Socionics or naivety?

[Azeroffs]

Once one's learned socionics, one cannot return to Neverland.

I thought this deserved some of its own attention.

I personally am very glad that I discovered and learned socionics, but I could totally understand why someone would think otherwise. It totally depersonalizes interaction in a way that cannot be reversed. It's like the world just became a lot drier and simpler. I personally like things to be simpler and more easily understood, but it does take the wonder and unknown out of it which could be depressing for some.

If you could start all over and choose whether or not to learn the theory, would you? Do you think socionics has made your life worse?

This may have been covered before. If so, I apologize.

[DirectorAbbie]

I would still want to learn the theory. But I would postpone it. Half a lifetime being normal and half a lifetime in the know sounds good to me.

[tcaudilllg]

Learn more. Don't just learn about socionics... challenge socionics assumptions by asking people to affirm or disaffirm them through their responses.

[Galen]

I'd probably choose to learn about the theory in early childhood, assuming that I'd learn then what's available now. That way I'd not only be so much better than I already am, but I feel I'd have a better time understanding the people around me and what about people I like/dislike.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Creepy-male]

I don't really think about socionics in day-to-day interactions. It hasn't ruined my life in the least.

[ArchonAlarion]

Learn more. Don't just learn about socionics... challenge socionics assumptions by asking people to affirm or disaffirm them through their responses.

[Gilly]

Socionics actually makes me more interested in people. At least now the faces that were formerly heads bobbing in the crowd take on some color, some significance, some relevance; I have a reason to swoop low amidst their foul scent, if only to prod and poke for my own pleasure.

[Ritella]

I'd still learn it as I never connected or cared for people prior to learning it or prior to meeting my dual. Now I don't have to lament such a person leaving my life since there are so many out there. I now have hope that there are people like me out there (identicals), so I'm not weird (or special) and there are people who like me when I'm being me (duals), and the people who hate me because of my Ni can go suck a cock.

the one thing that sucks about socionics is that it sort of killed my Fi- i.e. rather than being interested in figuring everyone out, I now sort of know the basics, which makes things less fun.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[thePirate]

to be really honest, it has made my life worse in alot of ways but I wouldnt take it back. I think with learning information like this, theres a certain period of distraught and shock where reality doesnt seem to make sense or you dont want to believe things to be so, as is the case with certain people anyway. here, I truley think theres a period where things go to shit as you figure stuff out; alot of what Im learning is shedding light to dark parts of myself and my past that I had hoped to hide from myself or not pay much attention to. its neccessary though, for any healthy human to go through things like this and in the long run knowing and being in control of your destiny is much better than blissful ignorance.

in a sense knowing this information gives us choice; power over our lives that an otherwise existence may not have provided as quickly or as easily; and as they say it is always darkest before the dawn. if one can weather the storm, I do believe paradise can be achieved-so to speak.

[A Person]

It can still to an extent be rectified.
I moved away from the theory a few years back; it was still in the back of my mind to an extent, but not in the sense that I was always analysing everybody and trying to apply it to my life.
I personally think its best use anyways is as a consideration in situations of conflict- when you can't figure something out about a person/situation. It can still be used this way if not a thought topic regularly.
I keep my distance from it outside of conflict situations.
Frankly, a great deal of the situations in my life have not unfolded necessarily how one would expect them to based on socionics, anyways.
I would by no means insist that there's NO practical application to the theory; I did however find sitting around this forum and always thinking about the theory to be more of a negative than a positive.
In the same way as if a fortune teller told me (accurately) what was supposed to happen tomorrow it would probably change what would, knowing how I'm "supposed" (or are "most likely") to interact with people usually changes how one interacts with them.
This can be rectified A) By having distance from the theory and B) by having a fair amount of uncertainty with how real life situations pertain to socionics. Afterall, just because something is most likely to happen a certain way, doesn't mean it will- we shouldn't assume anything. That is generally my biggest problem with how people think (or act at least- "Probability = reality"), socionics as an expression of such a matter is not an exception- certainly not within myself either.
I personally better trust (and am altogether more comfortable, a completely different matter entirely) with my intuitions and my personal experiences with others as a basis for interaction anyways.

