How important is it to know your type?

[Jimbean]

Just how important do you think knowing your type is? How much has socionics affected your perception of yourself? Is being aware of the order of your IM elements affect the way you think?"

[aestrivex]

Does knowing your order of IM elements affect the way you think?

unfortunately, yes.

[anndelise]

Just how important do you think knowing your type is? How much has socionics affected your perception of yourself? Does knowing your order of IM elements affect the way you think?

I haven't figured out what to vote yet.
Prior to knowing which functions I was more relaxed with and allowed me to be ME, I was very down on myself for not meeting these expectations people from my past used to place on me. "You're so intelligent, why do you keep screwing these things up?" "Why don't you use your brain more often?" "If you'd just think about it more." "Use your brain, not your heart." "You should be more careful and think before you act." "How could you say something so stupid?" "Why do you keep contradicting yourself? (huh? but it wasn't...not really...)" "How hard is it, really, to understand this simple concept?" etc etc etc. Even different therapeutic techniques seemed to be trying to change me into something less natural for me. I always felt as if I was worthless because I couldn't do the things people kept trying to get me to do. And because I couldn't express myself the way they wanted me to. And because I couldn't understand even supposedly simple stuff.

But then I learned that all those things my mind kept bombarding me with was natural..and it had a name I could refer to it as..."Ne".
And I learned that some people DO process information and such via their feelings (like i do), and not through some well reasoned process (like i have difficulty doing). And I learned that there were even benefits to doing it this way.
The only times now that I get uptight regarding my functionally related strengths/faults is when some idiot invalidates me in much the same way as the comments above used to do. Pathetically, I sometimes still fall for it. Grrr.

So I guess I'd say that knowing my type..or rather, knowing my IM elements of preference has helped clear up a lot of self-loathing and self-criticalness. And has even led to some self-pride at how well I was able to achieve something that was damned hard, that certain people seem to think should be easy for me. I'd say that that's a pretty damned big turn-around...from self-loathing to self-pride!

[Jimbean]

Does knowing your order of IM elements affect the way you think?

unfortunately, yes.

I apologize, I should rephrase that into "Is being aware of the order of your IM elements affect the way you think?"

[aestrivex]

Does knowing your order of IM elements affect the way you think?

unfortunately, yes.

I apologize, I should rephrase that into "Is being aware of the order of your IM elements affect the way you think?"

i don't see the difference between the two.

[normal]

somewhat important. know my type doesnt really change anything to me. For the first time, hell yes, i was very confused because im very passive-agressive and a bit depressive so i question my personality all the time with every thing i do in life or how i react with some people. But when i started to work my behavior to more positive way leaving my obsseive self-discovery apart, Knowing my type doesnt really matter at all. I just (try) live with it.
Now it is only curiosity. And that's fine with me. there are still times when i ask to my self, why i do such <insert whatever behavioir here> but i try not to think much about it. I guess that know my IM element (or at least, understanding a bit) help me a lot too. (The same thing happen with the enneagram btw.)


oh i still remember when i came here the first time i try to relate everything i do in life with socionics, but i was wrong. It's so embarrassing know that i think about it. But actually i'm fine.

[Joy]

If I'm going to hang around here, I cannot fathom not figuring out my type. There are a number of people here who seem to not care to figure out their types... it baffles me. Seriously, what's the point in putting time into this theory and community if you don't even care what your own type is?

[Jonathan]

If I'm going to hang around here, I cannot fathom not figuring out my type. There are a number of people here who seem to not care to figure out their types... it baffles me. Seriously, what's the point in putting time into this theory and community if you don't even care what your own type is?

Well there is the school of thought that views Socionics as pertaining to states of mind rather than to one type that a person is all his/her life. For example, Smilex advocated the view that people change types. So, if one believes that one can change type whenever one wants, then it isn't that important to know one's type, but understanding the states of mind may still be important.

Naturally, for those people who believe that type is unchanging, that wouldn't seem to make any sense at all. But I think it explains why some people may not seem to care what their type is.

