aristocracy between quadras

[ShadoW805]

Aristocracy in Beta quadra vs arisoctacy in Delta quadra...what is the difference? How do these two groups act based on this dichotomy?

[Iris]

I think it would be interesting to hear some perspectives on the differences between Beta and Delta aristocracy. Great topic! Hopefully people will contribute.

[Radio]

reinin dickotomies are even more convoluted bullshit than the core socionics model. you can fabricate any amount of crap to justify your explanations but in the end it really doesn't tell you anything or predict anything consistently. so, you know, whatever.

[Saberstorm]

Delta aristocracy is a subtle expression of ideology, such as demonstrating strong but subtle signs that you have a special awareness or affiliation with something you find meaningful. From this a type of "group" emerges with such a common awareness. Fi aristocrats,

Beta aristocracy is orientated towards organizing to achieve a goal: Fe aristocrats.

[Absurd]

Stick around the forum and you'll see.

[mu4]

Democratic quadras have function blocks which contain both an external and an internal function.

Aristocratic quadras have function blocks of only external functions or internal functions.

These difference in function blocking within an individuals psyche create some tendencies in behavior which manifest in grouping and other differences between Aristocratic and Democratic quadras.

Aristocrats tend towards the extremes as the ST's have all external functions within their ego. This makes them highly practical(in a way), and very straight forward. Conversely, their counterparts NF's are idealistic, can be fanatics, and can entertain all sort of superstition, religion, and other ideas.

Beta aristocracy is quite different from delta aristocracy although often their interactions are mixed due to clubs ST/NFs. Beta quadra with as a valued function often will form social collectives founded around structural purity , and with around discipline to the hierarchy. The basis of the ideology is often very visionary and can be anything from technological singularity to communist utopia. There is often a desire for their visions to affect the whole of society.

Delta aristocracy with is founded on individual practice around moral ideology/purity , they do not value discipline but rather variety and practicality. They form collectives often with each other for practical reasons but try to maintain moral purity such as no carbon footprint or "Leave no Trace", they focus on individual practice of a specific moral ideology. Delta aristocracy don't have the same tendency to form large collectives as they don't focus on the discipline side nor the visionary nature of Beta. The focus is local, practical and personal.


Disclaimer: It's hard to describe these differences very clearly using words so I want to put this note that the words I'm using often have fairly specific meaning which is not the same as the layman usage. I'm using fairly standard/common words but I'm using them very specific meaning and probably not as strictly as I should for the sake of making it more accessible.

[Narc]

Democratic quadras have function blocks which contain both an external and an internal function.

Aristocratic quadras have function blocks of only external functions or internal functions.

What do you mean by this? Example? It appears to me that all types have function blocks that contain internal and external functions.

[Saberstorm]

What do you mean by this? Example? It appears to me that all types have function blocks that contain internal and external functions.

Here is the quote from Wikisocion, it is different that what hkkmr said.

"Aristocrats have the logical and sensing IM elements in the same blocks of Model A.

Here is a possible interpretation of this:

Material assets are systematized and automated. Systems and production have a material expression. Ideas exist for people and societal relationships. People and relationships are valued for their personality and potential.
Democrats have the ethical and sensing IM elements in the same blocks of Model A. "

[ashlesha]

What do you mean by this? Example? It appears to me that all types have function blocks that contain internal and external functions.

http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...mation_aspects

[Narc]

http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...mation_aspects

Ah. I didn't realise sensing and logic were grouped in that way. I just assumed that external elements were objective/extraverted and internal elements were subjective/introverted.

Here is the quote from Wikisocion, it is different that what hkkmr said.

"Aristocrats have the logical and sensing IM elements in the same blocks of Model A.

Yeah, that's what I was going by.

[mu4]

Here is the quote from Wikisocion, it is different that what hkkmr said.

"Aristocrats have the logical and sensing IM elements in the same blocks of Model A.

Here is a possible interpretation of this:

Material assets are systematized and automated. Systems and production have a material expression. Ideas exist for people and societal relationships. People and relationships are valued for their personality and potential.
Democrats have the ethical and sensing IM elements in the same blocks of Model A. "

Logics and sensing are both "external functions", intuition and ethics are both "internal functions".

Aristocrats have function blocking which are either both external or both internal.

