Detecting Socionic Types
Recently I was a guinea pig in an opportunity for Olga Tangemann to demonstrate her diagnostics method to the World Socionics Society. Years ago Olga types me as LSE based on her methodology. My self-typing is SLI. I was very sceptical at the outset, being of the opinion that things like art and music preferences are largely accidents of exposure, and finding it difficult to take her previous typing seriously.
Olga was very pleasant to interact with and for the most part I enjoyed the novelty of such a different method, regardless of my scepticism. The diagnostics process was quite long and involved; Olga is very thorough. I was asked to provide examples of my art and music preferences, examples of art and music that I disliked, photos of the art on my walls at home, photos of art I had created, and also photos of my outfits.
This was quite fun and I have to admit to being charmed by diagnostic methods that are interested in my aesthetic sensibilities. This may just be my favourite test. It was difficult to provide few enough examples of my favourite music; even after paring it down I still had too many. Olga very kindly did not complain. Her analysis ended up more nuanced than that though not nearly as detailed as would satisfy my interest in the subject and not incoherent, so I was pleasantly surprised.
It was also a bit unfair; my friends and family have been pestering me to wear colour for most of my life and I only started adding bright colours, very slowly and with much prodding, about 4 years ago.
This was really a missed opportunity to ask further probing questions to learn more about my personality. I think my wardrobe does have a lot to say on the matter though, and is probably as worthwhile to look at as any other nonverbal preference. Associative test : This was a more straightforward Socionics test with forced choice between different dichotomies etc.
Type-Subtype Analyser : It was never very clear as to how to correctly use this tool or what to expect from it. I think ranking IMEs in this way is just a bad idea and the qualitative features of functions are considerably more useful than any exercise like this. I am really not a fan of the questionnaire. It was actually a bit tedious. You can gauge my success for yourself.Post a Comment.
To see more type profiles, click here. Immanuel Kant 1. Laws Central to the LII is their coherent structure of laws and principles through which they formulate an understanding of the world around them.
LIIs are motivated by a need to analyse and make sense of their experiences, abstracting from them certain rules or regularities and drawing them into a consistent, theoretical framework. For them, truth is the pinnacle of understanding and such truth can only be reached if everything accepted fits together and makes perfect internal sense. Only then can their structure possibly be correct. Many LIIs will be drawn to fields where they are able to make sense of the fundamentals that ordain our world, with many being found in mathematics, philosophy or even theology.
Less intellectual or educated LIIs will nevertheless have an emphasis on the general principles by which they have naturally come to understand their experiences and will insist on trying to make sense of things according to these principles. Some LIIs can dedicate their lives to being system-builders, slowly and painstakingly piecing together a jigsaw in their minds that might revolutionise their chosen field.
However, at some level, all LIIs will be driven to create a certain theoretical consistency in their lives, carefully ordering their thoughts and ideas through which to interpret a variety of phenomena. When leading the conversation, LIIs can come across as a bit stiff. Emotional expression does not come easily to them and their focus on detached logical thought can result in them being rather disconnected from the emotions of those around them and unable to communicate adequately how they feel to others.
This can result in social awkwardness or them boring others when talking about a niche topic of interest, as well as being unable to tell that they are failing to impress. However, they will lack the ability to regulate this themselves and may just as easily fall into inopportune bouts of depression that can be inconsiderately expressed to others. They often need someone who can raise their spirits and keep them in a positive mindset.
Despite often having something highly insightful and well-thought to say, LIIs are not very good at getting people interested and cannot adequately command people's attention. This can easily cause them to feel socially isolated and lonely. As such, they greatly appreciate engaging, charismatic individuals who are able to welcome them into the fold and communicate their insights to others in an exciting way. Furthermore, the doggedness of LIIs with their principles can result in a lacklustre existence.
Mary Somerville 6. LIIs grow and develop by edging carefully out of their mental palaces to better appreciate the wholesome pleasures of the real world. A crucial aspect to helping LIIs emotionally unwind is in the creation of physical harmony in their surroundings and satisfying their more aesthetic tastes. LIIs tend to feel vulnerable to their physical surroundings and can find that it easily becomes overwhelming.
As such, they can be quite picky and sensitive about their sensory experiences, with a fastidiousness over the things they like and a need to satisfy these preferences in a well-balanced moderation, enjoying very particular kinds of food and only liking physical contact in certain areas.This article is a guest post written by Johannes Karlsson, founder of Sociothena. Socionics was developed in the s and 80s by a Lithuanian sociologist and economist called Aushra Augusta.
Its purpose was to map out relationships and how personality types interact with each other. You can find out more about the basics of socionics here and more about the basics of Myers-Briggs here. One of the most apparent differences when we take just a quick glance at Myers-Briggs and socionics side-by-side, is the function stack.
For example, an INFJ would have the following function stack:. Socionics describes how we use all eight functions in detail. Socionics divides these functions into four different blocks. You can get a look at the difference between the two function stacks in the graphics below:.
