Mixed Effects of Socionics

I hope that perceptive visitors to my site will realize that promoting socionics is not my utmost goal. Yes, here at this site I try to present information about socionics that will be useful to those who are interested in it. I personally have found socionics a very useful intellectual tool that has allowed me to see many things more clearly, as well as a valuable way to harmonize one's psychological space — one's relationships with others, one's lifestyle, and one's self-awareness. However, what I am most interested in is understanding people, relationships, human perception, and societal processes, and in finding tools for self-development. These interests go quite a bit beyond socionics, which is an important piece of the puzzle that helps me keep in mind all varieties of people rather than just those clustered around my own type. However, I have found that while socionics contributed immensely to my life, many or most people who become involved with socionics don't seem to experience the benefit I did. This has perplexed me and caused me to think a lot about what happens to people in the socionics community — why some people find what they are looking for and others don't.

The vision of socionics

Part of the implicit vision of socionics — especially of founder Aushra Augusta — is that by learning about socionics and discovering their socionic type people would solve their problems and organize themselves in new ways and pursue socionically harmonious relations in their private and professional lives, thus leading to a sort of grass-roots psychological revolution within society. Each person would gain the knowledge necessary to pursue self-realization, perhaps with the assistance of socionics 'guides.'

Though some socionists keep this vision alive, reality has proved more convoluted than expected. Instead of remaining one big body with one set of definitions and one understanding, socionics has divided into many different schools headed by their respective leaders who often diagnose types differently — at times very differently. For example, there are schools that type ILEs much more often than other types, schools where EIEs and LSIs are considered by far the most common, schools where Delta Quadra dominates, etc. (fortunately, most of these schools are recognizably peripheral to the socionics community). So, although this grass-roots 'revolution' may be happening (in the former Soviet Union, at least), along with it come competition between schools and individual socionists and frustration because of differing type diagnoses.

The vision of socionics is often realized on a small scale. When small groups of people understand socionics and know their socionic types (I would add, their correct types), their interaction becomes more purposeful and mature. Their expectations of each other become more realistic, they give each other more room to be themselves, and they better recognize the possibilities for cooperation. If you have such a group of people around you, I'm sure the benefits of socionics will outweigh any frustration you may have when encountering differences of opinion.

Controversy and antagonism in socionics

Socionics deals with very personal issues — one's self-concept and one's close relationships with others — and publicly aired disagreements about people's true socionic types can hit close to home. Differences of opinion about types are a constant source of frustration and often ill will between socionists and schools of socionics. The animosity seems to be greatest during public attempts to type people — either in person (with people from different schools present) or on socionics forums. For these experiences to be positive there has to be a recognized authority figure who everyone else listens to. Otherwise, participants fight among themselves, trying to use various semantic tactics to assert their own opinion. Moreover, people who frequent socionics clubs and forums become used to 'confrontational typing' and come to see it as completely normal. It is not. It is ethically incompetent and potentially damaging to participants.

To avoid this, 1) find people who share a similar understanding of types and socionics who you can discuss your diagnoses with constructively, 2) find a teacher to learn from, or 3) stick to only typing people you know. Pretty much all other typing situations are fairly useless in that they increase the amount of mush in one's head and add to frustration.

Discussion between socionics schools

As long as you remain within the 'walls' of one school, you won't encounter too much controversy, but as soon as you meet socionists from other schools (ie. at social events, conferences, or at online forums), conflicts often arise. Often differences of opinion can be overcome through discussion, which helps views to drift together, but occasionally it cannot; sometimes schools have such radically different approaches that effective discussion and cooperation is nearly impossible. For example, there are socionics schools that practice so-called 'physiognomic socionics,' schools that combine socionics with Taro cards (!), and schools where students are taught to think that all other socionists are in error. Such schools are far from the mainstream and have an understandably difficult time communicating with other schools.

By 'school' I mean something more abstract than an educational system or a building. Any group of people that discusses or 'practices' socionics together tends to grow into a sort of 'school of thought' over time. These people have consciously or unconsciously developed a certain culture, way of understanding things, and informational emphasis that becomes recognizable from without, even if the group does not realize it. Every group develops and solidifies a lopsided information structure over time, opening the door for criticism and defection to competing groups.

Ironically, socionics is a victim of the very socionic phenomena it describes; different schools gravitate towards certain information elements and attach different importance to different things, engendering informational compatibility or incompatibility at the organizational level. Of course, these phenomena are not unique to socionics!

*NOTE: I should add that people with a more mainstream understanding of socionics have much less trouble discussing socionics and their typings with other schools. Even though each school develops its own approaches over time, some approaches and understandings are clearly more mainstream and supportable by fundamental socionics theory than others. My dialogue with other socionists has shown that there is an invisible "core" of socionists who share a similar understanding that is at the center of the field. I believe my understanding of socionics also makes me part of this core. What is harder is when socionists are at the periphery of the field and don't realize it. These people tend to feel that everyone else is in error, and their students have a hard time finding a common language with other socionics enthusiasts.

Dealing with animosity in socionics

Sometimes animosity is so blatant that it seems to negate any good that socionics may have done for those involved. However, I would argue that those people who seem to feed the animosity would do so with or without socionics. We cannot say that this animosity is a result of socionics; socionics simply provides a new platform for innate human traits such as competitiveness and groupthink to manifest themselves.

To rise above the animosity (if, of course, you don't want to be a part of it), remember that socionics is not yet an empirical science, and the 'truth' behind various controversies cannot be established experimentally. Hence, differences of opinions should be taken in stride. Some socionists are able to take this step and not get mired in socionic squabbles. If you have opinions that differ from others', try to formulate the reasons behind your opinions and find ways to discuss these preliminary observations and arguments rather than simply focusing on the opinion itself (especially in regards to type identification). This will ultimately prove much more constructive than simply sharing opinions.

Resolving personal problems

It's no secret that most people who get involved in socionics, psychology, or any system that offers a formula for self-development, initially do so primarily in order to resolve some personal area of need or weakness. There's nothing to be ashamed of if this is the case. What is sad is when people never resolve their issues (or never determine their socionic type), even after rising to positions of influence and power within the field. In socionics, a huge and ever-growing body of information and never-ending discussion and controversy can distract one from the problems one initially wished to resolve. For such people, the socionics (or psychology) community often becomes a sort of refuge from the real world — a place where they can mask feelings of inadequacy with big words.

Others get interested in socionics, actively participate in the community for several months, then burn out and leave with a bad taste in their mouth. This is usually because of disagreements on type identification or the lack of scientific empiricism. Justifiably so, these people come to feel that there is no objectivity in socionics, or that no one cares to hear their opinion, or that no one knows what they are talking about. Someone has coined these people "socionics corpses" — disillusioned socionics ex-hobbyists who never got what they were looking for.

To avoid these scenarios, take a self-centered approach to socionics. What do you want to get out of socionics for yourself? Find people who can help you achieve what you want, and avoid those who distract you from your goal. Once you have found what you were looking for, the risk of getting distracted will be much lower, and you can safely 'indulge' in abstract discussions and debates about people's types (including your own).

Does everyone need socionics?

Most certainly not. The only people who have an actual need for socionics are 1) those who are trying to solve pressing personal problems, 2) those who are trying to understand various social phenomena, and 3) those who need socionics for their professional activities. In addition, the most "socionically active" age is about 18 to 30. During this age people are trying to figure out who they are, what they want to do in life, and whom they want to be with — exactly the kinds of questions that socionics can help answer best. If a person has these decisions behind him, is satisfied with his life, and does not have professional interests related to socionics, the chances that he will become seriously interested in socionics are minimal.

10/07/2006 Author
I now feel I took too pessimistic of a view in this article (but I'm not going to edit it for the time being). In reality "antagonism" between schools seems largely limited to peripheral socionics groups, while the mainstream community is actually quite friendly. Constructive dialogue seems to take place quite a bit more often than I originally supposed.

11/19/2006 FA van der Spuy
your comment:
"I have found that while socionics contributed immensely to my life, many or most people who become involved with socionics don't seem to experience the benefit I did."

the best part was that of the dual...
in relationships i pursued those which gave me the most energy.
at one point i realized that my energy levels just need to settle, and that i need someone i am comfortable with.
with time i forgot my cirmstance/experience injunction...
but the dual concept once again, in a learned manner impressed this on me,
and this became an axis for me.

also an important helper in a separate context is this.
there are many self-help, or motivational guides out there.
it was good to find my type....
as this showed me where the limits lie between the motivational lead exercises, and what i do.
OR...
between the motivational exercises of awareness__
which impress on a person the need to be active,
and finding my type...
which lead me to realise exactly what parts i need to keep active in my awareness, and what parts are passive__as they are part of my normal processing
(this is no science, but i learn as i go, merely it was the feeling of a 'good realization', that with time, i would be able to do all of these things)

12/19/2008 Craig
An older article, but still a very poignant one. My experience of on line socionics is to find some people that I relate to better in terms of our understanding of socionics and what it should be used for and concentrate on communicating with them. It may be selfish but i've found it the best way to have an on-line socionics community mean anything for me. This way i've learned about my dual and compared stories of people I know and developed an understanding I feel I can use more. I've posted on forum discussion sometimes and i'm left feeling confused at what every ones motives are. Seems, although I could be wrong, some use it to release aggression or discuss hypothetical theory of socionics when they are unaware of their type. It is strange because when I try to talk about example of life instead of discussing how to proceed it does up with another 15 types suggested for me or the people in the story i'm talking about.