Typing Methodologies

[moredhel]

Hi everyone,

Reading through these forums it's obvious that typing people is a big part of the socionics community. What I have also noticed is people approach it very differently and come to some vastly different conclusions.

So this is how I type people...

• First step get a vibe of their quadra
  
  Alpha=easy going social types, Beta= passionate social types Delta= Easy going serious types, Gamma=Passionate serious types. (This is very rough, my vibe is actually a bit more detailed but it wasn't translating well to text.)

• If it isn't obvious consider their quadra more closely
  
  The quadra's are all very different from one another so I find it is a good place to start, as I only need to consider a small subset of socionics theory. As I tend to type people based on my social interaction with them I consider the following things.
  
  • Do they prefer large groups or small groups? (can be misleading)
  • Do they go with the flow of the group or do they try to steer the group?
  • Are the often animated/passionate?
  • Are they competitive?
  • Do they have strong opinions about people? If so are they likely to express these opinions?
  • Do they prefer practical discussions or "fun" discussions?
    etc...(there's more I was getting bored)

• If I know them well enough I would next choose their romance type.
• Once I have decided on a quadra I decide within the context of their quadra are they introverted or extroverted.
• If I couldn't figured out their romance type I will decide if they are more ethical or logical.
• This should leave me with 1 type.
• Lastly I consider if the social roles and cognitive function placement fit.
  
  If yes it should be a puzzle piece moment like "yes they are defiantly this type". If it's a maybe I would place a tentative type and observe them bit more or consider close alternatives. If it's no I will revise the previous steps and consider where I may of made an incorrect assumption or observation.

I find this to be a very efficient method and easy as the information on quadra's focuses a lot on group behavior which is the context In which I do most of my typing. It is quite a quick process of elimination. In terms of accuracy I found I could type all of my close friends and I could type about 40% of my acquaintances/friends who I didn't have a 1on1 relationship with while at least getting as far as quadras on the rest.

I only consider relationships after I've decided on a type and I will not type a person based on a relationship (either to me or between people i'm typing). I will also try not to give types value, IMO all types are equal.

So how do other people type and do you feel that method/ability in typing could be related to type?
I feel the above is a very Te method very efficient without having to use detail unless i'm not getting that puzzle piece moment.

[woofwoofl]

Holy crap, I really like the descriptions you have of the quadras

As for me, I go for what sticks out the most - can I spot an axis of Perceiving functions (Judicious/Decisive Reinin)? Judging functions (Merry/Serious Reinin)? Democratic or Aristocratic? Temperament (getting halfway there on this one is good too)?

I'll nail down what I can nail down, nail down a few things I can't nail down, and remember which is which, so that if I need to change a thing, I'll know what to change...

[moredhel]

Holy crap, I really like the descriptions you have of the quadras

As for me, I go for what sticks out the most - can I spot an axis of Perceiving functions (Judicious/Decisive Reinin)? Judging functions (Merry/Serious Reinin)? Democratic or Aristocratic? Temperament (getting halfway there on this one is good too)?

I'll nail down what I can nail down, nail down a few things I can't nail down, and remember which is which, so that if I need to change a thing, I'll know what to change...

Yeah the quadra Dichotomies are good and I use them in my "vibe" thinking.
I'm relatively comfortable with the expanded quadra explanations so I tend to check off my questions quite quickly in my head.

I have trouble typing with Democratic/Aristocratic axis as i'm not really comfortable with how it visibly manifests itself in peoples behavior, beyond putting people in groups vs judging everyone individually that is.

Temperaments are good but I haven't looked into going beyond Ix vs Ex and I wouldn't necessarily trust the result if I was able to.

[mfckr]

.

[woofwoofl]

Yeah the quadra Dichotomies are good and I use them in my "vibe" thinking.
I'm relatively comfortable with the expanded quadra explanations so I tend to check off my questions quite quickly in my head.

I have trouble typing with Democratic/Aristocratic axis as i'm not really comfortable with how it visibly manifests itself in peoples behavior, beyond putting people in groups vs judging everyone individually that is.

Temperaments are good but I haven't looked into going beyond Ix vs Ex and I wouldn't necessarily trust the result if I was able to.

