Since discovering socionics I've noticed a gradual increase in the quality of my relations with other people. For example, socionics concepts really helped me with my LSE boss (whom I mentioned in another thread). By learning to turn down the volume on my ni and, at the same time, learning to appreciate his si creative function, not only was I able to avoid any of the negative aspects of supervision, I was actually able to learn to get along really well with him and we're now on very friendly terms.
It's little victories like this that make me somewhat optimistic about socionics' ability to make people's daily lives and interactions at least slightly more pleasant and less angst/anxiety provoking. However, I've also observed that mbti has 'poisoned the well' to a certain extent when it comes to the viability of novel personality typologies in the US. I have a lot of thoughts on the reasons why, but these seem to be the two main factors:
1.MBTI has pretty much cornered the market with regard to areas where there is a demand for personality typing (management consulting, HR etc.) and it has a critical mass of die-hard defenders who are fairly hostile to socionics (those who know about it anyway)
2.Although there is a certain amount of merit to Meyers-briggs, it has a lot of flaws which make it easy to discredit as being a slightly more scientific version of astrology. Unfortunately, the effect of MBTI's shortcomings amongst its critics in the psychological community has been to create a general disillusion with the concept of personality typing rather than a need to seek out or develop a more accurate system.
What are your thoughts on the future of Socionics in the west?