Note I believe the terminology for internal and external to be a bit difficult to understand or perhaps inappropriate, however it's a important to note that there are differences between logic vs ethics, sensing vs intuition while ethics and intuition has this similarity along with sensing and logic.

From a software/information analogy I would say internal functions are private. While external functions are public.

[BlackholeRoad]

Democratic quadras have function blocks which contain both an external and an internal function.

Aristocratic quadras have function blocks of only external functions or internal functions.

These difference in function blocking within an individuals psyche create some tendencies in behavior which manifest in grouping and other differences between Aristocratic and Democratic quadras.

Aristocrats tend towards the extremes as the ST's have all external functions within their ego. This makes them highly practical(in a way), and very straight forward. Conversely, their counterparts NF's are idealistic, can be fanatics, and can entertain all sort of superstition, religion, and other ideas.

Beta aristocracy is quite different from delta aristocracy although often their interactions are mixed due to clubs ST/NFs. Beta quadra with as a valued function often will form social collectives founded around structural purity , and with around discipline to the hierarchy. The basis of the ideology is often very visionary and can be anything from technological singularity to communist utopia. There is often a desire for their visions to affect the whole of society.

Delta aristocracy with is founded on individual practice around moral ideology/purity , they do not value discipline but rather variety and practicality. They form collectives often with each other for practical reasons but try to maintain moral purity such as no carbon footprint or "Leave no Trace", they focus on individual practice of a specific moral ideology. Delta aristocracy don't have the same tendency to form large collectives as they don't focus on the discipline side nor the visionary nature of Beta. The focus is local, practical and personal.


Disclaimer: It's hard to describe these differences very clearly using words so I want to put this note that the words I'm using often have fairly specific meaning which is not the same as the layman usage. I'm using fairly standard/common words but I'm using them very specific meaning and probably not as strictly as I should for the sake of making it more accessible.

I have to say, that Delta Aristocracy stuff very closely describes a lot of the social settings I end up in. Like volunteering, philosophical discussions via groups on meetup.com, etc. I tend to prefer chill settings where we discuss a central topic in an open and civil way, usually the topic is of ethical nature, and I'm drawn to the variety of perspectives being explored in relation to the topic. The ethical interest obviously applies with the volunteer work I do, and I definitely prefer the direct and practical approach to helping others. Not meaning to toot my own horn, just giving examples of how this relates to me as a Delta. I mean, I'm prolly still lame as fawk, it's whatevs.

[anndelise]

Here is the quote from Wikisocion, it is different that what hkkmr said.

"Aristocrats have the logical and sensing IM elements in the same blocks of Model A.

It's not too different from what hkkmr said. Aspects of each element are:

External (explicit)= S, T
Internal (implicit)= N, F

Abstract = N, T
Involved = S, F

Object = Xe
Field = Xi

Integral (P)= N, S
Discrete (divisible) (J) = T, F

Dynamic = Pi, Je
Static = Pe, Ji

Beta fields...how everything interconnects, is based on the abstract (Ni, Ti)
Delta fields...how everything connects, is based on the involvement (Si, Fi)
Beta NFs...implicit dynamics
Delta NFs...implicit states

So, something like...
Beta's people connections would be based on the implicit dynamics(Ni, Fe) between those people/self, and how they are symbolically connected(Ni, Ti).
Delta's people connections would based on the implict states(Ne, Fi) within an individual/people, and how the person/people feel about/around something/someone(Fi, Si).

However, Alpha and Gamma have their own people connections they make:
Alpha's would be based on a person's dynamic involvements with others(Si, Fe), and their explicit connections(Si, Ti).
Gamma's would be based on a person's state involvements with others(Se, Fi), and their implicit connections(Ni, Fi).

(note: I am sure the wording could use some modifications.)

[InvisibleJim]

Examples would be useful.

[xerx]

quadras are bs.

quadras force people into seeing types as a set of behavioral traits instead of abstract, information processing and selection mechanisms. it's impossible to conceptualize quadras as something more than collections of idiosyncratic "values" that people share. most of the confusion comes from associating values with information metabolism when that's not the case.

information metabolism happens at an atomic level and can't be changed. values change [from person to person and within the same person] and can turn on or off depending on the situation. if you accept the idea that there are vast intra-type differences, then intra-quadra differences should also exist.

quadras affect the way people see intertype relations. the assumption that in-quadra relationships are "better" is built into the concept. i put "better" in quotes, because the whole idea of ranking relationships is a scam. relationships aren't quantities you compare; they're qualitative interactions that play out over time.

nothing that quadras attempt to explain can't be explained (and better) by old school inter-types and information elements. they are a useful tool, but should be treated skeptically -- like any behavior correlating device.