As far as having learned it or not- I have honestly learned a great deal from socionics outside of how most people apply it.
The fact that there are in fact many very similar to me in the world, the fact there there are many who do have an intuitive understading of me (more than I would have expected), the true subjectiveity of people and how many different perspectives there truely are in the world.
It is worth considering at well that though this theory teaches that often our misconceptions and weaknesses are a part of our nature- and therefore encourages some manner of tolerance- doesn't me we should excuse weaknesses, misconceptions, etc. The point of the theory is to become better aware of what weaknesses are- we should still encourage the strengthing of weaknesses in others as we normally would, and enact tolerace and understanding when called for as well.

[nilv]

We don't have to choose between the burden of ultimate truth (a la socionics) and blissful ignorance. Understanding socionics implies understanding its scope. People are so complex, and our environments impact us in so many ways, that while socionics does help us understand people's motivations and interactions, it hardly reduces human interaction to an absolute, deterministic mechanical formula. You could understand socionics perfectly and still be completely mystified by human behavior.

Socionics only depersonalizes interactions if you've assigned it powers it doesn't have and bent all of reality to fit into its finite framework. It's easy to fall into this trap -- I know I've done it before. But a better question would be this: recognizing that socionics is a useful but limited tool VS. living in a fantasy land where the universe unfolds according to grand socionical principles and socionics reveals the human species' master plan, sucking life dry of all mystery and meaning.

[A Person]

As a further extension of what I just said, I will say that I do think it's important that we share our negative experiences through the use of socionics as well. If the theory truly holds weight, I doubt there are too few who have had negative experience like myself- from the looks of it many of you have as well.
I think socionics is a positive to some point, and a negative to another extreme. Like most anything in the world, it's a balance we should learn- something we should observe with moderation and not TOO faithfully.

And this way, people can learn that one CAN move away from it. There is moderation one can attain. (See above.) There should absolutely be some uncertainty with the theory, like anything else, and this is absolutely a good thing for the sake of all of us who have crossed that barrier.

I had something else to say, and then I went brain dead.
Anyways, I'll finish posting on these couple, and then I'm probably gone again.
Good luck folks. :-D

[A Person]

We don't have to choose between the burden of ultimate truth (a la socionics) and blissful ignorance. Understanding socionics implies understanding its scope. People are so complex, and our environments impact us in so many ways, that while socionics does help us understand people's motivations and interactions, it hardly reduces human interaction to an absolute, deterministic mechanical formula. You could understand socionics perfectly and still be completely mystified by human behavior.

Socionics only depersonalizes interactions if you've assigned it powers it doesn't have and bent all of reality to fit into its finite framework. It's easy to fall into this trap -- I know I've done it before. But a better question would be this: recognizing that socionics is a useful but limited tool VS. living in a fantasy land where the universe unfolds according to grand socionical principles and socionics reveals the human species' master plan, sucking life dry of all mystery and meaning.

Unfortunately this moderation takes more time and comes with more difficulty for some than others. Ultimately better to go through the effort of attaining such moderation though, in my opinion.

[AQ]

I thought this deserved some of its own attention.

I personally am very glad that I discovered and learned socionics, but I could totally understand why someone would think otherwise. It totally depersonalizes interaction in a way that cannot be reversed. It's like the world just became a lot drier and simpler. I personally like things to be simpler and more easily understood, but it does take the wonder and unknown out of it which could be depressing for some.

If you could start all over and choose whether or not to learn the theory, would you? Do you think socionics has made your life worse?

This may have been covered before. If so, I apologize.

Yes, it puts choice in our hands, and who wants that kind of responsibility where fate can no longer be blamed ?

And, ahem, the more people learn socionics, the more they will become INTps, because interactions would become "depersonalised" . You know before the event has transpired what the outcomes are going to be.

I am glad I learnt socionics and that I learnt it in my early twenties and not before, so I have enough data on a pre-socionics and post-socionics world. Therefore, I don't have to accept all that socionics says as true; I have data of my own to verify.

