Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: What Socionics Could be Like in the far Future

  1. #1
    jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default What Socionics Could be Like in the far Future

    Imagine socionics really catches in the far future - and is now highly accurate.

    This is what I imagine would be good applications of socionics:

    - It could be applied to things like education, having courses, schools, etc. cater to different personalities, learning styles, etc.
    - It could be applied to things like medicine or therapy, making sure that people match up with their dual as a psychologist or doctor.
    - It could be applied to work, making sure again that teams of people are on the same page and that people's work matches up with their learning style.

    Here is where I imagine it would not be good:

    - Arranged marriages by type.
    - Things like family planning, where people are adopted into families by type.
    - Cities and places being arranged geographically by type.

    I can just sense that the last three would not be accepted very well by the public or even be practical - although I think with relationships, socionics dating would be an obvious good idea.

    What do you think of this? Do you agree/disagree? Where do you see socionics being used in the far future?

  2. #2
    jason_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Let me explain:

    - Arranged marriages: I think traditional arranged marriages is the most backwards approach to dating, followed by the essentially `free market` western approach, followed by socionics. Combining socionics with something backwards is not an innovative idea...
    - Adopting families into type is again like `1984`or `Brave New World` - not really a big idea that is going to catch on...
    - Cities and geographic places arranged by type is like racial segregation - does not make sense...

    However, applying socionics to:

    - schools
    - counseling
    - medicine
    - dating
    - work

    Would make a lot of sense in the far future, if they could make socionics into an incredibly accurate science...

  3. #3
    Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,921
    Mentioned
    221 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Alternative negative possibility:

    Ignored and forgotten as pseudoscience for a more objective personality system.
    “We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Socionics is neither science nor pseudoscience, because it's just making an observation then expecting the same thing to happen again. While a lot of people mistake that as "science", it has nothing to do with science. It's not even "protoscience", because at least protoscience makes a claim about how the world (apparently) works.

    People are so impressed by Socionics, because what is written in the description is observed yet again, and hence apparently "predicting" behavior. But that's just expecting the same thing to happen again or expecting some kind of a repeated pattern (for no reason, might I add). True prediction obviously has to do with predicting something that has never even been observed before. You can say that if-so-and-so happens, then we can expect X to happen. That's the kind of a logical deduction that you can make from scientific theories or scientific explanations. It's about explaining how things work.

    Expecting the same thing to happen is... just expecting the same thing to happen again.

    Human brains are wired for finding patterns, and that's why they often get stuck in trying to find the patterns of expecting the same thing that has happened before to happen again. They think that it has happened before, therefore it will happen again (not saying that's necessarily wrong, but there has to be a reason for it). I think that's why Inductivist systems like Socionics are initially so alluring. But nonetheless, it's a mistake.

  5. #5
    Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,921
    Mentioned
    221 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Socionics is neither science nor pseudoscience, because it's just making an observation then expecting the same thing to happen again. While a lot of people mistake that as "science", it has nothing to do with science. It's not even "protoscience", because at least protoscience makes a claim about how the world (apparently) works.

    People are so impressed by Socionics, because what is written in the description is observed yet again, and hence apparently "predicting" behavior. But that's just expecting the same thing to happen again or expecting some kind of a repetition (for no reason, might I add). True prediction obviously has to do with predicting something that has never even been observed before. You can say that if-so-and-so happens, then we can expect X to happen. That's the kind of a logical deduction that you can make from scientific theories or scientific explanations. It's about explaining how things work.

    Expecting the same thing to happen is... just expecting the same thing to happen again.
    Aw, you won't even call it pseudoscience? You must really hate it! xD
    “We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  6. #6
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    Alternative negative possibility:

    Ignored and forgotten as pseudoscience for a more objective personality system.
    Even more negative alternate possibility:

    Modern civilization will collapse in the near future in the near-future and socionics will be the least of our concerns.