[strrrng]

It is important to me for a few reasons. one is self-understanding. unlike mbti, socionics really explains thinking patterns, which I like a lot. It is also like another system for me to dabble in until I reach proficiency. And like anndelise said, it has cleared up a lot of strengths, weakenesses, problems and what they mean.

anndelise, it seemed like you kind of did this...you mentioned self-criticalness and doubt before, and how socionics mitigated those things. even though it explains, it can't substitute for true self-esteem, etc.

ultimately, it's a very good system, very interesting.

[Jarno]

Knowing your type is necessary to know which person is your dual.

Finding your dual is one of the core elements in socionics for me personally.

[reyn_til_runa]

it is important to me, but i'll always leave my type open to revision. i'm not saying i think that type can actually change, but that being confronted with many forces that threaten to undo us, frazzle our senses, make us appear to be quite the people we believe ourselves not to be...we are left vulnerable to "not knowing" our preferred ways of functioning, and knowing instead, the ways we have been forced to function just to survive under stress.

so, it has always been a little unclear to me -- the role of socionics. i mean, does finding one's type require removing all the masks which are used so that we can survive? i don't think so. i think, instead, finding one's type requires that we are aware of the discrepancies in ourselves to some degree, and work from finish to start, to possibly get at the original (or ongoing) impetus for creating the masks.

[Blaze]

Knowing your type is necessary to know which person is your dual.

Finding your dual is one of the core elements in socionics for me personally.

that's if you believe in the validity of socionics.

i do think it's important to know one's type; otherwise you're just spinning your wheels bring your energy and attention to the wrong things.

[strrrng]

it is important to me, but i'll always leave my type open to revision. i'm not saying i think that type can actually change, but that being confronted with many forces that threaten to undo us, frazzle our senses, make us appear to be quite the people we believe ourselves not to be...we are left vulnerable to "not knowing" our preferred ways of functioning, and knowing instead, the ways we have been forced to function just to survive under stress.

if you don't think it can change, how can it be revised? You can be revised through life experience, etc., but your type is not going to revise; the functions are what they are. if it does change, then it does. socionics helps because it doesn't focus on all that stuff you mentioned. it focuses on your thought patterns, independent of influence, which is good. you want to know how to function best.

[FDG]

Reality is what it is, so things would be the same regardless of whether I knew my type or not.

[reyn_til_runa]

it is important to me, but i'll always leave my type open to revision. i'm not saying i think that type can actually change, but that being confronted with many forces that threaten to undo us, frazzle our senses, make us appear to be quite the people we believe ourselves not to be...we are left vulnerable to "not knowing" our preferred ways of functioning, and knowing instead, the ways we have been forced to function just to survive under stress.

if you don't think it can change, how can it be revised? You can be revised through life experience, etc., but your type is not going to revise; the functions are what they are. if it does change, then it does. socionics helps because it doesn't focus on all that stuff you mentioned. it focuses on your thought patterns, independent of influence, which is good. you want to know how to function best.

right. but you're missing my point.

the brain is complex and functions in ways that have yet to be discovered. also, the fact remains that i can only do my best to perceive how my brain works accurately and to understand why certain manifestations may not represent the actual mechanism beneath the surface. "the functions being what they are," doesn't change that a person may not accurately translate these functions within the context of their own functioning, and how it changes throughout life.

this seems obvious to me.

[anndelise]

It is important to me for a few reasons. one is self-understanding. unlike mbti, socionics really explains thinking patterns, which I like a lot. It is also like another system for me to dabble in until I reach proficiency. And like anndelise said, it has cleared up a lot of strengths, weakenesses, problems and what they mean. For example, my parents used to nag me about my problem with establishing relationships, my therapist constantly tried to push me into it, and both of these things pissed me off to no end. however, understanding my polr and agenda has helped me come to terms with such things and not care as much about what others may say. which leads to another point, an underlying theme of anndelise's post: it is like a religion in the sense of being a comfort and, if taken too far, a crutch. I think it's important to use it for psychological understanding, but when you are relying on it and using it for almost everything, you have lost touch of reality.

anndelise, it seemed like you kind of did this...you mentioned self-criticalness and doubt before, and how socionics mitigated those things. even though it explains, it can't substitute for true self-esteem, etc.