There are four such blocks; the ego, the super-ego, the id, and the super-id. Each block contains two functions, and we have different attitudes and approaches to each block. For a simple look at them, we can divide them into strong ego and id and weak super-ego and super-id blocks, as well as valued ego and super-id and subdued id and super-ego blocks. The other two blocks, the super-ego and super-id, contain weak functions, and we need help or advice about them.
If a function is valued it is preferred, and if it is subdued it is less-preferred, but may still be strong. Using an INTJ as an example, Ni ego block is a valued function, and compared to its subdued counterpart, Ne id blockNi is strongly preferred while Ne is still in a strong block.
When we put these in a two-by-two matrix, we see that the ego is both strong and valued. The other strong block, the id, is subdued. One of the weaker blocks, the super-ego is difficult and even painful for us to access. Technically, we need help with this block, but we can often be annoyed when someone points it out. The super-id, on the other hand, is a valued but weak block — we seek help and advice in these functions. There are also important differences in how the different positions a function can have are described.
For example, the inferior or suggestive function its name in MBTI and socionics respectively are approached differently. Going through each cognitive function definition and describing the differences between Myers-Briggs and socionics would take up too much room in this article.Socionicsin psychology and sociologyis a theory of information processing and personality typedistinguished by its information model of the psyche called "Model A" and a model of interpersonal relations.
Socionics is a modification of Jung's personality type theory that uses eight psychic functions, in contrast to Jung's model, which used only four.
These functions are supposed to process information at varying levels of competency and interact with the corresponding function in other individuals, giving rise to predictable reactions and impressions—a theory of intertype relations.
The central idea of socionics is that information is intuitively divisible into eight categories, called information aspects or information elements, which a person's psyche processes using eight psychological functions.
This in turn results in distinct thinking patterns, values, and responses to arguments, all of which are encompassed within socionic type. Socionics' theory of intertype relations is based on the interaction of these functions between types. Socionics provides a means of predicting the character of relations and degree of business compatibility, information sharing and psychological compatibility of people before their joining in one collective group, i.
According to Aleksandr Bukalov and Betty Lou Leaver, socionics uses Jungian typology, informational model of psyche, and theory of information metabolism for political and sociological analysis. According to G. Fink and B. Mayrhofer, socionics is considered one of the four most popular models of personality including cybernetic theory Maruyama, five-factor model, Big Five" and typology Myers—Briggs Type Indicatordeserving special attention because of its importance in the study of personality.
According to J. Horwood, and A. Maw socionics is a science developed by Ausra Augustinaviciute in the s. Augustinaviciute and her colleagues worked with Carl Jung's personality typologies to develop personality-based relationship profiles.
It was found that the nature and development of interpersonal relationships both professional and personal are far from random.
Instead, they are based on how well suited each individual's psychological profiles are to one another, allowing Augustinaviciute to develop 16 'socionic types' predicting and describing the interpersonal relationships between any combination of Jung's personality types. According to R.Socionics test 3 of 3 (the 16 types ru laser ru)
Blutner and E. Hochnadel, "socionics is not so much a theory of personalities per se, but much more a theory of type relations providing an analysis of the relationships that arise as a consequence of the interaction of people with different personalities.
Philosopher L. Monastyrsky treats socionics as pre-science. At the same time, L. Monastyrsky himself proposes to pay attention to "the concept of socionic type".
Philosopher E. Pletuhina defines socionics as the study about the information interaction of the human psyche with the outside world, between people. She also defines it as the doctrine of psychological types of people and the relationships between them, as well as notes that the particular quality of socionics is that it considers the innate qualities of the human psyche, including the personality type, which cannot be arbitrarily changed without prejudice to the mental and physical health.
Unlike MBTI, which is widely criticized  for the lack of validity and utility,  the socionics model, which is in some use in Eastern and Western Europe, as well as throughout Eurasia, Central Asia, and the Baltic nations,  strives to stay very close to the original descriptions and type labels suggested by Carl Jung. This field of inquiry has been called socionics. According to Sergei Moshenkov and Tung Tang Wing, "MBTI and Socionics are contemporary sister sciences that categorize and describe human personality types in accordance to the predominance of certain mental faculties called psychic functions by Dr.
Carl Jung. Myers-Briggs and P. Myers notes the highest popularity of socionic books in Russian and remarks that their authors are appealing to the literary and artistic associations of the mass reader, in contradistinction to books on MBTI, which contain the empirical and statistical data on the types distribution in professional groups.I don't think ILIs are the Aspergers type.
I'd say, often they know what is 'expected' of them, they just don't see any value in complying with expectations, which is fair enough. The few I know IRL aren't awkward at all. At least not with me. Funnily enough, two of the fictional characters were my childhood crushes - Heathcliff, and Beast. I really loved Beauty and the Beast as a child, but never really felt I identified with Belle as most girls did.
So it's interesting to examine that retrospectively, I could primarily identify with the Beast. Just because he believes there is a negative outcome to his situation doesnt mean ILI right away. He imprison her dad and then her, he smashed things, everyone was afraid of his physical violence, a lot of Se.
