Practical application?

[A Person]

Once upon a time I was really into this stuff.
I'm not anymore.

I see the merit of socionics IN THEORY.
However, my experience of taking socionics into consideration in my every day life has always resulted in a skewed perspective. What I mean is that when I take into consideration in my day-to-day life what socionics would say, for example, about a particular person... rather than having what I would consider an "unbiased" outlook on coming to know a person, I subscribe that person to a knowledge basis of which- even if the liklihood is high- may or may not apply to them. In having such expectations (or "in looking for such high liklihoods") about said person, I have often seen just that- what I "expected" to see, as opposed to what's actually there.

Now perhaps you're thinking this sounds like a personal problem- and perhaps to some extent it is; my curiosity about that aspect of the matter is mostly what brings me to post this.
I would argue pretty strongly (and I'm sure many would agree) that "seeing what one expects to see, rather than what's there" is a relatively common motif in the world.

I am simply curious then what other people feel about this- their different perspectives on the matter, and if they feel that, given the above said, they are able to still have an acurate perspective on others with the consideration of socionics, and abstain from the problems that I had with it.
(After having learned other things from socionics over a good deal of time, at this point I consider it to be more of a negative than a positive to me for the above reasons.)

[Jarno]

The most practical application of socionics is relationships.

You only need to type people to know the relationship you will have with them. You don't need to type someone to get to know that person.

There's a huge emphasize on types in the socionics community and the relationship prediction capability of socionics is almost forgotten, while that is the most important aspect of the whole theory...

[Gilly]

I dunno, I find Socionics very helpful in dealing with people, or at least understanding them, especially those of adjacent or opposing quadras.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

It helps me realise some people are different and that further interaction with them - if it's not going well, won't make it any better, it will just make it worse. And it gives me an insight into those differences, ie, they might not actually be trying to be annoying to me - it's just their 'design'.

Also, as a T type, it's good to have this sort of knowledge instead of wondering if or what i'm doing wrong (trying to figure out relationships and stuff which is not the best thing for me).

[redbaron]

I understand why relations work and do not work. I at least know what to look for in business partnerships and especially in marriage prospects if I ever meet the proper SEE who shares my values in lifestyle, religion, and such, spurs my confidence and ambitions, and that I do the same for them. Someone who would enrich my life and likewise. I think in such a scenario, it would be a realistic possibility which I would not have realized without knowledge of the theory coupled with RL experience with people of various types to notice a correlation.

yes to this and to everything everyone else has said. I've said this before: I don't limit my friendships with people due to their type. I'm actually friends with a couple of LSEs. But at the same time, I know in the back of my mind that it's a conflicting relation and that IF we were to try to get closer, things might not go smoothly so I don't waste my time trying to promote a closer relationship. Also, once you're aware of what duality feels like, it becomes easier to spot your dual for friendships and I can't overestimate to you the benefit of such relations (assuming the person you're involved with is relatively healthy themselves).

[Azeroffs]

I have often seen just that- what I "expected" to see, as opposed to what's actually there.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this. Maybe you need to be more specific, but it's important to take on the mindset that you can never be completely sure about a person's type. Always leave room for error and consider all interactions as part of the typing processes. You should never really expect behavior based on type alone. Expect what you would from a person and just use socionics as a way of structuring your observations. This becomes practical in the understanding of how relationships manifest as was said, and it helps you understand where the person is coming from when misunderstandings occur. Socionics isn't meant to be a behavior predictor.

[717495]

I think a lot of decent understanding comes from Socionics if you can just understand the information elements correctly. The dominant function, PoLR, DS, and HA for instance, are very enlightening information to someone's character and motivations. I guess all the functions are. The difference between types from there can be stark. But you're probably not going to learn a lot from the forum, to be quite honest. You can get some starting figures.

Ni types seem to be the largest group here on the forum.

I don't really see Socionics as an appropriate tool for predicting someone's behavior, really. I'd rather really get to know someone personally. I see Socionics as a classification system, but a helpful and useful one. I don't really put people in boxes, but the theory helps me understand who I would usually get along with, that there are people just like me, and there are people I wouldn't get along with in a lot of situations, due to values. I can relate to Fe-PoLR, Fi thoughts, Ni dominance, etc. and I know who to go to.

