social instinct and aristocracy

[ashlesha]

This is probably stupid, but I think I have some trouble with my iee friends instinct stacking because of differentiating SO from aristocracy. I think she's more aware than me of the social aspects in life partly because she pays attention to "these sort of people" and "those sort of people." Discuss?

[strrrng]

so is a kind of collective intelligence, it has to do with appraising social context, identifying interpersonal nuances and relevant points of influence to maximize social experience/output. aristocracy is more about seeing oneself as implicitly a part of a whole, it's 'social' in a more controlled, mechanical way -- 'this is how things are operating, and why' as opposed to 'this is where I stand'. you'll see that so-last aristocrats will just maintain an awareness of basic functionality, occupying their role without any real regard for the broader, social implications of it and how they comport themselves; whereas so-primary democrats will be keenly aware of where they stand with people and what the operant social conditions are, without ever applying a more fundamental structure to happenings -- they merely move through the social field unfettered by the implicit boundaries aristocrats utilize; the so-last aristocrat, despite not being as bound by social convention, will still not stray far from what they perceive to be the 'rules of the game.'


edit: 'these sort of people' seems more aristocratic.

[Amber]

I think strng has already answered the Q quite well ..I'll just add that the combination of SO instinct and aristocracy can lead to something like nazism lol. People are mainly perceived through their belonging to a specific group (mostly ethnic, in that case) and the SO interest in community creation/preservation/health is used either for affiliative and progressive purposes (martin luther king), or for the expulsion of components deemed impure. In any case I think a more pronounced political focus is the tell-tale the SO instinct, while aristocracy just uses wholes/groups instinctively (automatically) for cognition purposes mainly.

[yeves]

I've been wondering the same thing ..

[Froody Blue Gem]

One of my primary attributes is how little sx I have. While I am very sp, social instinct plays a role with me, how I relate to others, how I branch out and focus on the group.

There is a strong correlation with how high up social instinct is and democratic vs. aristocratic. I think social instinct can relate to fe/fi too though. There are certain people who I am acutely aware of not being like, I suppose a lot of people, but when meeting those people who I connect with with common functions or ways of thinking, there is a special click. ] I do relate that to belonging to a greater whole, and having a strong sense of like minded people vs. people who are not like-minded.

With people who aren't aristocratic types, having social instinct can create fake higher fi/fe in logical types, and fake aristocracy too.

[lkdhf qkb]

This is a very interesting thread. From what I understand:

- social instinct: an awareness of "who's who". Who can I count on? Who is the boss/responsible? Who has the best knowledge? Who will understand what I'm going through? Who am I/how do I relate compared to others? What can I contribute? Where do I belong? Can I change society?(SJWs)

- aristocracy in socionics: treating information according to blocked information elements. The world is either seen through a lens of NF(feelings about abstract contructs, like morality, spirituality, mental synchronocity, ideals and visions) or ST(logistics, external achievements). NT(technology, science, practical wisdom) and SF(social networks and relationships) aspects are subdued, or used entirely used to further NF or ST aspects. The use of SF social networks and groups to further NF social ideology or ST prowess is where the label "aristocrat" comes from. Aristocrat separate people using their positive functions, Fi+, Ti+, Te+, Fe+, which makes them very detailed in those distinctions. This doesn't mean that socionics "democrats" don't also distinguish and segregate "right and wrong kind" of people too. It's just that they use NT and SF blocks to judge people ("democrats" vs "republicans" which are different NT ideologies, diatribes against religion like Richard Dawkins does, SFs bullying marginals and outcats,.). Democrats separate people using their negative functions, Fi-, Ti-, Te-, Fe-, which makes their distinctions less detailed.

- the need for superiority and feeling better than people who are different isn't correlated to socionics. Socionics is purely a system that helps to understand how people treat information about the worlda. But a NF who thinks he's better than others will use very different reasons than a NT for example.

I think strng has already answered the Q quite well ..I'll just add that the combination of SO instinct and aristocracy can lead to something like nazism lol. People are mainly perceived through their belonging to a specific group (mostly ethnic, in that case) and the SO interest in community creation/preservation/health is used either for affiliative and progressive purposes (martin luther king), or for the expulsion of components deemed impure. In any case I think a more pronounced political focus is the tell-tale the SO instinct, while aristocracy just uses wholes/groups instinctively (automatically) for cognition purposes mainly.

Nazism is a good example of beta aristocracy mixed with contraflow, mainly sx/so and so/sp. Synflow aristocratic stackings go the opposite route when confronted with difference: "We are all different kinds of people, but can't we all live together? Let's make a lot of different groups which reflect our NF faith differences or ST organizational differences and unite only on what we have in common".

sx/so - excluding, eliminating, dividing, separating, contradicting, subverting, confronting, rebuffing, ridiculing, challenging, interrupting, reforming, rupturing
so/sp - utilizing, employing, implementing, expending, exercising, spending, capitalizing, expropriating

While the tendency for strict hierarchical ST relationships might be beta, that doesn't mean that dictatorship is beta. I'd type Mussolini, SEE so/sp and his brand of faschism was contraflow & "democratic" in the socionics sense: he was a populist ultranationalist.