yours and your mother's concerns

[Blaze]

Recent research conducted by Elena Olkova together with Elena Udalova proves that sociotypes aren't genetically determined but rather form as the result of mother's biggest concerns (which form the vulnerable function of a child) during the pregnancy. During the research, 100 pairs of monozygotic twins were tested and clearly showed different sociotypes (i.e. there were no twins with identical sociotypes found).

above from wikipedia socionics article. seems like an interesting proposition and we have discussed genetics and socionics on this forum before. those of you who are moms: does your experience confirm this? what were your biggest pre-occupations while pregnant?

for others, males and not moms yet, what do you think? if you know your mother's type....how do you think it dovetails to yours?

[Blaze]

i tried not to think about the wiki article. instead, i thought hard about what i was mainly thinking about while expecting my two daughters. hopefully this eliminates some bias.

with my older one (age 13 who is reliably typed as ESE) i felt that being a mom was a huge responsibility that could likely get quite burdonsome and vexing at times. i wondered if i could do it and i mainly worried about whether i would be able to love her enough. whether i would care enough. when she was born, i had a huge cascade of emotions which solified love.

with my younger one (age 8, pretty sure she is ILE), i focused on what would i do to help her. to give her a unique identity. to set her up for success. i also worried about giving her equal time compared to the older one, who i had ended up falling in love with, and who i was exceptionally close to. when she was born, i did not have a huge emotional cascade, but i felt that i knew her immediately, that i understood how her mind worked even as a newborn.

i hold off comment for now about my own mother. waiting to hear others thoughts about this topic and about the general idea of mothers forming children's temperaments.

[DirectorAbbie]

i tried not to think about the wiki article. instead, i thought hard about what i was mainly thinking about while expecting my two daughters. hopefully this eliminates some bias.

with my older one (age 13 who is reliably typed as ESE) i felt that being a mom was a huge responsibility that could likely get quite burdonsome and vexing at times. i wondered if i could do it and i mainly worried about whether i would be able to love her enough. whether i would care enough. when she was born, i had a huge cascade of emotions which solified love.

with my younger one (age 8, pretty sure she is ILE), i focused on what would i do to help her. to give her a unique identity. to set her up for success. i also worried about giving her equal time compared to the older one, who i had ended up falling in love with, and who i was exceptionally close to. when she was born, i did not have a huge emotional cascade, but i felt that i knew her immediately, that i understood how her mind worked even as a newborn.

i hold off comment for now about my own mother. waiting to hear others thoughts about this topic and about the general idea of mothers forming children's temperaments.

I think I'll go with this theory. There's no evidence against it.

I can influence my childrens' types! No Betas for me.

[Creepy-female]

I think I'll go with this theory. There's no evidence against it.

I can influence my childrens' types! No Betas for me.

My parents are Delta and my dad and brother are conflictors. He was probably like "Fuck you people, I'm Beta!!" in the womb.

[DirectorAbbie]

My parents are Delta and my dad and brother are conflictors. He was probably like "Fuck you people, I'm Beta!!" in the womb.

My parents are Delta and my youngest brother is a Beta. He was supposed to be a girl, too.

[Jimbean]

wow, if you folks end up finding out how a person's type is determined while being in the womb, let me know!

[Exodus]

Holy crap, I knew it.

I'm pretty sure I know identical twins that are EIE and ESE respectively. Type is not genetic.

Also, lol at BS hypotheses making it into the wikipedia article. Their hypothesis still doesn't explain why twins have different types, does it? edit: sorry...I should read the thread before responding, lol. And yes, somebody should edit that article for bias.

[Blaze]

screw the validity or lack thereof in the wiki article. it's not even on the level of hypothesis yet. but it's still a cool idea...and one that may yet have merit.

director abbie: yes this is exactly what i was looking for...to see if there are correlations. and those are great examples.

i was thinking temperament could be genetic...but the specific ordering of the IM's in the child's model A could be maternally influenced. i think it's obvious that moms look for certain things in their kids and put them on missions in life. but if you think about it....if it is the ordering of the IM's that they have influence over, it's still a pretty big influence.

like if the child was born EP, then the mom could influence type expression with a resulting ILE, IEE, SLE, or SEE, all very different people.

[somavision]

Recent research conducted by Elena Olkova together with Elena Udalova proves that sociotypes aren't genetically determined but rather form as the result of mother's biggest concerns (which form the vulnerable function of a child) during the pregnancy. During the research, 100 pairs of monozygotic twins were tested and clearly showed different sociotypes (i.e. there were no twins with identical sociotypes found).

above from wikipedia socionics article. seems like an interesting proposition and we have discussed genetics and socionics on this forum before. those of you who are moms: does your experience confirm this? what were your biggest pre-occupations while pregnant?

for others, males and not moms yet, what do you think? if you know your mother's type....how do you think it dovetails to yours?

