Socionics used as Horoscopes…

[Hope]

Sometimes I have this feeling that many ppl use socionics in the same way they use horoscopes as if it were some sort of oracle to predict the outcome of relationships or guess the thoughts, motivations or feelings of ppl or even their future actions.

Can socionics be used in practical life without falling in too many assumptions that end up in using socionics as some sort of divination tool? Is there a correct and incorrect way of using socionics? What's the difference between psychological types or personality patterns and horoscopes?

Edit. I'm mean when ppl use socionics to try to guess the future, both personal and relational, that's why I say horoscopes, ppl try to predict what will happen certain day, week and month. Also they have their IR stuff, if you are X sign and element, you dont match with X or Y element, that based not even in a test someone answered, but in what the "stars" say about you (and if they say something why it would be something about you especifically? Are you that important? I studied astrology astral chart for years and is bs guys/End rant).

[Dr PissBender]

Sometimes I have this feeling that many ppl use socionics in the same way they use horoscopes as if it were some sort of oracle to predict the outcome of relationships or guess the thoughts, motivations or feelings of ppl or even their future actions.

Can socionics be used in practical life without falling in too many assumptions that end up in using socionics as some sort of divination tool? Is there a correct and incorrect way of using socionics? What's the difference between psychological types or personality patterns and horoscopes?

Horoscopes are random mambo jambo bollocks based on ancient beliefs related to the stars, when people just relied on what they supposed the unknown was. They tried to make sense out of what they didn't understand.

This pseudo-psychology is based on theory that has been applied to reality/action and it has shown it does actually make sense (that's why I don't like the term 'pseudo-science' for this even though many people use it), of course, there will be people who will take it too far to the point of, for example, hating certain types and shoving every individual in the same bag.

This knowledge can be both a powerful tool and a curse if taken too far.

[YXPR]

Because socionics isn’t a science, guessing is necessary when trying to apply it to reality. But it doesn’t have to be a bad thing. When done intelligently guessing is a good way to get you closer to the truth.

For me socionics is just one more tool to understand people and my relationship with them. Together with other typologies (in which I include astrology), my personal experience, my knowledge in other matters, my gut feelings and of course common sense, socionics does help to make what I consider to be educated guesses and predictions when it comes to other people and to myself.

In my opinion socionics theory is a problem only when it becomes the only basis for guessing and predicting.

[ooo]

I think they're very much alike, even if it might look otherwise at a distance, but the mechanics behind them are the same. to remember: Jung got inspired by astrology to formulate his types' dynamics.

horoscopes, not intended as time predictive tools, have the same function of socionics, they describe the person's psychology, but why not, even their physical traits, backgrounds and all kind of possible plights you might think about. it's the same that happens in socionics when each block of the psyche corresponds to a certain area of one's life, to a certain plight of one's psyche, and to a general idea we have on the types and how they look.

the idea behind both of these disciplines is the same, we say "I'm a great analyst because I have Ti dom, Gemini Mercury, Ni ego, Saturn trine Moon, Ti-Ni subtype, Virgo Ascendant, my ass is blue" or "I'm attracted to Johnny Depp because I'm a Se, I'm Aquarius, Johnny's creative feeds my hidden agenda, my Venus trines his Eros, I have a pirate tattoo". but what are we saying?

both these disciplines have a way of explaining "reality" without explaining it, both these disciplines have built a rational system based on natural associations, that is the very same concept behind superstition. we can say that where astrology's requirements are more arbitrary (I'm x because month= x), socionics ones are more objective (I'm y because rationality=y), but actually both are contingent, dependent only on the way we decide to look at our schemes, which are not testable but, again, based on free associations and free beliefs.

we humans are egoists story tellers and we even have a strong tendency to let someone/something else lead us. we love to rely the control of our lives to someone/something else, and possibly hear good stories about us in the meanwhile. is it bad? in absolute terms, no, especially if we realize our bias and apply these theories with fun. they can both be good tools to find answers and new points of view to our lives, new perspectives, new meanings. unfortunately the opposite can easily happen and we can come to view the entire world through these limited spectrums and put ourselves in boxes that hardly even exist. plus, it becomes very boring.

[GuavaDrunk]

One problem is that people vastly overstate how broadly Socionics does affect people, and over-interpret the most human things to be tightly and/or only type-related. Sociotypes are more like one subtle thread in an interaction/personality than The Outcome Of Your Life, and have more to do with the meta-shape of your processing than the outcomes of it, but it's easier to believe otherwise.

[Tallmo]

This goes for all knowledge. People easily apply it outside its proper context. One can only learn this by experience.

When you have met 50 people of a type, then maybe you can see what is type related and what is not. DCNH also helps because it gives you a good overview of major non-type related stuff.

But I don't know why you mentioned horoscopes? Maybe as a metaphor to sloppy application of something.

[Sol]

Sometimes I have this feeling that many ppl use socionics in the same way they use horoscopes as if it were some sort of oracle to predict the outcome of relationships or guess the thoughts, motivations or feelings of ppl or even their future actions.

Besides magic, to predict can be used models in the borders of common reason. Socionics is one of them and is supposed to be applied to the listed by its theory.

To get better results than with magazines astrology:
1) identify types better. do not forget about average typing match <20% pointing on average accuracy <50%. trust more to VI (intuitive impressions from the nonverbal) when typing people which you do not know good and close
2) trust more to more basic and more reasonable theory. to Jung's opinion above Augustinavichiute's. do not use theories besides these 2 authors and baseless heresies as Reinin's traits, subtypes, etc
3) take into account the existence of other factors besides Jung types. do not get simplified types/IR descriptions as absolute

My experience and initial experimental results give the objective hope that the theory is correct. With better general reason you may assume this too. In the future, the theory should be objectively proved by scientific standards: the tendencies of higher abbilities according to strong functions, psyche and relations positive effect of supplemental functions.