  7. #7
    Kill4Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w7 so/sp
    Posts
    2,608
    Mentioned
    268 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is no future for socionics without Stackemup Typology.

    Let me say it again, there is no future for socionics without Stackemup Typology.

    Only insane or dishonest people deny that I cracked the VI templates for every socionics type and subtype:

    https://www.pinterest.com/socionics/

    It's also an important consideration that I've also got the only valid breakdown for every type, wing and stack.

    https://stackemup.livejournal.com/

    Stackemup Typology has expanded socionics and enneagram out of the closed universe one typology mindset.

    The futures of both typologies are inextricably linked.

    Failure to get on board with Stackemup Typology equals wrong side of history, folks.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    Aw, you won't even call it pseudoscience? You must really hate it! xD
    Yah, because even pseudoscience has a (wrong) theory on how something works or how the world works. Socionics doesn't have a theory or an explanation.

    You might say, "What are you talking about, Socionics is highly speculative! It has a theory". Well no, because Socionics is just about writing down observations and categorizing things accordingly. It's basically just data and statistics.

    Then you might say, "Well who cares about explanations? Aren't data and correlations enough? Aren't we SUPPOSED to write down observations? Isn't that what science is?".

    Well for one, you can't possibly make predictions without explanations, because you don't know what is the cause of something. You could observe some sort of a statistical trend, but you don't know why it's happening. And if you don't know why it's happening, then you can't possibly predict a statistical trend continuing in a certain way.

    Or perhaps we can look at something like dog breeds. We can say that such a thing is similar to Socionics and other typologies. But how the "theory" goes is that a certain dog breed's temperament and behavior is mostly due to genetics. We don't say, "Well a Labrador is friendly and loyal because it grew up in a loving environment with loving a family, and it has been socially influenced to be loyal". However, that is the case for humans, as they're heavily influenced by their environments. Or even their own cognition.

    So when we have endless debates about "Is it type related?" vs "NTR", what we're really doing is that we're trying to find the cause of something. Is it genetics, or is it socially or cognitively influenced? And we can't possibly find the cause Socionically.

  9. #9
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I for one regret I will not live long enough to browse the brain net and see people debating the pros and cons of Gorblox-Snerfdrazz intertype relations

  10. #10
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is nothing wrong with arranged marriage. I probably wouldn't do it personally but it's a legitimate part of some cultures.

    I think you're getting at the right thing though. Socionics shouldn't be used to rigidly limit interactions and form clans based on intertype relations (quadras especially). What it should be used for is to improve understanding between people of different types and of oneself, so that you can make those relationships work better.

  11. #11
    Chthonic Daydream's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    The Snail Spiral
    Posts
    1,245
    Mentioned
    171 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is assuming that people will follow the same line of reasoning when typing people and there will be no conflicting opinions on one's type. Which, as you can see on this forum, is pretty impossible

    But oh, man, the trailer for Socionics 2077 looks sick. I heard Gulenko makes an appearance too.
    "Wake the fuck up. We have people to type."
    “I want the following word: splendor, splendor is fruit in all its succulence, fruit without sadness. I want vast distances. My savage intuition of myself.”
    Clarice Lispector

  12. #12
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    4,404
    Mentioned
    244 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    Aw, you won't even call it pseudoscience? You must really hate it! xD
    You can just ignore him at this point

  13. #13
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    4,162
    Mentioned
    305 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Knowledge of Socionics / jungian types or whatever it will be called in the future, will of course revolutionize many fields. It's a huge problem right now that this basic knowledge of human beings is missing. The applications are endless, I'm not even gonna try.