Just because someone is physically massive having been transformed from a normal-sized man into a beast and has a short, even violent temper, it doesn't make that person an SLE. They need to be able to confidently use Se to their advantage?
Welcome to the world of Socionics!
Does the Beast do this? Not so much. He IS much stronger due to being a beast, but he isn't decisive and confident in the moment. He prefers to withdraw and brood over things, rather than take action. A clear SLE in the story is Gaston. To see more type profiles, click here. Isaac Newton 1. Time The ILI is disposed towards inner reflections on the flow of events. Detaching from trivial concerns, ILIs turn their attention to the more important and far-reaching matters of life.
Penetrating the misty vestiges of the past and future through depth of imagination, ILIs tend to synthesise for themselves a profoundly realist, neutral world view that can be perceived as 'bleak' or 'gloomy' by others. Such a world view is frequently in the form of a singular eventuality that current events will head towards given certain variables.
For them, the present is only important in so much as it is the midway point between what has happened and what will happen, and that sometimes actions can be undertaken to change or alter that interaction, usually in the form of preventing stupidity that might lead to disaster later on. Often what is completely obvious to the ILI makes very little sense to anyone else and they may be frustrated that other people are too dense to see the issues so clear to them.
Frequently, ILIs may feel that they have a responsibility to inform people of these dangers, especially if they may affect the world at large. As such, ILIs regularly come across as critics and augurs for the consequences of foolishness, although their risk aversion may also mean that they do not deign to get involved, in case they are also pulled in to drown. Some famous people we think are ILIs:. Some fictional characters we think are ILIs:.
Steven T. Parker 10 June at Teacher Mike 13 June at No 19 July at Hayam 26 October at Jack Oliver Aaron 21 July at Newer Post Older Post Home. Subscribe to: Post Comments Atom. Isaac Newton. Marie Curie.You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features.
By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members PMview blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.
User Tag List. Thread: Socionics tests: Find your sociotype! Socionics tests: Find your sociotype! By popular request, here are a few socionics tests for finding your sociotype. Edit: found a few Socionics duality facebook groups for anyone who wants to join, share your feedback, help plan meetups, etc. Last edited by Bush; at PM. Reason: updated by request. Send PM. I don't think it was written by an english speaker. What I see is what I see. I usually depend on other people to tell me all the surrounding invisible circumstances of a situation.
I also get very distracted. For example, the only reason I'm in front of my computer right now is because I was looking for my water bottle and I was supposed to be eating breakfast. Now I'm just hungry and distracted. Originally Posted by sulfit. Most of the time these tests provide an accurate result, but occasionally they miss [ Originally Posted by DJ Arendee. Which one? It's sometimes difficult to understand what the questions try to pertain to.
Also, I think I understand socionics too well as a system so it's easy for me to manipulate the results even if I answer honestly. Granted, it's my actual sociotype but regardless. Come watch with me as our world burns. Okay, LII I can buy that. I need to read up on it a bit more.There are three methods of detecting socionic types: testing, interviewing, distant type detection.
Although various books publish popular tests consisting of questions, such as Keirsey Temperament Sorter, these in fact are not valid psychological instruments. Real psychological testing methodologies must include means of verification of correctness of their results, which is impossible to achieve with only several tens of questions.
The MBTI is a similar but not identical system of types. This means that correlation between Socionics, on the one hand, and MBTI, on the other, is only approximate. So, if you know your type according to MBTI, you will need to check "bordering" socionic types. Too complicated, you will say. MBTI gives me a reliable description of my type, why do I need socionics? But MBTI achieved an easy methodology of testing at the cost of neglecting some essential factors of Jungian personality types.
Just reckoning with these factors allowed Socionics to create a system of intertype relationships. Actually we are translating an article by Victor Gulenko giving a concise description of this methodology. It consists in comparing traits from type descriptions with characteristics of real people.
You may have noticed yourself significant divergences of lists of celebrities at different typological sites. This site represents E. Filatova's collection of portraits of typical representatives of each type from: E. However, when the number of people diagnosed by her approached several hundreds actually it exceedsshe began to mention certain regularities in people's appearance, which correlated well with their personality types, and even so called "twin series" within each of the 16 types.
This table looks exactly like first socionic tests.
Their obvious problem was that they worked excellently in the hands of their authors but failed in the hands of the others. However, if you have already got certain experience in detecting types, and people more and more often are agree with your diagnosis, this table below should serve as a good mnemonic table containing clue traits of all 16 types.
However, we do not approve using it for self-identification. Detecting Socionic Types There are three methods of detecting socionic types: testing, interviewing, distant type detection. Testing Although various books publish popular tests consisting of questions, such as Keirsey Temperament Sorter, these in fact are not valid psychological instruments.
Interviewing Actually we are translating an article by Victor Gulenko giving a concise description of this methodology. Distant Type Detection It consists in comparing traits from type descriptions with characteristics of real people. Is Visual Identification Possible?
We will publish soon more materials on her methodology. Mnemonic Table of Socionic Types This table looks exactly like first socionic tests.