But the one sad part is, sometimes, even my imagination is modified to suit a socionics reality, and that can kill creativity.

[redbaron]

all these replies are great and so interesting. There was a thread like this awhile back wherein I was lamenting knowing socionics because it was like eating from the tree of good and evil. Knowing this stuff and experiencing it, you can never go back. However, if I could choose, I'd still wanna know all about it, at as young an age as possible. For some reason, I always choose knowledge and understanding over blissful ignorance. Even though it might not be entirely good for me.

[Creepy-]

The same way learning about biology didn't take away my fascination with the workings of the body, learning socionics hasn't taken away my fascination with people and interrelations. It adds another level of understanding, but there is still plenty to wonder/marvel at imo.

I kind of like the metaphor of learning socionics as eating from the tree of knowledge - I'm still happily munching away on my fruit

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

It's both.

You'll always be naive in ways. only the narcissist tries to know everything. However, people soon realize this is absolutely impossible. You become just a brain, with no heart or soul or body. So you will always be childish, you will always be the blind leading the blind in many ways. Human weakness. I don't see an easy way out of this. There really isn't any. No good solution.

So don't care if you are naive. Don't feel bad. What point is there? Don't apologize for you naive weak little girly fag qualities, cause they never go away. Again, you will always be naive. The price for not being naive, is pure narcissism- and you wouldn't want that. To love is to be naive, to find magic is to be naive, all of those things require childlike naivety and curiosity.

[silverchris9]

I thought this deserved some of its own attention.

I personally am very glad that I discovered and learned socionics, but I could totally understand why someone would think otherwise. It totally depersonalizes interaction in a way that cannot be reversed. It's like the world just became a lot drier and simpler. I personally like things to be simpler and more easily understood, but it does take the wonder and unknown out of it which could be depressing for some.

Nothing could take the mystery out of people for me. The soul (or what-it-is-to-be-human if you prefer) is the most mysterious, wonderful, odd, excellent thing in creation. And then the fact that man is also a "handful of dust"? The two creation stories in Genesis? Nah, we'll never run out of things we don't know about people. And don't even get me started on God. I could spend an eternity and still not know everything about God. [/Catholic theology joke]

If you could start all over and choose whether or not to learn the theory, would you? Do you think socionics has made your life worse?

Nope. Socionics hasn't made my life any worse. I still hang out with people that don't fit in my quadra, I just know that I'm hanging out with people who probably aren't in the same quadra as me, and adjust my expectation accordingly. The thing is, I don't adjust my behavior any more than my natural feeling-out of people would otherwise require. Socionics is, to me, a theoretical explanation for a phenomenon that is otherwise observable regardless.

The same way learning about biology didn't take away my fascination with the workings of the body, learning socionics hasn't taken away my fascination with people and interrelations. It adds another level of understanding, but there is still plenty to wonder/marvel at imo.

Good comparison. I agree.

You'll always be naive in ways. only the narcissist tries to know everything.

Or the promethean. But I guess all prometheans are narcissists (that's the lesson of Frankenstein--the actual book that is, not the stupid monster movies--probably based largely on Mary Shelley's observations of her crazy-ass genius husband).

[Marie84]

the one thing that sucks about socionics is that it sort of killed my Fi- i.e. rather than being interested in figuring everyone out, I now sort of know the basics, which makes things less fun.

Never thought about that before but you're right. People seems a lot more...predictable now

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[crazedrat]

it can be reversed, but only after years of study. And maybe.. maybe not entirely reversed. But I am still hopeful. ;l Basically you have to reject socionics by appreciating the uniqueness of everything. Pretty difficult to do..

[silverchris9]

REVISED OPINION:

I've determined the negative consequences of socionics, for me, have more to do with me using socionics to excuse my own negative or undesirable behavior (i.e., passivity and extreme romantic timidity) than socionics affecting how I deal with other people. That is, socionics has more of a negative effect (or potentially negative effect) on how I deal with myself than on how I deal with others. It really doesn't much affect how I deal with others; it does potentially explain some of my very positive or very negative dealings with others. But I figure as long as it doesn't significantly change how I would interact with others sans socionics, it's OK.