Socionics is a theory of information processing and personality type, distinguished by its information model of the psyche, called Model A, and a model of interpersonal relations. It incorporates Carl Jung's work on Psychological Types with Antoni Kępiński's theory of information metabolism. Socionics is a modification of Jung's personality type theory that uses eight psychic functions. These functions process information at varying levels of competency and interact with the corresponding function in other individuals, giving rise to predictable reactions and impressions—a theory of intertype relations.
Socionics was developed in the 1970s and '80s, primarily by the Lithuanian researcher Aušra Augustinavičiūtė, an economist, sociologist, and dean of the Vilnius Pedagogical University's department of family science. A. Augustinavičiūtė has later shortened her last name from "Augustinavichiute" to "Augusta" to make it easier to spell for foreigners. The name "socionics" is derived from the word "society", because A. Augusta believed that each personality type has a distinct purpose in society, which can be described and explained by socionics. Augusta created symbols to represent the functions described by Carl Jung and — together with a circle of fellow researchers/hobbyists — eventually created what is known as the "socionic model of the psyche" — a description of the psyche where each of the 8 information elements has its place in each person's psyche.
The central idea of socionics is that information is intuitively divisible into eight categories, called information aspects or information elements, which a person's psyche processes using eight psychological functions. Each sociotype has a different correspondence between functions and information elements, which results in different ways of perceiving, processing, and producing information. This in turn results in distinct thinking patterns, values, and responses to arguments, all of which are encompassed within socionic type. Socionics' theory of intertype relations is based on the interaction of these functions between types.
I think it's weird, coming from my own background in esoteric studies, to build a school of typology on a dead person's writings, since that person can
WVBRY Today, 12:19 PMAnd how did you come to these numbers?
WVBRY Today, 12:14 PMI'm kind of on the fence about typing someone through observation of behaviors. I think it is a part of the picture, at least.
I think your
The simping is a bit out of hand.
Tbh kinda messing around with calling it simping but this does feel like a "listen to the prophet"
Re: healing, great news.
It means one has the plasticity to modify in a push pull dynamic, ala the limic triggers in these scenarios.
But it’s actually kind of unlikely for a modern iei to be a classical iei…. because of the nature of mental and whatnot.. I mean, transfer
Braingel Today, 08:25 AM(But not all iei’s in modern will be eii, or even intuitive in general.. They can be super egoic NiFe, like SLI.. they can be ese with their polr
Braingel Today, 08:24 AMI mean, I am an IEI in most schools, but even in those, indeed, my shadow is why I first got typed eie in those.. An iei is more equivocal to a classical
Braingel Today, 08:23 AMI always knew that shit wasn’t even apart of my true essence.. and now I just more broadly understand all the why’s as to why I’ve developed
Braingel Today, 07:46 AM
Why I don’t believe Si egos or sensors without Ti as a general rule of thumb make very good typists..
I agree that not every behavior points to something typological in a person. But probably, part of it does. That's why I say it's part of the picture.
WVBRY Today, 12:29 PM