ultimately, it's a very good system, very interesting.

heh, i'm not sure where you got the religion feel from my post, because all I was talking about was how I finally had something that explained those problems to me and helped me realize that there was nothing wrong with me, only with other people's expectations of me. I don't rely on it for everything...in fact, hardly anything. Socionics was useful to help me finally understand some of the issues I was dealing with psychologically, understanding more of myself helped me to relax as myself (except when it comes to certain forum members) instead of trying to push myself into being something i'm not, as well as finally developing a way of communicating with my daughter more successfully. That's pretty much it. I don't go around typing everyone i know (only those closest to me or when I'm trying to understand better one of the conflicts we're having). And I see no reason for typing people i don't know. In fact, I don't think much of socionics at all except for when I'm feeling the need to be around people, as this forum is currently my only social outlet.

as for the self-critical vs "true" self-esteem thing....that's a natural reaction that often comes when one finally understands that one's weaknesses are..well..natural..to them and not a fault nor a personality disorder, and that one's natural strengths are finally being accepted as strengths instead of being judged by others as being faults. I mean, seriously, when you find something that helps you remove all that self-doubt and all that self-critical-talk....relaxation and peace automatically follow. That doesn't imply some sort of religious fanatacism or whatever. And it leaves much more room and energy for self-improving on the things *I* want to improve on (not socionically related) and not doing it because "there's something wrong with me". (basically, improving because I want to...not because i "have to")

[XoX]

Reality is what it is, so things would be the same regardless of whether I knew my type or not.

but you are a part of reality so you knowing your type would change the reality?

[Jimbean]

Reality is what it is, so things would be the same regardless of whether I knew my type or not.

My sentiments exactly!

[Jimbean]

Reality is what it is, so things would be the same regardless of whether I knew my type or not.

but you are a part of reality so you knowing your type would change the reality?

No, just your perception of it, or maybe how you go about changing your environment.

[FDG]

Socionics just tells me I get along with people I get along, and I don't get along with people I don't get along. So knowing my type is useless.

Knowing other people's types in order to predict their relations and so that I can try to form favorable pairs and/or groups - that might be more useful. But it's only useful in relation to myself, meaning that if I have mistyped all INTps as ISTjs or vice versa, it won't matter as long as my relation with them is one of mirror and the relation with the set of people I have typed as having the opposite set of letters will be one of conflict.

[strrrng]

Reality is what it is, so things would be the same regardless of whether I knew my type or not.

sure, one would continue to sleep and eat, and the birds would continue to fly, but one's picture of reality - specifically their orientation in it - would be less lucid. But nonetheless, socionics will benefit some people more than others, and some not at all.

the brain is complex and functions in ways that have yet to be discovered. also, the fact remains that i can only do my best to perceive how my brain works accurately and to understand why certain manifestations may not represent the actual mechanism beneath the surface. "the functions being what they are," doesn't change that a person may not accurately translate these functions within the context of their own functioning, and how it changes throughout life.

ok, the brain is constantly adapting and has yet to fully be understood. yes. and you can only attempt to quantify it. yes. that's fine. People do have a good capability of translating and understanding the functions, however. One of the base components of socionics is that all the functions work relative to eachother, sometimes alternating in strength depending on circumstances. One should not just look for absolutes. However, because of the complexity of the system, when understanding yourself, you will most likely correspond to one type your whole life because of what it encompasses: behavior, living environment, social reactions, etc. Having your type change is not as simple as going from P to J; it's a complete change in your thinking patterns. We all know the brain changes, you can stop arguing that point.....it proves little in the context of socionics understanding and is quite annoying, frankly.

[FDG]

Reality is what it is, so things would be the same regardless of whether I knew my type or not.

sure, one would continue to sleep and eat, and the birds would continue to fly, but one's picture of reality - specifically their orientation in it - would be less lucid. But nonetheless, socionics will benefit some people more than others, and some not at all.

If I look back to my adolescence, relationships (not romantic) followed the script predicted by socionics, and groups of friends were split following their quadra pertainance. Basically, my picture of reality was exactly the same as now, the only difference being that I did not have formal labels attached to relations, quadras, and types.

