Well I already have a rough alternative to Socionics, which would be superior to it.

For example, instead of saying that this person and that person will either fundamentally get along or not get along (e.g. if you put ESE-LII together then they would get along, if you put SEE-LII together then they will conflict), we could instead have a "Theory of Identity", which would be the entire criteria in which how a person gets along with others or conflicts, how a person's likes and dislikes are determined, and so on, would be determined.

For example, if one identifies oneself as an "Intelligent person" or that he "should be intelligent", then he would be "offended" if somebody "insults his intelligence". And hence, he would not likely get along with such "offensive" persons. But if he does not, then his conception of his own identity is not threatened, and therefore is unaffected. So it all depends on what one identifies as.

Or if one identifies as a "liberal", then one expects to not get along with his "opposite", such as a "republican", which he will likely label him as an "enemy", and indeed may not actually get along with them. But then if this "republican" does not at all act in the way that he expects them to (e.g. with hostility), then he would be pleasantly surprised. Or he could believe that he does get along with his opposites.

And of course, this "Identity" is more or less sociologically constructed. It develops within a certain culture, and it develops along with other people, as an identity cannot grow in a vacuum. It's impossible to recognize something in yourself, such as your own identity, without having something to compare it to, such as other people.

And this approach would be superior to Socionics, because we are focusing on the abstraction of a person, and not the person itself as its own unit, as we are focusing on the psychology of their identity, which is an abstract idea.

Of course, this is just a rough example and a rough sketch, and I'm not even saying that this is correct. But it just goes to show how easily you can just come up with an alternative that would be much easier and can explain things so much more in detail than Socionics.