    For dating though, it will lead to people demanding more. If I can use an app for only dating duals, I will start looking for the most beautiful / nicest / richest / most compatible duals. And so on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    Alternative negative possibility:

    Ignored and forgotten as pseudoscience for a more objective personality system.
    That's the current situation, in a way

    Quote Originally Posted by The Perpetual Now View Post
    I for one regret I will not live long enough to browse the brain net and see people debating the pros and cons of Gorblox-Snerfdrazz intertype relations
    We are already looking at the future because we know Socionics. The discussions in this forum is probably hundreds of years ahead of its time. The fact that there are 16 distinct cognitive types of humans is completely unknown to most scientists. So far it is, but at some point it will probably be accepted, even if it will take 1000 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post

    I think you're getting at the right thing though. Socionics shouldn't be used to rigidly limit interactions and form clans based on intertype relations (quadras especially). What it should be used for is to improve understanding between people of different types and of oneself, so that you can make those relationships work better.
    Partially limiting interaction to own quadra can be a good thing though. That's what people tend to do automatically already. But it is a matter of how extreme one should be.
    The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.

    (Jung on Si)

  14. #14
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    Partially limiting interaction to own quadra can be a good thing though. That's what people tend to do automatically already. But it is a matter of how extreme one should be.
    I would not generally decide to not be friends with someone purely based on their type.

    What I would do is, try to observe their personality and then recognize that they have certain qualities that I don't mesh well with. Then there could be other factors that might still make it a beneficial interaction.

    But the situation could shift in the future. Currently the character judgment and the typing are a result of the same process (observation). Sure someone else could type someone but if we had an objective way to type in the future, I might conceivably end up in a situation where I could be certain of their type before interacting with them. Based on my experience with others' self-typings I still would not make an a priori judgment about them. Only if it was for something like being forced to take a month-long hike with a random person in the wilderness.

    Great idea for a socionics reality show by the way Pit a dual pair against a conflictor pair and see who wins.

  15. #15
    Feeling fucking fantastic golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Second story
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,724
    Mentioned
    250 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I’ve heard a few people in the last few years using divorce rate alone as a measure of arranged marriages’ success, and although it may work for some specific couples, in light of the bigger socioeconomic picture, it’s far from good for most women, especially poor women. Here’s a useful discussion: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...anged-marriage
    LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”

    Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”

    LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”

  16. #16
    mindless Aeris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    nowhere important
    TIM
    heartless
    Posts
    481
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Every system can be abused. From sects forming to happy marriages, from self discovery to discrimination over type. Those best and worst currently happen in small forms, whether they grow worldwide or not doesn't matter to me.
    This reminds of some person and her vipassana stuff, she thinks it's The Way(tm); because it works for her, then it must work for everyone.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Number 9 large View Post
    You can just ignore him at this point
    Too bad no one cares about your opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    But the situation could shift in the future. Currently the character judgment and the typing are a result of the same process (observation). Sure someone else could type someone but if we had an objective way to type in the future, I might conceivably end up in a situation where I could be certain of their type before interacting with them. Based on my experience with others' self-typings I still would not make an a priori judgment about them. Only if it was for something like being forced to take a month-long hike with a random person in the wilderness.
    There's no other way to "objectively type" someone, than to come up with an explanation. All forms of "objective" measurements are based on explanations of some kind. The reason why mere observations don't work, is because while observations are explanations of a kind, they're unexpressed and tucked away inside of our heads.

    There's also the problem of whether a person's behavior is either genetic or socially influenced (or cognitive). But it's likely that the vast majority of human behavior is actually socially influenced, because you need some kind of an environment or a culture to have it possible to have an expression of genes.

    If it's socially influenced, then it can be somewhat easily changed and hence easily tested. If it's genetic, then it would be much harder.

  18. #18
    Dalek Caan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    196
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's way too abstract for it to have any direct or obvious relevance in people's lives. So your average person is much more likely to misunderstand or misinterpret the theory, writing it off and seeing the people that understand it as deranged cultists or brainwashed wackos. And the people that do understand it well won't be open about it as a result.

    The masses will always be asses.
    Androgynous Robot Dreamer - Not really human, but good at pretending.

    Quote Originally Posted by Number 9 large View Post
    blame the merry quadras

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •