The Democrats – the aristocrats. The attribute manifests itself as a universal characteristic of fellowship. The democrats find it easy to establish horizontal relationships, get on friendly terms, become friends and partners. The aristocrats are more aware of the hierarchies; they keep people at a distance, more prone to establishing vertical relationships.
There are two democratic quadras: the alpha-quadra and the gamma-quadra. There are two aristocratic quadras – the beta-quadra and the delta-quadra. The difference between the two democratic quadras may be summed up as follows: alpha-quadra is characterized by democracy in relationships. These people are obviously inclined to democratic style of speech, clothes. "I hate wearing a suit, it is uncomfortable, I will if I have to wear it”, - might a Don Quixote say. When for a Holmes, for example, formal clothes are not an inconvenience. I know some people of this type who wear a tie and a suit even at home. The gamma-quadra are the 'democrats of the idea', their ideas are democratic but in their relationships they are somewhat distanced and 'buttoned up'.
The beta-quadra are the 'formal aristocrats', they are the aristocrats of position and interaction. Delta-quadra is the 'aristocrats of spirit'. This attribute is revealed in beta-quadra in a more formal, external way whereas in delta-quadra – more internally, deeply and ideologically. But they both share distanced and vertical relationships.
During the experiments these groups are easy to distinguish. The aristocrats try to distance themselves from others as much as possible, they never interrupt anybody; democrats speak all at once, frequently neglecting the common norms of politeness.
We have described all the 15 considered sections of a socion.
Identification of all these sections with certain personality traits not only opens ample opportunities to create essentially new tests (with higher reliability), but also allows reconsidering some of the accepted names and descriptions of types, which have been rigidly conformed to the traditional Jungian basis for too long.
Jung chose the four attributes randomly: it was a result of his way of thinking, the way he saw things. Had he used a different approach he could have discovered some other attributes and the types would have had other names today.
Originally Posted by Ypiret
- 
(as per tcaudilllg)
Reply With Quote
. It's like a puzzle with some pieces that you think might fit together but then you realize they don't when you're already halfway done. I've even used a Reinin calculator and most of the possible combination I came up with for myself aren't represented by any type.
.