[mu4]

Sociologically I think quadras do play out in grouping behavior but only over time.

Clubs group based on activity, quadras group based on shared values. This binds together the opposing quadras based on clubs initially and creates division based on values.

Intertype relations are more analyzable with psychological instruments but quadras and clubs are sociological constructs as the individuals number greater than 2.

I highly disagree quadras are bs. Because club grouping and quadra grouping is highly evident in social constructs.

[Absurd]

Lul @ atomic level. One can't get anymore Ti than that.

[xerx]

Sociologically I think quadras do play out in grouping behavior but only over time.

Clubs group based on activity, quadras group based on shared values. This binds together the opposing quadras based on clubs initially and creates division based on values.

Intertype relations are more analyzable with psychological instruments but quadras and clubs are sociological constructs as the individuals number greater than 2.

I highly disagree quadras are bs. Because club grouping and quadra grouping is highly evident in social constructs.

We can group quadras based on shared information elements, but that definition doesn't add any value to what we already get just from working with IEs. There are no intra-quadra values any more than there are intra-type values.

[ashlesha]

relationships aren't quantities you compare; they're qualitative interactions that play out over time.

liked 4 this

*cough* dynamic *cough*

We can group quadras based on shared information elements, but that definition doesn't add any value to what we already get just from working with IEs. There are no intra-quadra values any more than there are intra-type values.

why is that a problem? so we have different ways to frame and describe the same thing.

[mu4]

We can group quadras based on shared information elements, but that definition doesn't add any value to what we already get just from working with IEs. There are no intra-quadra values any more than there are intra-type values.

Quadras as a categorization is a 4 individual group, as are the other small groups. This group relation creates a different union then random 4 type groupings. In the same way a socion is a 16 type group and aristocracy and democracy form a 8 type group as a Reinin Dichotomy.

These are merely labels for the holistic IE interaction between all individuals within the group but so is basically every construct we use to name some specific set of interactions within this study. It's much easier to say Quadra then a 4 person group of shared valued information elements.

There are situations where more than 2 people interact I think you miss this and there are sets of interaction that may behave in a novel interaction due to the balance and mix of communication styles. It's very common for aristocratic and democratic groups to form as well due to club activity level grouping and duality/activity relation mixing of compatible clubs.

A quadra group is one of the easier groups to form, 2 activity relations bring their dual spouses or 2 mirrors bring their dual spouses.

[Saberstorm]

Reinin and me already had babies. I wuv Reinin! And by the way, true fanatics of Reinin spell his name the Russian way, as Д-р Григорий Rhine .

[xerx]

why is that a problem? so we have different ways to frame and describe the same thing.

if you want to use it as a shorthand for something else, that's 100% legit. same deal with small groups.

they aren't (usually) used like that though. people love treating quadras as tightly knit groups with concrete values and attitudes that are (more or less) applicable to all members of that quadra. we can't even agree on what an estp is like, yet we have threads about how all betas are aristocratic.

[xerx]

Quadras as a categorization is a 4 individual group, as are the other small groups. This group relation creates a different union then random 4 type groupings. In the same way a socion is a 16 type group and aristocracy and democracy form a 8 type group as a Reinin Dichotomy.

These are merely labels for the holistic IE interaction between all individuals within the group but so is basically every construct we use to name some specific set of interactions within this study. It's much easier to say Quadra then a 4 person group of shared valued information elements.

There are situations where more than 2 people interact I think you miss this and there are sets of interaction that may behave in a novel interaction due to the balance and mix of communication styles. It's very common for aristocratic and democratic groups to form as well due to club activity level grouping and duality/activity relation mixing of compatible clubs.

A quadra group is one of the easier groups to form, 2 activity relations bring their dual spouses or 2 mirrors bring their dual spouses.

if you want to use it as a shorthand for information elements and intertypes, that's fine. see my reply to lungs.