What I look for is if a person shows heavy signs of grouping people together mentally, and basing things off of that (Aristocratic), or if a person just sees a lot of individuals more or less (Democratic).

This one sticks out like all hell to me - there's a dude I know who I nailed down as "Irrational Aristocratic Extratim", and it took me ages to get him as a Ti-SLE; I couldn't tell much with the P functions at first, he seemed to exhibit more than I did, but that doesn't exactly say very much

I'm currently on a Rational Aristocratic Extratim who I'm pretty sure is an Fe-EIE; I'll nail it down right now for him actually, he may give off Delta vibes but our Ts don't match at all, and he was blowing all over the place... his whole grouping of "women" as some sort of separate, alien species bewildered me and grossed me out, especially due to the frequency of it, and how much weight he placed on it...

And hell, I almost forgot until Ashton brought it up - I see Positivist/Negativist a hell of a lot too! Lots of the time, it'll be the very first one that I find; lots of those times, it'll be the only one that I find...

[Cat King Cole]

I use temperament and traits I know are peculiar to particular types, like the SLE's piercing gaze of judgement, or an IEEs enthusiasm about "looking behind" people.

Key words and themes are another big thing. I really love http://www.socionics.us/works/semantics.shtml for that, even though some of the vocab seems only applicable to Russian (e.g. most western Si dominants don't use plant and animal analogies so much). Ne dominants love to talk about "interesting" and often present the idea that they can see something hidden underneath the surface of people or ideas ("seems like <not immediately obvious potential>), Fe dominants are very warm and personable, etc.

Role function through interview is another good method. Asking people for five key words about themselves usually yields one adjective stereotypically associated with their Role function. ESEs often describe themselves as efficient, Ti dominants as friendly or polite, etc.

Like you, I think Quadra is a good one. What's of interest to me is that, even though we're both "Splat!" thinkers due to a dialectical-algorithmic thinking form, you don't use quite the same empirical Splats! as I do, instead opting for a logical approach. This could be F/T in action, or it could be experience.

The member who I inherited most of my typing style from is thehotelambush, and AFAIA he uses basically the same approach of "wait and see for something peculiar to a given type".

[Cat King Cole]

Woof, I think the empirical approach of "That person just did something that every other person of that type does!" is the least headache-inducing typing method for dumbass SFs like us

Filatova's photos and the socionics.us gallery are both good, though the former has far less mistyped people.

[Kill4Me]

I coined my method the Intelligent Design Method of typing.

Click below for more information:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...09#post1123109

[Kill4Me]

I also use the Open Borders Approach, another one I coined. I am speaking to two fundamentally different views of Socionics.

The Open Borders approach dissolves the Quadra Values mythology….”drains the swamp.” Socionics New Wave still recognizes Quadras but in the same way that England recognizes the royal family. We will call them King and Queen but they don’t have any actual power. Although there may be some values loosely associated with each quadra, there's absolutely no rational basis for treating Quadra Values as an axiomatic principle of Socionics. It's ludicrous to use it as starting point.

The Closed Borders view is the one that is held by pretty much every Socionics School of Thought except for Socionics New Wave. That is, the view – religiously held by some -- that there is such a thing as Quadra Values and that one can or should begin with quadra when typing. So in the classic methodology, first you type Quadra based on Quadra values, whatever that means, and then you narrow it down by one of four types, either through VI or one of the less objective, less serious methods of typing.

Consequently, the VI breakdown for each Socionics type laid down by Socionics New Wave is much better than the breakdown proferred by Socionics.Com. Even though both schools of thought recognize that VI is superior to all other methods of typing, pinterest.com/socionics's breakdown is not inhibited by a Closed Borders Approach. The Open/Closed Borders difference may not be the precise or only reason why the New Wave breakdown is better. However, I can affirmatively state that the New Wave breakdown would not have come out so great if it had been based in the more arbitrary Closed Borders Method.