The research as it is presented in this quote appears only to suggest that type isn't dependant on genetics, I can't see how that can be used in itself to support the proposed hypothesis.

[Blaze]

The research as it is presented in this quote appears only to suggest that type isn't dependant on genetics, I can't see how that can be used in itself to support the proposed hypothesis.

this is initial speculation type of thread not concrete fully supported hypothesis type of thread. i'm asking people what their experiences are, to see if there is even any face validity. if we get a bunch of contradictory responses, then we would tend to dismiss. if there is some confirmation then we could look more closely.

[Slacker]

With #1, probably largely work issues, but also whether I'd make a good mom. With #2, probably how it would affect #1.

I think #1 is IEE. Not sure about #2. Introvert, maybe SEI.

[Slacker]

Oh yeah, and Sept. 11 happened early in my pregnancy with #1, and there was a certain amount of "Oh god what kind of world am I bringing this baby into?"

[Jarno]

Isn't there a contradiction in the results?

Sociotype is determined by pregnancy, but all the twins had different sociotypes.

But when the mother was pregnant, she was pregnant of both at the same time, how can they have different sociotypes then if the pregnancy determines sociotype?

[Filambee]

I am a ENTp and my mom is a ESTP. She said that she wasn't really concerned about anything when she was pregnant with me. She just wanted to make sure that I was healthy. She worked out, drank milk, and stayed away from smokers.

[Filambee]

If the pregnant mother had twins and was concerned about the same thing for both of babies, wouldn't the vulnerable function of the twins be the same?

[Creepy-]

How can the proposition in the OP be empirically tested?

I believe that type is partly genetic and partly influenced by external factors... this research indicates that it is at least not wholly genetic, but I don't see how this yields the conclusion which was apparently arrived at.

[Galen]

That is by far the stupidest hypothesis for why sociotypes are formed I've ever seen, hopefully the stupidest one I ever will see.

There's no way to test this. Is the baby supposed to read the mother's mind about what her concerns are? How are we supposed to know which concerns cause the type to form and which don't? The whole thing seems way open to interpretation and makes a ton of premature conclusions that aren't verifiable. God Russians are idiots.


I just read a bit more of that section on the Wiki page:

The second concept is so called functional dimensions. It was introduced in co-operation of Ermak and Bukalov. They define the first dimension as the personal experience (Ex), the second dimension as social norms (No), the third dimension as the current situation (Si), and the fourth dimension as the globality, or time perspective (Ti). This concept is brilliant because it best illustrates the difference in cognitive power (imagine measuring capability of 2D vs 3D measuring tool) and roughly describes abilities of each function to process and generate information.

THIS CONCEPT IS BRILLIANT

Someone please delete that entire section.

[munenori2]

All I know is that my mom ate a ton of jalapenos when she was pregnant and I love spicy food.

[Slacker]

Yeah I love Indian food and my kids love it too, but the amniotic fluid gets the flavor of what you eat, as does breastmilk, so that actually makes sense. Don't know if my kids were fetal mind readers though.

[Capitalist Pig]

How can the proposition in the OP be empirically tested?

 

It can't.

In fact, none of this shit can be empirically tested.

[Jarno]

In fact, none of this shit can be empirically tested

if you have large enough amount of data you could do a lot of testing with this kind of shit.

[Capitalist Pig]

if you have large enough amount of data you could do a lot of testing with this kind of shit.

Assuming you had a consistent method of typing individuals, and could articulate a factual basis for the existence of types.

[Jarno]

Assuming you had a consistent method of typing individuals, and could articulate a factual basis for the existence of types.

There are sufficient methods which work for typing individuals.

The existence of types is evident from the empirical evidence already acquired.

Psychology is empirical! Claiming that you can't use empirically testing for psychological phenomena is for me like saying you can't repair a car using mechanical tools.

