zarathustra]

Then maybe please explain your point?

If you were a longer time member of this forum, you'd probably recognize that picture as a reasonably good representative of a rather prominent attitude of mine. Seeing as you were complaining about my abundant Se hitting you in the face the other day, I figured the message might still be accessible to you. Also, no need to teach me about the relation of types to their shadow. I'm probably one of the foremost writers about this topic on this board. If you read what I've written over the years, including in my blog, you'll see that your assumptions about my relationship to my tertiary and inferior are pretty off base.

What's more esoteric, and that, frankly, you couldn't have known from my post, is that you could probably find a bunch of pictures of me from high school making just about that exact same gesture. Also, interestingly, my ENFP ex and I realized a while ago that Rihanna and I dance extremely similarly. As in, not too many people dance like me (I have been told once before, tho, by two girls, that they know a guy who dances like me [meaning that how I dance, and how the guy dance, are, for whatever reason {and what is hopefully obvious, but, since you are new, and, thus, apparently don't know how to read me yet, I will state anyway}, likely due to typological reasons], but, for whatever reason, Rihanna does.

This is where we first noticed it:

And it was further confirmed here (mine's just a bit more guyish):

Another longtime-member inside joke you likely (understandably) would have missed was this:

For posterity:

That was my pokemon avatar (during a certain [1-day] phase on this forum), and it was considered highly representative.

And both of you missed the point why I mentioned him. I didn't mention him because he's an alpha NT, but I used him as an example of a person who's redefined the system since then and adding new details to it. Then we can argue further whether he is cognitively biased or not or whether his observations mean little but that was aside the point.

Well apparently you missed KDude's original point, which is that Se is poorly described in Socionics because all the theorists are NPs.