Aristocracy in Beta quadra vs arisoctacy in Delta quadra...what is the difference? How do these two groups act based on this dichotomy?
Aristocracy in Beta quadra vs arisoctacy in Delta quadra...what is the difference? How do these two groups act based on this dichotomy?
I think it would be interesting to hear some perspectives on the differences between Beta and Delta aristocracy. Great topic! Hopefully people will contribute.
You seek a great fortune, you three who are now in chains. You will find a fortune, though it will not be the one you seek.
But first you must travel a long and difficult road, a road fraught with peril.
You shall see things, wonderful to tell. You shall see a... cow... on the roof of a cotton house. And, oh, so many startlements.
I cannot tell you how long this road shall be, but fear not the ob-stacles in your path, for fate has vouchsafed your reward.
Though the road may wind, yea, your hearts grow weary, still shall ye follow them, even unto your salvation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pukq_XJmM-k
Delta aristocracy is a subtle expression of ideology, such as demonstrating strong but subtle signs that you have a special awareness or affiliation with something you find meaningful. From this a type of "group" emerges with such a common awareness. Fi aristocrats,
Beta aristocracy is orientated towards organizing to achieve a goal: Fe aristocrats.
![]()
Socionics -
the16types.info
Democratic quadras have function blocks which contain both an external and an internal function.
Aristocratic quadras have function blocks of only external functions or internal functions.
These difference in function blocking within an individuals psyche create some tendencies in behavior which manifest in grouping and other differences between Aristocratic and Democratic quadras.
Aristocrats tend towards the extremes as the ST's have all external functions within their ego. This makes them highly practical(in a way), and very straight forward. Conversely, their counterparts NF's are idealistic, can be fanatics, and can entertain all sort of superstition, religion, and other ideas.
Beta aristocracy is quite different from delta aristocracy although often their interactions are mixed due to clubs ST/NFs. Beta quadra withas a valued function often will form social collectives founded around structural purity
, and with
around discipline to the hierarchy. The basis of the ideology is often very visionary
and can be anything from technological singularity to communist utopia. There is often a desire for their visions to affect the whole of society.
Delta aristocracy withis founded on individual practice around moral ideology/purity
, they do not value discipline but rather variety
and practicality. They form collectives often with each other for practical reasons but try to maintain moral purity such as no carbon footprint or "Leave no Trace", they focus on individual practice of a specific moral ideology. Delta aristocracy don't have the same tendency to form large collectives as they don't focus on the discipline side nor the visionary nature of Beta. The focus is local, practical
and personal.
Disclaimer: It's hard to describe these differences very clearly using words so I want to put this note that the words I'm using often have fairly specific meaning which is not the same as the layman usage. I'm using fairly standard/common words but I'm using them very specific meaning and probably not as strictly as I should for the sake of making it more accessible.
Here is the quote from Wikisocion, it is different that what hkkmr said.
"Aristocrats have the logical and sensing IM elements in the same blocks of Model A.
Here is a possible interpretation of this:
Material assets are systematized and automated. Systems and production have a material expression. Ideas exist for people and societal relationships. People and relationships are valued for their personality and potential.
Democrats have the ethical and sensing IM elements in the same blocks of Model A. "
Socionics -
the16types.info
Logics and sensing are both "external functions", intuition and ethics are both "internal functions".
Aristocrats have function blocking which are either both external or both internal.
Note I believe the terminology for internal and external to be a bit difficult to understand or perhaps inappropriate, however it's a important to note that there are differences between logic vs ethics, sensing vs intuition while ethics and intuition has this similarity along with sensing and logic.
From a software/information analogy I would say internal functions are private. While external functions are public.
It's not too different from what hkkmr said. Aspects of each element are:
External (explicit)= S, T
Internal (implicit)= N, F
Abstract = N, T
Involved = S, F
Object = Xe
Field = Xi
Integral (P)= N, S
Discrete (divisible) (J) = T, F
Dynamic = Pi, Je
Static = Pe, Ji
Beta fields...how everything interconnects, is based on the abstract (Ni, Ti)
Delta fields...how everything connects, is based on the involvement (Si, Fi)
Beta NFs...implicit dynamics
Delta NFs...implicit states
So, something like...
Beta's people connections would be based on the implicit dynamics(Ni, Fe) between those people/self, and how they are symbolically connected(Ni, Ti).
Delta's people connections would based on the implict states(Ne, Fi) within an individual/people, and how the person/people feel about/around something/someone(Fi, Si).