[1981slater]

Betas: "YOU SUCK!!!!" (loudly)
Deltas "You suck"

[mu4]

if you want to use it as a shorthand for information elements and intertypes, that's fine. see my reply to lungs.

It's not merely shorthand, because quadras are a small group that shares the same 3 inter-type relations(dual, mirror, activity). This is the same as other small groups.

4 random types can have a large number of different intertype relationships such as say ILE ILI ESI SLE would have business, comparative, conflict, activity, benefit, etc etc etc.

It could be said that having 4 individuals who share the same 3 inter-type relationships creates a resonance effect between the three which creates novel and unique interactions that are not present in random arrangements.

Think of it as a sort of molecule which has novel characteristics beyond the interactions of the individuals. Everything in socionics is built up from a set of simple observations, but many novel arrangements and patterns exist which are significant to observation and interaction, giving these arrangements and patterns name is useful.

[xerx]

It's not merely shorthand, because quadras are a small group that shares the same 3 inter-type relations(dual, mirror, activity). This is the same as other small groups.

4 random types can have a large number of different intertype relationships such as say ILE ILI ESI SLE would have business, comparative, conflict, activity, benefit, etc etc etc.

It could be said that having 4 individuals who share the same 3 inter-type relationships creates a resonance effect between the three which creates novel and unique interactions that are not present in random arrangements.

Think of it as a sort of molecule which has novel characteristics beyond the interactions of the individuals. Everything in socionics is built up from a set of simple observations, but many novel arrangements and patterns exist which are significant to observation and interaction, giving these arrangements and patterns name is useful.

That can still be fully framed in terms of interacting IEs.

[Saberstorm]

That can still be fully framed in terms of interacting IEs.

But you can't get to the cheesiness that is Delta from IEs. Delta's are the subculture mavens - they are the hipster - "Portlanda" - NRA - 700 Club - Rodeo riding - Freethinking Feminist Porn star - Zombie Hunters - of Socionics. They are the freaking INSANE CLOWN POSSE and Mitt Romney in one quarta.

Their Aristocracy is freaking nuts. They keep trying to find themselves through sub-culture. IEs do not explain that. Aristocracy can.

[xerx]

But you can't get to the cheesiness that is Delta from IEs. Delta's are the subculture mavens - they are the hipster - "Portlanda" - NRA - 700 Club - Rodeo riding - Freethinking Feminist Porn star - Zombie Hunters - of Socionics. They are the freaking INSANE CLOWN POSSE and Mitt Romney in one quarta.

Their Aristocracy is freaking nuts. They keep trying to find themselves through sub-culture. IEs do not explain that. Aristocracy can.

Behaviours *on their own*, without the IEs as a reference, are outside the scope of socionics. You can get correlations between cognitive processes and behaviours. If you know what you're doing, you can even get correct ones.

[Saberstorm]

You're not supposed to get that cheesiness from IEs because IEs are defined as cognitive processes (or should be), not as behaviours. Behaviours *on their own* are out of the scope of socionics.

You can get correlations between cognitive processes and behaviours. If you know what you're doing, you can even get correct ones.

Uh, yeah. We cannot get the IEs to go where Reinin can take them. Yet Reinin is explanatory. That is what I was saying. Just the combination of Te/Fi and Ne/Si cannot get you Portlanda. Yet Delta Aristocracy can explain that.

This is Delta:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-sdO6pwVHQ

[Saberstorm]

Note for the record: Xerx edited his post while I was writing a response. There is not much disagreement between us.

[xerx]

Uh, yeah. We cannot get the IEs to go where Reinin can take them. Yet Reinin is explanatory. That is what I was saying. Just the combination of Te/Fi and Ne/Si cannot get you Portlanda. Yet Delta Aristocracy can explain that.

This is Delta:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-sdO6pwVHQ

How does Reinin explain that liking a particular genre of music is Delta (or aristocratic), or the exclusive domain of Delta (or aristocracy)? What does Reinin say about Deltas who stop listening to Portlanda and stop voting for Romney?


ETA:

Note for the record: Xerx edited his post while I was writing a response. There is not much disagreement between us.

I only edited it to be concise; I still stand by it:

If the only thing that concerns you is behaviour, you could probably get more insight into human nature by surveying what all "Portlanda fans" have in common than invoking socionics at all.