So, not only I continue to sleep and eat, but the way my relationships are formed is exactly the same as before.

[FDG]

but if you misinterpret the functions, values, temperament, clubs, etc. so much as to mistake INTp for ISTj, how precise is your interpretation of the rest of the theory likely to be?

As long as I don't misinterpret the relationship, it is of no interest for me to have everything wrong, simply because when I want to use socionics in a practical way, relationships are everything that counts.

Now, don't get me wrong. I don't think I have the types wrong as I said, but I do think that nothing has changed in the way I interact with other people.

on average perhaps but having labels perhaps enchances the precision of, pace of, or confidence in the splitting. i agree with strrrng said about "lucidity".

it's also an important point on his part that precision is not always desirable.

But splitting occurs naturally. I'm not the one doing it, groups are formed automatically. I might be better at observing its happening, sure, but I don't have any control on who I get along with, or on who gets along with whom.

There's only one thing I have done out of my knowledge of socionics, which is slightly pushing an ESFp towards approaching an INTp she liked. They quickly became a couple and started cohabiting. Now, though, I'm not sure I did the right thing, so I truly want to avoid any influence socionics might have on my life.

[Jimbean]

Reality is what it is, so things would be the same regardless of whether I knew my type or not.

My sentiments exactly!

while socionics may attempt to model reality, a reality with socionics is not the same as a reality without it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metadata + http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursion

Correct, but could you evaluate something that you are not aware of, although it may be important?

whoops maybe i hit someone's POLR

(FDG has an excuse because he at least thinks he devalues Ne.)

No you did not, I like to think about philosophy, plus you are coming from an Ni perspective, but nice try

[FDG]

by having learned socionics, perhaps you spend less time and hessitation over thinking about such things than if you had not learned socionics.

Part of the problem is that for a short while I actually over-thought about it. Then I reverted to my old, natural patterns and things returned to homeostasis. Most of my skepticism stems from this personal experience.

[reyn_til_runa]

We all know the brain changes, you can stop arguing that point.....it proves little in the context of socionics understanding and is quite annoying, frankly.

you are annoyed by what exactly?

[reyn_til_runa]

We all know the brain changes, you can stop arguing that point.....it proves little in the context of socionics understanding and is quite annoying, frankly.

you are annoyed by what exactly?

i think you're kind of being vacuous but i think he is jumping to conclusions.

the extent that type change "is a complete change of thinking patterns" is an empirical argument i think that demands rigorous study.

"the functions are what they are" in description but they are more ambiguous to identify in reality.

the user Kioshi i think has put up the best argument in defense of more constant type so far with empirical information about thermoregulation. although i think it's questionable how much that corresponds to what is measured by socionics type, an argument i am still developing.

ok, vacuous meaning stupid? i think he just doesn't get it.

[reyn_til_runa]

no! not "vacuous" in that sense.

(i was "vacuous" in that sense for having chosen a word with that alternate meaning. sorry...)

what i meant wasn't so much even directed at anyone specifically, as that argument in general. it frequently comes up. it frequently creates a lot of words being posted. and it frequently comes down to a stalemate, being "empty".

perhaps because, as far as i can tell*, it's not something that can be answered conversationally. we need rigorous evidence.

but if you guys want to try and hash it out to some benefit anyway, i probably should not have interrupted. i'm probably just expressing my own frustrations with seeing the argument, more so than offering anything of benefit to you myself with that particular comment of mine. again, sorry.

i also may be taking the "obviousness" of the asterisked (*) remark for granted.

as i guess i am taking the obviousness of their being some probable lapse between perception of functioning and actual functioning for granted. it's actually such an obvious thing to me that i have a hard time explaining it. but, either way, no problem about calling me vacuous. i was sort of hoping it was a clever euphemism for calling me stupid, and if that were the case, i would have preferred a more direct stab.

[Jarno]

Knowing your type is necessary to know which person is your dual.

Finding your dual is one of the core elements in socionics for me personally.

that's if you believe in the validity of socionics.

i do think it's important to know one's type; otherwise you're just spinning your wheels bring your energy and attention to the wrong things.

