What would Socionics look like if some "average" person made it?

[Dazu]

I've been musing about this here and there lately. Let's say a fairly average person who has never heard of any Jungian typology was somehow able to come up with some kind of somewhat formal system that described the information elements and Socion. What would it look like? Even more, have you ever met someone in real life that has basically done this? Really, I don't think this idea is too absurd. Socionics is just detailing real phenomenon and people already can note others who like comfort and how they base their personality on it.

[Poptart]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/lisatran100...kle-cvbijctzr4

[Dazu]

I thought I would get Pickle but I got cucumber. This test does not understand my truly deep and complex INFJ nature.

[Adam Strange]

I thought I would get Pickle but I got cucumber. This test does not understand my truly deep and complex INFJ nature.

Life is so much like that.

[Dazu]

Life is so much like that.

Such is life. Finally got over my ego. Self growing so much it hurts

[Adam Strange]

Is your avatar a picture of you?

If so, nice hat.

[Dazu]

Ah nah, it's from this site: https://www.thispersondoesnotexist.com

[Metaphor]

Let's say a fairly average person who has never heard of any Jungian typology was somehow able to come up with some kind of somewhat formal system that described the information elements and Socion. What would it look like? Even more, have you ever met someone in real life that has basically done this?

Interesting, if you were to take on what theoretically "could be", on this occasion, I would say it depends on what kind of average people that come up with such system to describe the Informational Metabolism Elements of Socionics. But if I were to ponder, it might be a system that is rather based on their own observation in the environment according to their understanding about people in general, the person probably works in Sociology as a researcher. And no, I have never met someone in real life that has done so, let alone to see if that could ever happen.

[Dazu]

Interesting, if you were to take on what theoretically "could be", on this occasion, I would say it depends on what kind of average people that come up with such system to describe the Informational Metabolism Elements of Socionics. But if I were to ponder, it might be a system that is rather based on their own observation in the environment according to their understanding about people in general, the person probably works in Sociology as a researcher.

yeah this is the issue I'm having. What exactly is average here? Aside from intelligence and perhaps income, it's hard to make a prediction because there are so many cultural nuances here as well. But the environment, hmm. Now that you mention it, it might help to narrow things down. Using your example of a Sociology student might help. Maybe narrow it down further by specifying this hypothetical person is midclass and is in America, the UK, or the like.

[Metaphor]

Good point. Next, let's move to a probabilistic chance of country where they live. As for UK, I'm not that familiar with the environment.
Perhaps, should I consider Brazil? The reason is simple, a wide variety of samples according to their population that'd be needed for research, which ceases maybe some prodigies to investigate the cause of overpopulation by knowing the characteristic of each city based on people who live there, sounds like a narrow but exact scenario here.

[Tallmo]

It already exists. It's called Myers Briggs.

[EUDAEMONIUM]

It already exists. It's called Myers Briggs.

Lol I clicked on this just to see if anyone said this.

[Metaphor]

This bas reminds me when one of my language teachers, who believed in astrology, sorted out groups for students by their zodiacs.

[Metaphor]

Wouldn't say that's what people meant of being average, though.
No offence, but I could come up with a "better" instance such as Shadow Function by Beebe.

[Dazu]

Good point. Next, let's move to a probabilistic chance of country where they live. As for UK, I'm not that familiar with the environment.
Perhaps, should I consider Brazil? The reason is simple, a wide variety of samples according to their population that'd be needed for research, which ceases maybe some prodigies to investigate the cause of overpopulation by knowing the characteristic of each city based on people who live there, sounds like a narrow but exact scenario here.

I know little of Brazil outside of memes, but it's a good start. Also might help to narrow down by asking what are the most observable aspects in the TIM. Personally I think the Evaluatory functions are, specifically the inert ones. It seems effigies can be made of people through functions 1 and 4. For instance, LIEs are the over productive businessman who don't care for the environment and need their basic bodily necessities automated, SEIs are lazy ineffectual oafs who don't have a clue about any practical matters. I don't think this idea is preposterous. Descriptions from Jung's Psychological Types as well as other early Jungians were basically just 1 with aspects of 4, 5, and 7 bleeding in.

This bas reminds me when one of my language teachers, who believed in astrology, sorted out groups for students by their zodiacs.
[...]
Wouldn't say that's what people meant of being average, though.
No offence, but I could come up with a "better" instance such as Shadow Function by Beebe.

The teacher instance is interesting, I wonder if anything theoretically pertinent was observable, and if not, what justifications did the teacher make. As for the latter part, I do not understand. Are you saying Beebe's shadow functions would be observable?

[EUDAEMONIUM]

@Dazu your profile pic is unsettling, I feel like she's staring at me.

[qaz00]

Ah nah, it's from this site: https://www.thispersondoesnotexist.com

I tried to VI these random generated faces for fun, it seemed more difficult than with normal people, probably because it just puts random features on a face and in reality a type has some features tied together. Despite that I was able to pick some good representatives of a type: https://imgur.com/a/j7vsu6k

[Exodus]

People may recognize certain aspects of it like Se complementing Ni or something. You can see this happening in fictional depictions (which can be a bit hit or miss in general.) But to come up with a whole system like this you need to have some kind of special insight.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

@

Dazu your profile pic is unsettling, I feel like she's staring at me.

haha it's like the Delta NF therapist stare or something.