[ashlesha]

You can get correlations between cognitive processes and behaviours. If you know what you're doing, you can even get correct ones.

like what?

[woofwoofl]

But you can't get to the cheesiness that is Delta from IEs. Delta's are the subculture mavens - they are the hipster - "Portlanda" - NRA - 700 Club - Rodeo riding - Freethinking Feminist Porn star - Zombie Hunters - of Socionics. They are the freaking INSANE CLOWN POSSE and Mitt Romney in one quarta.

Their Aristocracy is freaking nuts. They keep trying to find themselves through sub-culture. IEs do not explain that. Aristocracy can.

Oh, you're gonna love the hell out of this! Phil Collins, Te-LSE:

[mu4]

That can still be fully framed in terms of interacting IEs.

I don't see what the fuss is about, the term is simply a label for a set of characteristics. It's no different than calling H20 water or O3 ozone. It's no different than calling some molecules salts, bases, acids.

[Absurd]

Oh, you're gonna love the hell out of this! Phil Collins, Te-LSE:

Nahhhh.

[mu4]

The specific behavior is not proof but a indicator.
It matters little if individual reject some of the specific behavior and adopt other specific behavior, what matters is that they adopt a subset of behavior which upon further analysis indicate the cognitive bias which led them to that behavior.

Subculture adoption as a correlation would be a indicator, while something closer to proof would be in the cognitive analysis of the specific individual.

There are no exclusive indicators here either. It's meaningless that someone stops watching a show or voting a certain way, people change and hop on different bandwagons and trends on a regular basis. This is quite normal for some individuals, what's important is the pattern of what they accept, reject and participate in.

Reinin are simply possible patterns which are deduced from Model A which can be associated with patterns of behavior thru observation. The associations can be difficult and prone to error but nevertheless, there is some value in making errors and correcting them where they are wrong.

[Esaman]

Does this explanation of Aristocratism/Democratism pass your smell test?
Aristocratism and democratism are all about what is a "group" to an individual. Groups are all about Fi.
Democrats have Se in a block with Fi. They see groups first all as power structures. In that aspects groups are all generally the same, and and members qualities are not that important as long as he feeds his power in to the system. Not a view to be fanatical about.
Aristorcrats have Ne in a block with Fi. They see groups first of all as having inherent qualities and potentials...

This would imply that particular social quality of Aristorcratism/Democratism overshadows 3 other qualities that opposite quadras share. One for each block.

[xerx]

like what?

dunno.

I don't see what the fuss is about, the term is simply a label for a set of characteristics. It's no different than calling H20 water or O3 ozone. It's no different than calling some molecules salts, bases, acids.

Different nomenclature is fine. Yes, a quadra is just another small group of four particular types with a specific pattern of relationships. That's a quadra in the weak sense.

Where it all goes wrong is when people take the concept of "quadra values" seriously and run with it. They end up making very specific claims about the behavior and personal values of those types. That's a quadra in the strong sense, which is what I'm arguing against.

It's no different than when people say that type X's behavior is Y: SLE's like to dominate; EII's are ingénues; SEI's are incapable of confrontation; etc. By now we all laugh at the latter, but not the former.

At least a type has cognitive properties that can be surveyed (however badly), whereas a quadra (in the strong sense) doesn't even have that going for it. It's literally just a collection of behaviors.

[mu4]

Different nomenclature is fine. Yes, a quadra is just another small group of four particular types with a specific pattern of relationships. That's a quadra in the weak sense.

Where it all goes wrong is when people take the concept of "quadra values" seriously and run with it. They end up making very specific claims about the behavior and personal values of those types. That's a quadra in the strong sense, which is what I'm arguing against.

It's no different than when people say that type X's behavior is Y: SLE's like to dominate; EII's are ingénues; SEI's are incapable of confrontation; etc. By now we all laugh at the latter, but not the former.

At least a type has cognitive properties that can be surveyed (however badly), whereas a quadra (in the strong sense) doesn't even have that going for it. It's literally just a collection of behaviors.

I don't think that's how people are approaching quadras or aristocracy in this particular thread.

[JWC3]

If you know what you're doing, you can even get correct ones.

You don't have to know what you're doing, you just have to put observation before theory.