I've experienced enough of Socionics in real life to conclude the validity of socionics. Questioning Socionics is for inexperienced people. ...and yes I'm trying to be arrogant right now.

[strrrng]

anndelise, I didn't mean zealous religion, just a (belief) system that works. I get what you're saying though.

Basically, my picture of reality was exactly the same as now, the only difference being that I did not have formal labels attached to relations, quadras, and types.

ok, that may be true on a general note, but in essence, no. Your perception of reality changes when you see a leaf fall, so to speak. And I can understand how socionics would hamper your freedom of thought, regarding yourself.

i think you're kind of being vacuous

yes, exactly. A meaningless appurtenance to the idea at hand.

but i think he is jumping to conclusions. possibly

the extent that type change "is a complete change of thinking patterns" is an empirical argument i think that demands rigorous study. agreed, just arguing theoretically

"the functions are what they are" in description but they are more ambiguous to identify in reality. yes, but in the context of the argument the meaning of that statement was slightly different

ok, vacuous meaning stupid? i think he just doesn't get it.

believe me, I get it perfectly, as there wasn't anything to truly get other than common sense understanding jargonized up. vacuous in the sense of innocuous or inane - fucking pointless.

as i guess i am taking the obviousness of their being some probable lapse between perception of functioning and actual functioning for granted. it's actually such an obvious thing to me that i have a hard time explaining it.

yeah, so obvious . it is obvious - that's why imfd85 called it vacuous and I said I was annoyed! there isn't shit to explain. you can bless us with your brilliance on something more significant.

[reyn_til_runa]

ok, vacuous meaning stupid? i think he just doesn't get it.

believe me, I get it perfectly, as there wasn't anything to truly get other than common sense understanding jargonized up. vacuous in the sense of innocuous or inane - fucking pointless.

in·noc·u·ous /ɪˈnɒkyuəs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[i-nok-yoo-uhs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. not harmful or injurious; harmless: an innocuous home remedy.
2. not likely to irritate or offend; inoffensive; an innocuous remark.
3. not interesting, stimulating, or significant; pallid; insipid: an innocuous novel.

maybe you should concentrate on the bolded definition, although i know you were trying to insult me by #3. perhaps fewer eye rolls would help you concentrate.

as i guess i am taking the obviousness of their being some probable lapse between perception of functioning and actual functioning for granted. it's actually such an obvious thing to me that i have a hard time explaining it.

yeah, so obvious . it is obvious - that's why imfd85 called it vacuous and I said I was annoyed! there isn't shit to explain. you can bless us with your brilliance on something more significant.

why the adolescent angst?

[munenori2]

Just how important do you think knowing your type is? How much has socionics affected your perception of yourself? Is being aware of the order of your IM elements affect the way you think?"

While I think there are some pitfalls in knowing, it depends on how you use it. I would say that it has helped me in the sense of understanding my weak spots so I can work on them (though again, this can have downsides as well). Still, it seemed like before I was always apt to try to improve myself, especially my already strong points but my PoLR was like a gaping hole I didn't give the time of day to, so in this respect I think my development is beginning to become a little more holistic. I think that socionics could lead someone astray in the sense that it might make someone complacent or resigned to the their weaknesses, expecting someone else to come along and simply take care of those aspects of life for them.

[strrrng]

could you clear this up for me? as i read it again maybe i misunderstoof what you were referring to with all the pronouns.

I was basically making a general statement in response to reyn's assertion about the brain always changing. I was basically saying 'yeah, the brain changes, but not so much to constantly change function usage altogether, being that they stay the same, in terms of overall cognitive mappning, throughout life'

now of course an INTj may find himself leaning more towards Ne for a few months, then the next few noticing development in his polr, etc., but he most likely will never change type.

[discojoe]

If I'm going to hang around here, I cannot fathom not figuring out my type. There are a number of people here who seem to not care to figure out their types... it baffles me. Seriously, what's the point in putting time into this theory and community if you don't even care what your own type is?

Yeah.

I can relate, but I also understand that there are people more interested in other facets of the theory than with necessarily finding their type. It's a matter of personal values.