[Blaze]

found this: looks to be the original article referenced on the wiki



The Process of Human Birth, Basic Perinatal Matrices and Informational Metabolism Type

Within the bounds of the research work performed in Dobrye Lyudi (Good People) Social Adaptation Center symbols and images of the Basic Perinatal Matrices first described by S.Grof (restored recollection of the child's own birth experience) have been discovered in course of detecting informational metabolism types in folk tales. From here a hypothesis of correlation between the so called basic perinatal matrices (BPM) and informational metabolism types (IMTs) has arisen. The author's methodology of Unzipping Psycho-Energetic Memory (UPEM) allowed starting research in this field. The methodology allows recollecting one's own experience of birth in either direct or symbolic sensations, which in turn allows determining at which BPM the patient is fixed. Knowing his informational metabolism type, it is easy to make correlation between the BPM and the quadra. Preliminary results of the research confirm the correlation between the informational metabolism type and the BPM.
Key words: process of birth, basic perinatal matrix, informational metabolism type, symbol, archetype, image, folk tale.

[Blaze]

http://www.thespiritwiki.com/index.p...natal_Matrix_I

[Blaze]

first one: your beneficiary or benefactor

second one: EIE or LIE

according to the theory. lol

[glam]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics


i think all the text starting from "Recent research conducted by Elena Olkova . . ." all the way through the "Mathematics" section should probably be deleted. that stuff is all too in-depth and technical - it could be posted up on Wikisocion somewhere, but not in a general article about Socionics.

iirc, that article used to list each MBTI type as the "equivalent" of a certain sociotype (e.g. Socionics ILE = Myers-Briggs ENTP). i no longer see that anywhere on the page, so it's good to see that it's apparently been removed.

[krieger]

socionics could be subjected to empirical research, but doing so would completely transform the theory. 95% of all of it's claims wouldn't survive the process.

it would also not be a very spectacular thing to restrict the research to empirical testing, because the result would almost certainly be that socionics as it is currently formulated doesn't predict experimental results accurately. The focus would have to be on how the claims can be adjusted to reflect more or less the same perceived phenomenon, but also yield predictive results.

[Jarno]

socionics could be subjected to empirical research, but doing so would completely transform the theory. 95% of all of it's claims wouldn't survive the process.

it would also not be a very spectacular thing to restrict the research to empirical testing, because the result would almost certainly be that socionics as it is currently formulated doesn't predict experimental results accurately. The focus would have to be on how the claims can be adjusted to reflect more or less the same perceived phenomenon, but also yield predictive results.

The current type and relationship descriptions are the results of empirical investigating. The majority of people have no problem with those descriptions, therefor I don't see where this rewriting 95% comes from. It has little use I think.

I also don't see why socionics would predict any less than for example personality disorders which is well comparable to it.

[Blaze]

well i did not reach the conclusions by very reliable means that's for sure. haha anyway, i tend to think that work related concerns would be expressed by the child through a relation of benefit, while health related concerns would be expressed through the child's Si polr. evidently this holds no water.

my mother had work concerns about me and i am her beneficiary. i have more to say about this in my response to starfall.

[Blaze]

When my mom was pregnant with me she was very lonely & depressed. She was originally from England & had just moved to America & obviously hadn't gotten to know anyone yet & the culture was different for her. Apparently this caused her to grow very attached to me. She wished for a loving, deep, artistic child who liked dragons. Interestingly enough, I have always fit that criteria. It's kind of weird because I was obsessed with dragons as a kid.

this is very interesting, exactly how i was thinking this topic could be talked about when i posted the thread.

i was born in 1964, before feminism really took hold. my mother was a high school foreign language teacher. when she began to to "show" her pregnancy, she was fired. i guess pregnancy was obscene for high school students to see back then.

ok so on to her "concerns". she was only 22 years old when she gave birth to me and had only just gotten married. she wasn't ready for a child, but my father had convinced her that unprotected sex was the most natural thing for them to do. well, naturally, she became preganant. she has shared with me over the years that she didn't want to have kids so soon, and also that she deeply resented having gotten fired from work due to her pregnancy, which ended up being the beginning of a long trend of not reaching her career goals. so her concerns, in a nutshell, were her relationship with my father and work. she is my benefactor.

i have always felt that i have had to fulfill a mission from her to succeed at work and to rise in the hierarchy. that the purpose of my life is to live this out, in part for her. we even connect best on work related issues. she is very interested in all the politics and strategizing, etc that comes with the kind of work that i do, and unlike the vast majority of nearly everyone on the rest of the planet, can talk about it for quite some time.

when i compare this to how i feel about my own kids i can see a pattern. with my first, i wanted to love my child. what better type for an ILE than an ESE, if this is the desired outcome? indeed, ESE is well loved by nearly all people. with my second, i wanted most to be able to help her. what better type for an ILE to help than another ILE?

i kind of think that there is something to the idea that mothers imbue their children with purposes and missions. and that mothers do that more than fathers. being a mom myself, and looking at my own mom, i can see there's something there, but trying to figure out what, is where i thought the group consensus might be helpful.

