Not a good idea. Probably.

We need our supervisors just as much as we need our duals, and every other type. Also, judging by how even the most studied people in socionics can disagree with each other sometimes, I think socionics would be twisted into some wild interpretations if it were that popular. I mean, look at how discombobulated the myers-briggs communities are, lol. There is a lot of room to fuck something like this up.

And honestly, if socionics were worth its salt, a healthy and varied society should sort itself out like that automatically.

But I totally want socionics to get at least as much attention as MBTI. One problem socionics has with gaining popularity is that it just isn't marketable to the everyman, I think. It would need a dumbed-down application like the myers-briggs system has done by emphasizing the basic dichotomies and creating what are essentially archetypes. Most people start out with that, and then a minority of those look into the cognitive functions and whatnot, and then maybe a minority of that minority moves on to socionics.

I remember a class I took in middle school and a class I took in college introduced the students to some simple personality systems and people really seemed to eat that stuff up. I don't remember what the middle school one was, but the college class covered the True Colors personality model. I remember how infuriating it was to have to sit through that True Colors bullshit having already been introduced to socionics at the time. We only covered it for two days in that class before moving on, but I still remember how much my classmates enjoyed the whole thing. Honestly, I think that kind of subtle exposure could be really nice if it were socionics, but socionics has a big learning curve.