So the practical application is just knowing, and potentially using the knowledge. I think the mistake is to be over categorical and certain about it all, even if it is often a correct way of looking at people on a basic level.

[silverchris9]

Socionics gives me rational justification for my belief in "not bad, just different" and that it's OK for me not to expend my energy trying to get along with or pleasure people who I just don't like and am not compatible with. Not that I don't have to be kind to such people, but just that I don't need to try to be best friends with someone with whom I am naturally incompatible.

I also like the functions, because they have interesting implications for different categories of things, and it's also a fun chance to play around with notions like "internal and external," "static and dynamic," degrees of abstraction. Socionics, for me, is a chance to study the relationship between mode of perception and behavior.

Oh, but you wanted a practical application. Well... it tells me that I can get a hot SLE chick if I just act uncertain enough around her or something. Also, socionics is useful in anticipating what sorts of information, in general, a person I'm speaking to will most want to hear (in other words, it tells me when to engage the Fi or Fe). It's not accurate all the time, but it at least gives me an educate guess to start with and then adjust as necessary based on observed reactions.

In related news, I really want some queso (you know, the dip, not just cheese in general). And I don't believe in science (yay for doing socionics instead of class!)

[MatthewZ]

Ni types seem to be the largest group here on the forum.

You sure? Last I checked, had a decent majority over

[DirectorAbbie]

I see the merit of socionics IN THEORY.
However, my experience of taking socionics into consideration in my every day life has always resulted in a skewed perspective. What I mean is that when I take into consideration in my day-to-day life what socionics would say, for example, about a particular person... rather than having what I would consider an "unbiased" outlook on coming to know a person, I subscribe that person to a knowledge basis of which- even if the liklihood is high- may or may not apply to them. In having such expectations (or "in looking for such high liklihoods") about said person, I have often seen just that- what I "expected" to see, as opposed to what's actually there.

I have the same problem. Socionics helps me understand people I know, but I'm unable to meet people the way I used to. Instead of thinking, "This person seems nice. Maybe I'd like to see her again." I'm thinking, "This person seems nice. I think she's an introverted feeler. She's certainly not an extrovert, and seems to fit with Deltas...maybe she's my dual!" Skewed perspective. Once one's learned socionics, one cannot return to Neverland.

[redbaron]

I have the same problem. Socionics helps me understand people I know, but I'm unable to meet people the way I used to. Instead of thinking, "This person seems nice. Maybe I'd like to see her again." I'm thinking, "This person seems nice. I think she's an introverted feeler. She's certainly not an extrovert, and seems to fit with Deltas...maybe she's my dual!" Skewed perspective. Once one's learned socionics, one cannot return to Neverland.

this.

[A Person]

I have the same problem. Socionics helps me understand people I know, but I'm unable to meet people the way I used to. Instead of thinking, "This person seems nice. Maybe I'd like to see her again." I'm thinking, "This person seems nice. I think she's an introverted feeler. She's certainly not an extrovert, and seems to fit with Deltas...maybe she's my dual!" Skewed perspective. Once one's learned socionics, one cannot return to Neverland.

I responded somewhat to you and a bunch of other people's responses in the thread that was created from your "neverland" comment.

[Trevor]

Knowledge can make people sad. Some of those sad people even say "I wish I didn't knew".

Knowledge can make people feel good about themselves. They might say "It's really good to know".

[Suz]

I dont know. . .I'm still a noob with improving socionics understanding, but socionics really caters to my hidden agenda--to understand. I have always craved understanding people, and socionics really has opened up a whole new world for me that way, so I wouldn't really want to return to Neverland.

I still use Ni and Fe to get a feel for a new person I'm meeting. I am unable to apply socionics to people until I get to know them well anyway. If we get along well, I may start thinking quadras.

[Gilly]

I think it is natural for their to be a divide between Merry and Serious types on this issue, partly because to Serious types, social roles tend to be more implicit, more assumed, whereas Merry types both acknowledge the fluctuation of social roles, and yet also (perhaps because of the latter) have a higher tendency to actively define them.