[DirectorAbbie]

I talked to an older woman at the facility where I'm doing my childcare practicum. She fully believed the mother's concerns during pregnency have a direct effect on the child's personality. I interviewed my mother (SLI) and got these results.

First Child: She was hoping she could find a good doctor to deliver the baby. She was concerned that there was no place to put the baby and not enough money for baby things. She was also concerned that she didn't know anybody and therefore couldn't expect a baby shower to get baby things.
Result: An LII who needs very little room, is frugal, and isn't very social.

Second Child: She was hoping for a healthier baby who was livelier than the first.
Result: A healthy LSE who sometimes took her clothes off and made her mom chase her around the house.

Third Child: She was worried about the age gap and wanted a child who would get along well with the other. She was also concerned because she had to find a new hospital and wanted the most natural birth possible.
Result: An easygoing SEI.

Fourth Child: She wanted a child with more spunk and would like someone to help with physical work.
Result: An athletic SLE.

[pianosinger]

I talked to an older woman at the facility where I'm doing my childcare practicum. She fully believed the mother's concerns during pregnency have a direct effect on the child's personality. I interviewed my mother (SLI) and got these results.

It has been proven (I believe) that stress and anxiety in a pregnant woman does affect her unborn child. To take it so far as to say a child's Socionics type (particularly the Vulnerable function as the OP asserted) is determined by the mother's concerns is much more questionable. Especially as it has been pointed out that even twins pretty much always have different personalities.

First Child: She was hoping she could find a good doctor to deliver the baby. She was concerned that there was no place to put the baby and not enough money for baby things. She was also concerned that she didn't know anybody and therefore couldn't expect a baby shower to get baby things.
Result: An LII who needs very little room, is frugal, and isn't very social.

Second Child: She was hoping for a healthier baby who was livelier than the first.
Result: A healthy LSE who sometimes took her clothes off and made her mom chase her around the house.

Third Child: She was worried about the age gap and wanted a child who would get along well with the other. She was also concerned because she had to find a new hospital and wanted the most natural birth possible.
Result: An easygoing SEI.

Fourth Child: She wanted a child with more spunk and would like someone to help with physical work.
Result: An athletic SLE.

Highly coincidental, IMO. Besides, even these examples do not support the original theory, that the mother's concerns determine the PoLR. At least, not the way I am understanding the theory's assertions.

[pianosinger]

But, I will reveal my own concerns from when I was expecting each of my boys. Just for the sake of argument, or whatever.

Child One: DH and I had to move in with his parents for a while, so it wasn't always easy for me psychologically, living in someone else's home. However, I was not very stressed about this initially (it took about a year for the stress to really hit, and by then my son was already born). I actually was kind of glad for the fact that I wouldn't be in a house alone with a new baby while my husband went off to work (he also worked out of his parents' home as he was helping with the family business). My biggest concern actually was that I might have a premature delivery like my mom did with all of her babies (or would have except she went on bedrest with the last three to prevent premature birth). So I was actually rather relaxed and inactive during much of my pregnancy, and ended up actually going past my due date. At that point, I finally was a little stressed, because I was worried that the baby might not arrive before my mom flew up to see him.

Child Two: I was dealing with a very active, stubborn 2-year-old. I stressed myself out trying to get him potty trained before his baby brother arrived, and it was all in vain and resulting in a lot of willfulness on his side and on mine (think epic Se struggle, or at least that's what it felt like). I was quite active with this pregnancy, unlike my first. I was determined not to go past my due date again, and I was doing everything in my power to help things along. I wanted a natural labor, so I did my research and prepared for that. Aside from the potty training struggle, though, I did not feel very stressed and was truly looking forward to having this baby. It wasn't until after the birth that the anxiety triggered.

[Creepy-]

I interviewed my mother (SLI) and got these results.

First Child: She was hoping she could find a good doctor to deliver the baby. She was concerned that there was no place to put the baby and not enough money for baby things. She was also concerned that she didn't know anybody and therefore couldn't expect a baby shower to get baby things.
Result: An LII who needs very little room, is frugal, and isn't very social.

Second Child: She was hoping for a healthier baby who was livelier than the first.
Result: A healthy LSE who sometimes took her clothes off and made her mom chase her around the house.

Third Child: She was worried about the age gap and wanted a child who would get along well with the other. She was also concerned because she had to find a new hospital and wanted the most natural birth possible.
Result: An easygoing SEI.

Fourth Child: She wanted a child with more spunk and would like someone to help with physical work.
Result: An athletic SLE.

Correlation does not equate causation (necessarily).

I have no reason to doubt you're lying, but if the test supposedly conducted was actually conducted, and it got those results, I would say that it pretty much destroys this theory. If all these premises hold true then, I would consider your mother's case(s) pure coincidences.

[The Ineffable]

Fourth Child: She wanted a child with more spunk and would like someone to help with physical work.
Result: An athletic SLE.

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
And God saw the light, and it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
And the Devil said, This is Director bullshit: and he was sent to hell.
And the Devil said, Conquerors are strong but lazy bastards, Thy mother shall get no help.
And God said, No, begone beast.
And the Devil lit a cigar and said, Wanna bet?
And God said, No: and there was no more evil in Heaven.

[The Ineffable]

Third Child: She was worried about the age gap and wanted a child who would get along well with the other. She was also concerned because she had to find a new hospital and wanted the most natural birth possible.
Result: An easygoing SEI.

I would like to mention that "repressed" does not mean "easygoing", if the case. He's not a pet and I'm in doubt whether you pay much attention to tell the difference, though I like to think that you do. Having that you're Te-Base and he's Te-PoLR, still you state that he's "easygoing" sounds terrifying to me.

(This haunted me since I read that post, yes. I have seen how damaging is for an SEI to grow in the shadow of a LSE and I can easily connect the lack of freedom with eating too much, too.)

[DirectorAbbie]

I would like to mention that "repressed" does not mean "easygoing", if the case. He's not a pet and I'm in doubt whether you pay much attention to tell the difference, though I like to think that you do. Having that you're Te-Base and he's Te-PoLR, still you state that he's "easygoing" sounds terrifying to me.

(This haunted me since I read that post, yes. I have seen how damaging is for an SEI to grow in the shadow of a LSE and I can easily connect the lack of freedom with eating too much, too.)

I asked him whether I was bossy and he said that I'm not bossy, I'm demanding, and it's easy to ignore demands. I've found it's easier to get him to do things for a stupid reason than for a good reason. My IEE dad gets along worse with him because he expects him to be like an IEE or an SLI and thus doesn't understand him at all.

[The Ineffable]

I asked him whether I was bossy and he said that I'm not bossy, I'm demanding, and it's easy to ignore demands. I've found it's easier to get him to do things for a stupid reason than for a good reason. My IEE dad gets along worse with him because he expects him to be like an IEE or an SLI and thus doesn't understand him at all.

I understand. Note that I'm not referring to bossiness, but rather limiting his horizons. I now recall that I was living with a LSE cousin - she was quite some years older than me and my brother - she couldn't order me what to do, still I felt her mental pressure. From what I can recall, once outraged me by breaking my magpie eggs (IN MY ABSENCE, the bitch), other time she pressed me to break-open the turtle ones for the reason their time was up for long. Yes, she was right, the time was up, but I had to discover that, I need to see all the "whys" and "hows" and it's for no use to me to be told that things are a certain way if I don't understand/experience them. In fact, as I don't know for sure what happened to those magpie eggs because I didn't see them myself - words are just words - nor I was compared the incubation time vs the time they were left there, I still don't believe her today; to me, she remained - based on that case and similar ones - a totally unreliable and often dishonest person, so I tend to oppose and distrust her in any situation that I can't verify - basically doing the opposite of what she says, when I'm unsure, because what she says now sounds like bullshit.
(btw, one turtle egg contained a black mummified little turtle, like a gem, which my mother - another Ej type - considered garbage and threw away without admitting it)

So this is the problem, Alpha Irrational children need to discover everything by themselves, without being told what's true or false, good or bad, right or wrong - apart for general lines, lawfulness - otherwise they may become confused rebels without a cause: a really embarrassing personality trait, being irrationally undisciplined without an intellectual support for it (intellectual base that again, Alpha Irrationals IMO can get solely by having this freedom to discover and decide).
The same thing I observe in my gf, she's the same "rebel" with her LSE mother and often other people, rarely on actual reasonable grounds. And guess what, I recently heard her mother blaming herself for letting her daughter making her studies in a remote city (my city, actually), she still believes that "too much freedom" made her so obstinate, while in fact it's the opposite!

So yeah, when I was saying "pet" I was rather thinking of keeping it in a leash/yard (limited world of ideas and facts), rather than daily commanding/enforcing. Btw, I observed that pets used with the outside tend to come back, the others tend to get lost .