[Adam Strange]

@Dazu your profile pic is unsettling, I feel like she's staring at me.

@Dazu's profile pic is SLI.

[Metaphor]

The teacher instance is interesting, I wonder if anything theoretically pertinent was observable, and if not, what justifications did the teacher make. As for the latter part, I do not understand. Are you saying Beebe's shadow functions would be observable?

I was about to emphasize that Beebe used Model A to create that Model, which meant to be obvious in the misconstrued application akin to MBTI.

[Dazu]

I was about to emphasize that Beebe used Model A to create that Model, which meant to be obvious in the misconstrued application akin to MBTI.

I actually didn't know that about the Beebe model. it seems that literally every single non-Socionics Jungian Typology improves in quality once Socionics is introduced. Same thing happened with Cognitive Typology / Vultology. Only had a speck of truth once the guy behind it was covertly being spoonfed Socionics ideas. Did Myers-Briggs-esque Typology only have the Grant stacks and dominant with the anima/animus before Beebe?

People may recognize certain aspects of it like Se complementing Ni or something. You can see this happening in fictional depictions (which can be a bit hit or miss in general.) But to come up with a whole system like this you need to have some kind of special insight.

This is what I'm afraid of, actually. A fully fleshed out TIM is probably impossible to figure out on one's own, especially if the person is just an average person. But I wonder how average people would conceptualize the macro elements that you suggested - /, /, etc.

[Exodus]

This is what I'm afraid of, actually. A fully fleshed out TIM is probably impossible to figure out on one's own, especially if the person is just an average person. But I wonder how average people would conceptualize the macro elements that you suggested - /, /, etc.

Why be afraid of it? Socionics has already been discovered

This is the norm with any really big breakthrough - it's usually discovered by a single person who dedicates many years to thinking about some subject intensely. Then they convey it to others and it becomes part of our collective knowledge.

[Metaphor]

Did Myers-Briggs-esque Typology only have the Grant stacks and dominant with the anima/animus before Beebe?

Let alone stack, MBTI didn't even have functions, they adopted it from JCF to define functions although with some modifications.
The original stack of MBTI was IEEE/EIII before Harold Grant re-created that rigid IEIE/EIEI stack.

[Metaphor]

Yes, there is no need to be afraid of what already invented.

[Metaphor]

Descriptions from Jung's Psychological Types as well as other early Jungians were basically just 1 with aspects of 4, 5, and 7 bleeding in.

This is correct.
Also, I don't know what you mean by evaluatory,
it seems to me that the contact/inert is rather you are closed or open with the way how you absorb environment,
no matter it's inner or outside environment.

"Are you saying Beebe's shadow functions would be observable?"

I mean, why not? Anyone can make typology for themselves. Beebe is a pure example of how an average person is capable enough to work on it but getting rebutted by someone else in many perspective. Shadow function, to be honest, it's a good concept, many interesting ideas that actually are applicable in real life, but I think we should be more focused on the way how people are involved into a society, opening the "windows" of internet, social media platforms or anything that might cause the confusion in the regard of their research, too many twisted information, malfunction and major mal-misorganized definition of functions that I consider sounds odd enough to believe. I ought to say, it's a very good example of how a misconception of typology, that turned into a disastrous calamity to reach the butterfly effect of the environment.

[Number 9 large]

@Dazu's profile pic is SLI.

nah too much Fe

this is SLI

[Tallmo]

Is it Hitchens? He seems more like ILI I think.

nah too much Fe

this is SLI

[Number 9 large]

Is it Hitchens? He seems more like ILI I think.

well i guess we disagree

[xerx]

I avoid using Socionics these days because I believe it to be a stochastic phenomenon, and that the available type definitions are inexact and prone to massive variability, but I'll decloak for just this instance.

I know that's it isn't a common opinion, but I always thought that Christopher Hitchens was SLE. He was a highly adversarial individual who enjoyed starting quarrels, oftentimes unprovoked, and causing drama. He also led a self-destructive, hedonistic lifestyle that included alcohol and cigarettes.

His brother Peter is ILI for sure ('the critic'). According to him, the pair didn't have the best relationship.

[CR400AF]

I avoid using Socionics these days because I believe it to be a stochastic phenomenon, and that the available type definitions are inexact and prone to massive variability, but I'll decloak for just this instance.

I think only some socionists, such as Aushra, understood Jung. "Socionics" is essentially a name so there are many different "Socionics" since there are many different markets. For instance some like to type famous people and they are doing Socionics for fun. Some people claim that MBTI is more true to Jung while Socionics is a totally different typology. Once there is such a market, there will possibly be someone to develop this market.

The market is like a pyramid. There are much more people who use typology for fun than those who study typology rigorously.

[Adam Strange]

I think only some socionists, such as Aushra, understood Jung. "Socionics" is essentially a name so there are many different "Socionics" since there are many different markets. For instance some like to type famous people and they are doing Socionics for fun. Some people claim that MBTI is more true to Jung while Socionics is a totally different typology. Once there is such a market, there will possibly be someone to develop this market.

The market is like a pyramid. There are much more people who use typology for fun than those who study typology rigorously.

That's true of bras, too.

https://flaneur.me.uk/12/architectur...ngineered-bra/