Ethnosocionics - Integral Types of Nations

The concept of integral types in socionics applies very well to entire nations, which can be seen as large cells where different kinds of information take on different priority and are arranged in a way that is reminiscent of socionic types. Most obvious is the leading information element in each nation; this element becomes the national "common language" — the default group language when people from a certain country gather together or make acquaintances.

Integral types of nations are closely related to language and religion. For example, most of Europe is made up of rational integral types (logic or ethics as the leading function), while most of Asia is irrational (intuition or sensing). Within European civilization, countries where protestantism dominates generally have logical integral types, while Catholic cultures are almost always ethical. Extraverted logic is the common language of all English-speaking countries, which currently dominate the spheres of science and technology. Russia, while belonging to greater European rational culture, has an irrational mentality that is reflected in its Asian leanings and its particular breed of creativity within the western world. The Asian religions of Hinduism and Buddhism, unfathomable to the Western mind, are dominant in India and China, where irrationality flourishes. Islam, like most of modern Christianity, is a religion with a rational mindset, however, separate Arab countries have not been studied closely enough to confirm their integral types.

Note that the predominant view of religion and spirituality in each country corresponds well with the "innate spirituality" of its integral type.

01/31/2006 kopernikus
Very interesting. However; does this mean that wherever a particular function seems to dominate a culture there are a) more people of types dominated by that function b) more people of types dominated by that function having important roles in the shaping of society, or c) simply the predominance of the particular mindset a certain function brings?

01/31/2006 Author
Good question. Socionists disagree a bit on the answer. I think most would agree with b). I personally believe that there are probably slightly more people with the particular dominant function in society and that they are more often found in influential positions where they would be looked up to as role models, but I don't have any statistics to back up my opinion, just logic and my own experience. If a society takes on a particular "lopsidedness" (as all do), then that would mean there are more niches available of a certain kind, which would encourage those who naturally have these traits to make more active use of them and move to the forefront.

02/07/2006 Bionicgoat
Considering nations and ethnic groups as larger social organisms that in ways display socionics types tends to suggest a new way of viewing humanity. Does the analogy hold up at that level? Do nations and ethnic groups of two different types tend towards the relationship socioncs dictates between them?

02/07/2006 Author
"Intertype relations" between "social organisms" that can be given an integral type actually seem to break down at this level, though some socionists (i.e. Bukalov) might argue that they are still distinguishable. The reason for this breakdown, in my opinion, is actually quite simple. Humans are designed to share and cooperate; organizations are designed to be self-sufficient and ever-expanding. Where have you seen organizations (for example, countries) who coalesce with each other in a symbiotic relationship as people tend to do? I'm sure it could be argued that some pairs or small groups of organizations tend towards a sort of peaceful coexistence due to the particularities of their integral types. However, intertype relations become quite a bit fuzzier than with people.

09/12/2006 Anonymous
Both China and Korea are strong in Si but they're both Js. China is TiSe while Korea is FiSe. Chinese and Koreans are very traditional and conservative. Korea is an F country. Amongst the three East Asian countries, Korea is the one that is most concerned about morals and love for one another. Japan is TeSi. These countries are all obvious Js. The Japanese, too, are very traditional and they're famous for their neatness and orderliness. None of these countries is irrational because they're all relatively stable in their energy level and are fairly persistent.

I assume that by China being Se dominant, you mean China is SeTi.

I would like to add one more place, Hong Kong, which is TeSi. Although it is part of China, it was ruled by Britain until towards the end of 1997. The British Gov't according to Dimitri is TeSi. I'm not familiar with the British culture so I'm not sure if that's right or wrong. And, when the Communist Party came to power, many merchants in Shanghai and other provinces fled to HK and many of them were TeSi. All these make HK an TeSi. HK is a free port, has a very simple tax system, low tax rates, minimal Gov't interference in businesses and it is not a socialist jurisdiction. In short, HK focuses just on how to make the most money. A very ExTj behavior. Hong Kongers are not very innovative and they're quite materialistic and frankly quite shallow, therefore, HK should be TeSi.

May I ask why you think Anglophones in Canada is Te dominant? Canada is famous for its humanitarian deeds. And it's a very tolerant country and economically speaking, Canada has never ever put others down for its self interest. It has also repeatedly apologized and compensated the Chinese, the aboriginals, etc, that it has wronged in the past. Canada might be close to the US, but the cultures of the two countries are quite different.

02/01/2007 Author
Sorry for not responding to the previous post for so long. I'm hesitant to write more about ethnosocionics because I don't fully buy it. I recognize certain socionic traits in the cultures I know well, but I'm not confident applying whole types to cultures I don't know very well...