I often don't agree with what people have typed themselves, and it may be something small (like I think IEE v EII) or something big (wrong club or quadra). But I was "taught" socionics by a friend who grew up with it, her mom was Russian lol, and she gave me exemplars of the types in our friends. So I guess I carried around this idea that it's possible to have standarized types. Then I observed people and mulled over how they played against the theory.
I think I interpret socionics differently from some others, who use it not as literally but just another form of introspection, or as maybe a shorthand to explain some patterns in people, even if it's an imperfect system.
For me socionics isn't about archetypes but really down to the details, and it's not based on traits like if someone is passionate they are beta. For instance I might type an emo poet SLI not IEI, it's really about how it feels like they reached their insights. I think introspection or general emotional intelligence, etc, are a lot less tightly type related than stereotypes suggest.
Maybe the more interesting question is what types help us learn about ourselves. If I consider myself an introvert, does "correctly" typing myself IEE instead of EII bring something to my life? If it can help me see that I need outside stimulation more than I think I do, that might be helpful. Or if I'm hellbent on chasing down a dual and have typed myself wrong... etc. But if I'm the Ne-base who is happy Ne-basing at home chasing down all my intellectual interests, it might not even matter so much. Maybe it would just add something interesting to introspect on?
Reply With Quote