However, Alpha and Gamma have their own people connections they make:
Alpha's would be based on a person's dynamic involvements with others(Si, Fe), and their explicit connections(Si, Ti).
Gamma's would be based on a person's state involvements with others(Se, Fi), and their implicit connections(Ni, Fi).
(note: I am sure the wording could use some modifications.)
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
I have to say, that Delta Aristocracy stuff very closely describes a lot of the social settings I end up in. Like volunteering, philosophical discussions via groups on meetup.com, etc. I tend to prefer chill settings where we discuss a central topic in an open and civil way, usually the topic is of ethical nature, and I'm drawn to the variety of perspectives being explored in relation to the topic. The ethical interest obviously applies with the volunteer work I do, and I definitely prefer the direct and practical approach to helping others. Not meaning to toot my own horn, just giving examples of how this relates to me as a Delta. I mean, I'm prolly still lame as fawk, it's whatevs.
I am not covered in thorns
nor am I covered in mold
https://soundcloud.com/#latitudes-official/latitudes-antechamber
Stick around the forum and you'll see.
Examples would be useful.
quadras are bs.
quadras force people into seeing types as a set of behavioral traits instead of abstract, information processing and selection mechanisms. it's impossible to conceptualize quadras as something more than collections of idiosyncratic "values" that people share. most of the confusion comes from associating values with information metabolism when that's not the case.
information metabolism happens at an atomic level and can't be changed. values change [from person to person and within the same person] and can turn on or off depending on the situation. if you accept the idea that there are vast intra-type differences, then intra-quadra differences should also exist.
quadras affect the way people see intertype relations. the assumption that in-quadra relationships are "better" is built into the concept. i put "better" in quotes, because the whole idea of ranking relationships is a scam. relationships aren't quantities you compare; they're qualitative interactions that play out over time.
nothing that quadras attempt to explain can't be explained (and better) by old school inter-types and information elements. they are a useful tool, but should be treated skeptically -- like any behavior correlating device.
Last edited by xerx; 09-24-2013 at 08:04 AM. Reason: punctuation
It's impossible to not think about behavior when using quadras. What people do and say are the only ways they interact with each other. Because they're separate organisms.
IM is usually conceived as being fairly mutable over time:
The metaphor of information metabolism expresses the thesis that human experience and behavior cannot be explained by a technical model of information processing. This process in humans is influenced to a significant degree by the subjective meaning of information, which was shaped during the person’s individual life-history. The unique set of experiences contained in the functional structures of a system of values includes, especially at the emotional level, subjective emotional complexes. These complexes cause human behavior in some situations to be directed by subjective feelings, rather than objective logic. For this reason the notion of information metabolism in human seems to be more adequate than that of information processing.
Value Tiers…
I. Biological-Vital
II. Emotional–Personal
III. Sociocultural–Ideational
Read Further
Nope, that's wrong. Experiences have to latch on to a static framework or type wouldn't exist. People would be so random that typology as a whole can suck it.
They could, but they'd be redundant, they'd be summarizing what intertypes already say.Quadra intertypes could just as well be considered from a more neutral perspective, w/o the embedded attribution of being "better".
Which, again, makes quadras redundant. It's fine if you want to use the concept as a shorthand for intertypes and shared IEs !!!Assuming that emergent themes/effects from higher-order IE interactions proprietary to the quadra level are causally explainable as a resultant sum of their component IEs.
Sociologically I think quadras do play out in grouping behavior but only over time.
Clubs group based on activity, quadras group based on shared values. This binds together the opposing quadras based on clubs initially and creates division based on values.
Intertype relations are more analyzable with psychological instruments but quadras and clubs are sociological constructs as the individuals number greater than 2.
I highly disagree quadras are bs. Because club grouping and quadra grouping is highly evident in social constructs.
if you want to use it as a shorthand for something else, that's 100% legit. same deal with small groups.
they aren't (usually) used like that though. people love treating quadras as tightly knit groups with concrete values and attitudes that are (more or less) applicable to all members of that quadra. we can't even agree on what an estp is like, yet we have threads about how all betas are aristocratic.
Quadras as a categorization is a 4 individual group, as are the other small groups. This group relation creates a different union then random 4 type groupings. In the same way a socion is a 16 type group and aristocracy and democracy form a 8 type group as a Reinin Dichotomy.
These are merely labels for the holistic IE interaction between all individuals within the group but so is basically every construct we use to name some specific set of interactions within this study. It's much easier to say Quadra then a 4 person group of shared valued information elements.
There are situations where more than 2 people interact I think you miss this and there are sets of interaction that may behave in a novel interaction due to the balance and mix of communication styles. It's very common for aristocratic and democratic groups to form as well due to club activity level grouping and duality/activity relation mixing of compatible clubs.
A quadra group is one of the easier groups to form, 2 activity relations bring their dual spouses or 2 mirrors bring their dual spouses.
It's not merely shorthand, because quadras are a small group that shares the same 3 inter-type relations(dual, mirror, activity). This is the same as other small groups.
4 random types can have a large number of different intertype relationships such as say ILE ILI ESI SLE would have business, comparative, conflict, activity, benefit, etc etc etc.
It could be said that having 4 individuals who share the same 3 inter-type relationships creates a resonance effect between the three which creates novel and unique interactions that are not present in random arrangements.
Think of it as a sort of molecule which has novel characteristics beyond the interactions of the individuals. Everything in socionics is built up from a set of simple observations, but many novel arrangements and patterns exist which are significant to observation and interaction, giving these arrangements and patterns name is useful.
Lul @ atomic level. One can't get anymore Ti than that.
Reinin and me already had babies. I wuv Reinin! And by the way, true fanatics of Reinin spell his name the Russian way, as Д-р Григорий Rhine .
Socionics -
the16types.info
Betas: "YOU SUCK!!!!" (loudly)
Deltas "You suck"
ILE "Searcher"
Socionics: ENTp![]()
DCNH: Dominant![]()
--> perhaps Normalizing
![]()
Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
Astrological sign: Aquarius
To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.
Note for the record: Xerx edited his post while I was writing a response. There is not much disagreement between us.
Socionics -
the16types.info
Does this explanation of Aristocratism/Democratism pass your smell test?
Aristocratism and democratism are all about what is a "group" to an individual. Groups are all about Fi.
Democrats have Se in a block with Fi. They see groups first all as power structures. In that aspects groups are all generally the same, and and members qualities are not that important as long as he feeds his power in to the system. Not a view to be fanatical about.
Aristorcrats have Ne in a block with Fi. They see groups first of all as having inherent qualities and potentials...
This would imply that particular social quality of Aristorcratism/Democratism overshadows 3 other qualities that opposite quadras share. One for each block.
The phenomenology of lasagna.
"[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Brought to you by socionix.com
So, the OP inquired about aristocracy between Delta and Beta, to which some of the participants reply with denying that specific agglomerations of individuals, called quadras, exist. And at the same time differentiate between "weak and strong 'properties'" of a quadra.
Pure LUL.
What I noticed is in Beta the overall movement is downward i.e. demotion - if you have demonstrated yourself to be incompetent and insubstantial, then you lose your position, privileges, etc. and somebody else climbs over you while you becomes their underling (also known as "bitch", hence betans have a certain occupation with such "bitches" i.e. people who have allowed themselves to be brought down). In Delta the overall movement is upwards i.e. promotion - if you have proven yourself to be worthy, good, talented, etc. then you get the position and the extra perks, while somebody else, who has not proven himself to be as good and talented as yourself, is left behind, unrewarded. Stratievskaya wrote a series of articles about quadra complexes where she describes interaction among Deltans as a kind of marketplace of demonstration of superiority, a "vanity fair" where each participant tries to keep at the apex and hold onto his or her right to occupy a better place while squeezing others out. Thus in Delta the displays of blatant aggression that may undermine one's character are discouraged, with the exception being that in an effort to prove this superiority people may lie, and if you suspect this to be the case it's perfectly fine to attempt to discredit them: "he/she is lying and is therefore not deserving of your praise/attention/high marks, etc." So there is this periodic snapping at others, hence why Strati calls the Delta complex as the "complex of undercut wings" as each member 'clips the wings' of another, thereby preventing him from 'flying too high'.
What else.
Delta hierarchies are more flexible and dynamic with more frequent changes of roles than Beta hierarchies, as a consequence of Te being a dynamic element while Ti is static.
In Delta there is more of a concern with enduring whichever hardships come your way, outlasting, tanking, pulling through, while in Beta there is more of a concern of dealing blows, timely, carefully orchestrated and precisely directed blows that would bring your opposition down to their knees. So Delta-Beta opposition can be depicted as a horde (beta) that travels certain distance to siege a walled town or castle (delta). The horde is a mobile, expansive force (Se) that will look for any signs of weaknesses to make the fortress that they are sieging surrender, while the goal of the fortress is to withstand for which it needs maximum stability, durability, and sufficient internal resources (Si) to outlast the attack.
In reality from what I've seen groups consisting purely of one quadra are very rare. Each quadra needs input from neighboring ones, otherwise things get stale, so extra-quadral associations are quite common, especially the ones along the lines of benefit and supervision relations. Additionally, there are other patterns and groupings outside of socionics, with entirely different sets of 'quadra' and intertype relations (enneagram, instincts, etc), so while someone may be duals in socionics, they may be conflictors elsewhere. And then of course there are points of friction within each quadra, since the two dual pairs oppose one another on basis of Rationality/Irrationality, opposing temperaments, and Process/Result traits, and since mirror partners often enter a rather unpleasant cycle of mutual correction. This typically 'loosens up' and dilutes socionics concept of quadra beyond distinct recognition. However, within any group there are usually a few members who have greater influence than others, and it is their types that contribute the most to the integral type and quadral imprint of the group.
I was just watching Parts Unknown and they did a episode on Denmark, IMO, this is a very Delta society. IMO Delta allows people to stand out on the basis of diversity, but not on the basis of ambition. There is also a seniority aspect to the promotions. The competition is passive and implicit(althrough it still goes on), there was one point in the episode where one member responded to "Who's in charge" and he said "I'm in charge but so is everything else". One of the prevalent theme of the show is the way in Denmark, individual that stand out are undercut and criticized.
Intergroup dynamics I see as consisting of a dominant quadra, adjacent intermediary quadras, with a dissenting conflicting quadra forming a "rogue" element to the dominant quadra. This forms a dialectic with the intermediary quadra providing synthesis options(if they can). Stagnation occurs thru the back and forth of the dominant and rogue quadras but this can change for better and worse when a intermediary quadra takes the dominant role. Depending on the activity, clubs creates the natural focus of skills in this activity, whether it be production, humanities, science and business and the various labors of man.
Ok. How about democracy between alpha & gamma? What is the difference there?
Probably repeating someone in the thread.
For Delta group's are about circle of insiders, outsiders vanish in to ignore in comparison. Si and Fi both turning the attention to managing the interconnections inside the group- comfort and trust.
For Beta group's are more about "us vs them" with "us" preferably being united by ideas and/or emotion/zeal.
Alpha wants to meet up and network quickly to collaborate on developing promising ideas as part of an loosely directed exercise at reflection and elaboration. They invented forums like this, we are all doing Alpha democracy as we post. Ne Fe democracy
Gamma wants to touch base quickly with you in order to induce a change within you by presenting a contrasting idea. They invented trolling. Fi Ni democracy.
Socionics -
the16types.info
Ahaha.
I dunno why that made me think of my favorite metaphysical poem.
ROOM! room! make room for the bouncing Belly,
First father of sauce and deviser of jelly;
Prime master of arts and the giver of wit,
That found out the excellent engine, the spit,
The plough and the flail, the mill and the hopper,
The hutch and the boulter, the furnace and copper,
The oven, the bavin, the mawkin, the peel,
The hearth and the range, the dog and the wheel.
He, he first invented the hogshead and tun,
The gimlet and vice too, and taught 'em to run;
And since, with the funnel and hippocras bag,
He's made of himself that now he cries swag;
Which shows, though the pleasure be but of four inches,
Yet he is a weasel, the gullet that pinches
Of any delight, and not spares from his back
Whatever to make of the belly a sack.
Hail, hail, plump paunch! O the founder of taste,
For fresh meats or powdered, or pickle or paste!
Devourer of broiled, baked, roasted or sod!
And emptier of cups, be they even or odd!
All which have now made thee so wide i' the waist,
As scarce with no pudding thou art to be laced;
But eating and drinking until thou dost nod,
Thou break'st all thy girdles and break'st forth a god.
"[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Brought to you by socionix.com
betas let you know if you're worth something, deltas allow you to realize you've been left out. the implication vs. what remains implied... aristocracy is about defining this distance between the individual and their collective import, with democracy it's more mutable.
what you're arguing against can happen with any grouping, it doesn't negate the value, which in this case is highlighting more basic themes among types on a collective level. it's implied that interpretations should derive from IE interactions.
4w3-5w6-8w7