[Marie84]

I go by functions and temperament most often, especially the former. VI has it's place but I wouldn't type someone based on it, it's more like a vague indication
IMHO if one is going by the classical understanding of the information element descriptions (Model A) it's the most helpful way of seeing a type outside of the personality stereotypes that may be associated with them and their quadras. They explain the basics of the subconscious without overtly boxing every tidbit in

Other methods such a Renin, subtypes, and many of the user created systems may or may not have their place in being realistically applicable, and I've dabbled in some with half-seriousness, but I feel all in all that they're far too categorical and for me to latch on to so I don't place a lot of confidence in them.
They, essentially, are meant to explain humanity into precise, systematic, categories that are meant to label the complexities in humans that are too complex to be labeled

[UDP]

Hi everyone,

Reading through these forums it's obvious that typing people is a big part of the socionics community. What I have also noticed is people approach it very differently and come to some vastly different conclusions.

Yeah.

As you may already know....
A lot of people especially at first are ignorant of how much they know and don't know, and often have baggage or certain things that "they know are representative of a type' that are not actually. So it's a process of continuously challenging those assumptions.

I don't think there will ever be much uniformity in process (or even results), at least on this forum. There are too many variations of understanding and assertiveness about opinions, and I think it's one of the biggest hurdles to getting into things.

So how do other people type and do you feel that method/ability in typing could be related to type?

How someone approaches socionics and typing people seems related to their ability to grasp other models in social sciences, and their ability (or experience) in weeding through various pieces of information, evidence or actual knowledge of a theory.

Different people will have shortcomings along those lines that are often based on their type. What people put faith in and why they put faith in that reasoning is often related to their type, in certain ways... in how they put a value on some things. Some very generalized examples: sometimes "F types" will base their feelings about a person based on a "feeling" they have about them, and trust their feelings about them, in regard to how they feel about certain types, more so than 'what socionics actually says'. That's obviously also possible for any person or type to do. Sometimes T types will over-focus on a piece of data and not understand how it actually relates to the person because they don't understand the person or their relationship to them very well.

things like that

[Beautiful sky]

My method:


VI -because this is a static impression and I'm a static valuer/type, this is very easy for me to do whereas you would probably need to watch and observe a person's actions for a while in order to gather all the intel on them LOL

Dichotomies -because it can be observed with written language and values that the person expresses; it's easy to spot who is a positivist and negativist.

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...le=Dichotomies

Functional analysis -here I look at which functions are in which position in the person's psychic block; most is using Jung's method of typing.

Relationship observation -Here I observe who they commonly interact with from the people who's types I am certain of and who they misunderstand, who they ignore, who they are attracted and repulsed by. I am an Fi type, so this is easy for me to do and because it is a static image. I also look at the person's mood here. Si types, especially ISTp tend to make value judgement based on who they favor or not and on top of that they can be very reactive in an irrational shortly thought out way so they are easy to spot.

Quadra Values -certain expressed language and style is particular to each quadra and members share those values

Temperament -

[moredhel]

Hi supposed conflictor! My typing method is pretty much identical to yours, interesting...

lol hello conflictor. I actually don't get along too badly with IEI's accept when I get left alone in a room with one, then even the crickets get embarrassed at the awkward attempts at conversation.

BTW I like your method .

Dichotomies -because it can be observed with written language and values that the person expresses; it's easy to spot who is a positivist and negativist.

This is the only axis I had a problem with in my own typing. While I do display negativist qualities at work because everything is so woefully inefficient (public sector for you), I'm generally quite optimistic in life and in my interactions with other people. I can see why my type is negativist as it's present in my thinking but more often than not I don't come across that way.
I'm also a bit wary as the only grouping of this axis in the small groups is romance types yet nothing in the explanations relates the groups to this axis.

That said, it is an easy one to observe but use with caution .

[Beautiful sky]

Hi supposed conflictor! My typing method is pretty much identical to yours, interesting...

lol hello conflictor. I actually don't get along too badly with IEI's accept when I get left alone in a room with one, then even the crickets get embarrassed at the awkward attempts at conversation.

BTW I like your method .

Dichotomies -because it can be observed with written language and values that the person expresses; it's easy to spot who is a positivist and negativist.

This is the only axis I had a problem with in my own typing. While I do display negativist qualities at work because everything is so woefully inefficient (public sector for you), I'm generally quite optimistic in life and in my interactions with other people. I can see why my type is negativist as it's present in my thinking but more often than not I don't come across that way.
I'm also a bit wary as the only grouping of this axis in the small groups is romance types yet nothing in the explanations relates the groups to this axis.

That said, it is an easy one to observe but use with caution .

Being optimistic in life doesn't have anything to do with that dichotomy. It's in how you see things. For example and a very easy contrast is one between my boyfriend and I

He says: We only have an hour.

I say: We have a whole hour.

In the above, you might observe that I see the potential and expense of time in a positive regard, while his Ni PoLR acts out in how worried/pressured/stressed/tense and rushed he becomes at observing it's limited movement...limit is confining and causes one to be negativist, while I see no limit, it's expansive and anything can happen; I'm ready for twists and turns and they don't bother me. He's likely to see the constraint and prepare for things...hence planning. I will post an interesting link to a book I've been reading lately which touches on the importance of both of these types in the Delta Lounge today or tomorrow.

Are you the type of an LSE who is typically early or late?

[moredhel]

Being optimistic in life doesn't have anything to do with that dichotomy. It's in how you see things. For example and a very easy contrast is one between my boyfriend and I

He says: We only have an hour.

I say: We have a whole hour.

In the above, you might observe that I see the potential and expense of time in a positive regard, while his Ni PoLR acts out in how worried/pressured/stressed/tense and rushed he becomes at observing it's limited movement...limit is confining and causes one to be negativist, while I see no limit, it's expansive and anything can happen; I'm ready for twists and turns and they don't bother me. He's likely to see the constraint and prepare for things...hence planning. I will post an interesting link to a book I've been reading lately which touches on the importance of both of these types in the Delta Lounge today or tomorrow.

Are you the type of an LSE who is typically early or late?

Optimism was an efficient generalization. What I meant was I word things in a positivist way probably greater than half the time even though I tend to think in a "there's not enough time" negativist kind of way.
I attribute it to being quite laid back and optimistic and making a conscious effort not to stress other people out.
So while Negativist would be accurate for me I would be very surprised if someone could accurately type me using that axis.

As far as my timing i'm the kind of LSE who's late to places I don't want to be (work) and early to places I'm looking forward to (birthdays), though I've had to teach myself the concept of fashionably late as I was always arriving well before everyone else . I'm also tend to be late when getting there on time requires getting up early .

[Beautiful sky]

Being optimistic in life doesn't have anything to do with that dichotomy. It's in how you see things. For example and a very easy contrast is one between my boyfriend and I

He says: We only have an hour.

I say: We have a whole hour.

In the above, you might observe that I see the potential and expense of time in a positive regard, while his Ni PoLR acts out in how worried/pressured/stressed/tense and rushed he becomes at observing it's limited movement...limit is confining and causes one to be negativist, while I see no limit, it's expansive and anything can happen; I'm ready for twists and turns and they don't bother me. He's likely to see the constraint and prepare for things...hence planning. I will post an interesting link to a book I've been reading lately which touches on the importance of both of these types in the Delta Lounge today or tomorrow.

Are you the type of an LSE who is typically early or late?

Optimism was an efficient generalization. What I meant was I word things in a positivist way probably greater than half the time even though I tend to think in a "there's not enough time" negativist kind of way.
I attribute it to being quite laid back and optimistic and making a conscious effort not to stress other people out.
So while Negativist would be accurate for me I would be very surprised if someone could accurately type me using that axis.

As far as my timing i'm the kind of LSE who's late to places I don't want to be (work) and early to places I'm looking forward to (birthdays), though I've had to teach myself the concept of fashionably late as I was always arriving well before everyone else . I'm also tend to be late when getting there on time requires getting up early .

Hee hee.

[Aleksei]

Hi supposed conflictor!

Supposed being the operative...

[pianosinger]

Lots of different methods; they all get kind of jumbled in my head, though, when I try to utilize them to type RL people. I look for clues about...

Temperament

Club

Merry/Serious

Relationships where I am positive of at least one typing, to give me clues about the other person's possible type/quadrant.

Functions, particularly Bold functions as these are easier to notice. And then with further observation, try to place these functions into the Model where they seem to make the most sense.

VI. I only use this tool, however, to identify when someone I meet seems to resemble (in looks, words, voice, physical attitude) someone whom I have already confidently typed. And then, I only really allow myself to narrow it down to a Club; if I go any further in my VI attempts, I hardly take the typing seriously without other methods to back it up.