Learn Socionics - Become a Socionist

[World Socionics]

Some of you might be interested to hear about a new project I will be undertaking next month. Others, perhaps less so, but it's still worth reaching out to those who could benefit from this. Yes, it's blatant advertising, but it's relevant and helpful to people who are trying to learn a theory with such a high barrier of entry. Help me to help people, because I simply don't have the means to spend every minute of my weekends and evenings preparing something like this for free. If you are a detractor of mine and start calling me a 'con man' from the cover of anonymity then I will gladly invite you to hold me to account on my YouTube channel live, because I believe that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Starting in September this year, I will be delivering a 12-session, online course in Socionics, which I hope will be comprehensive enough to take anyone, whether a beginner, or more intermediate, to an advanced understanding of both the Classical theory (Model A) and how to use it to type and understand other people. Everything will be done over Zoom in the form of live webinars each weekend, finishing in late November. The format will be part-lecture, but also with interactive exercises and the use of break-out rooms so that people have the chance to practise what they are learning.

As I have been forced, in the meticulous construction of this course, to grapple with many of the trickier ideas making up Classical Socionics, there will also be some ‘fresh’ material never seen or talked about in quite the same way before. This is not truly ‘original’ in that I have not added anything new to the theory, but rather, I have spent hours each night thinking about how some of the stranger parts, left in the dusty corners of the model, might actually make sense, and I think this has unlocked some useful insights for my understanding personality type that I would like to share.

The confirmed dates for the 2022 course are as follows:
• Session 1 - Elements - Saturday 3rd September
• Session 2 - Functions - Saturday 10th September
• Session 3 - Small Groups - Saturday 17th September
• Session 4 - Alphas - Saturday 24th September
• Session 5 - Betas - Saturday 1st October
• Session 6 - Gammas - Sunday 9th October
• Session 7 - Deltas - Saturday 15th October
• Session 8 - Relationships - Sunday 23rd October
• Session 9 - Typing I - Sunday 30th October
• Session 10 - Typing II - Saturday 5th November
• Session 11 - Typing III - Sunday 13th November
• Session 12 - Conclusion & Assignment - Sunday 20th November

If you cannot attend some of the dates, that will be fine. I will be recording every session and these will be made available to all who have signed up, so that no one falls behind. All who successfully complete the course, including the assignment in the final session, will be sent a ‘WSS Socionist’ certificate.

This is technically a pilot; I have never given this particular course before in this level of detail, which means exact durations of webinars may run between 1 and 2 hours. To account for this, the price for the full course is discounted at £240 GBP but will go up when I repeat this course next year.

[Exodus]

Some of you might be interested to hear about a new project I will be undertaking next month. Others, perhaps less so, but it's still worth reaching out to those who could benefit from this. Yes, it's blatant advertising, but it's relevant and helpful to people who are trying to learn a theory with such a high barrier of entry. Help me to help people, because I simply don't have the means to spend every minute of my weekends and evenings preparing something like this for free. If you are a detractor of mine and start calling me a 'con man' from the cover of anonymity then I will gladly invite you to hold me to account on my YouTube channel live, because I believe that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Starting in September this year, I will be delivering a 12-session, online course in Socionics, which I hope will be comprehensive enough to take anyone, whether a beginner, or more intermediate, to an advanced understanding of both the Classical theory (Model A) and how to use it to type and understand other people. Everything will be done over Zoom in the form of live webinars each weekend, finishing in late November. The format will be part-lecture, but also with interactive exercises and the use of break-out rooms so that people have the chance to practise what they are learning.

As I have been forced, in the meticulous construction of this course, to grapple with many of the trickier ideas making up Classical Socionics, there will also be some ‘fresh’ material never seen or talked about in quite the same way before. This is not truly ‘original’ in that I have not added anything new to the theory, but rather, I have spent hours each night thinking about how some of the stranger parts, left in the dusty corners of the model, might actually make sense, and I think this has unlocked some useful insights for my understanding personality type that I would like to share.

The confirmed dates for the 2022 course are as follows:
• Session 1 - Elements - Saturday 3rd September
• Session 2 - Functions - Saturday 10th September
• Session 3 - Small Groups - Saturday 17th September
• Session 4 - Alphas - Saturday 24th September
• Session 5 - Betas - Saturday 1st October
• Session 6 - Gammas - Sunday 9th October
• Session 7 - Deltas - Saturday 15th October
• Session 8 - Relationships - Sunday 23rd October
• Session 9 - Typing I - Sunday 30th October
• Session 10 - Typing II - Saturday 5th November
• Session 11 - Typing III - Sunday 13th November
• Session 12 - Conclusion & Assignment - Sunday 20th November

If you cannot attend some of the dates, that will be fine. I will be recording every session and these will be made available to all who have signed up, so that no one falls behind. All who successfully complete the course, including the assignment in the final session, will be sent a ‘WSS Socionist’ certificate.

This is technically a pilot; I have never given this particular course before in this level of detail, which means exact durations of webinars may run between 1 and 2 hours. To account for this, the price for the full course is discounted at £240 GBP but will go up when I repeat this course next year.

If you would like to capitalise on this early opportunity, please feel free to post here or email back with any questions, and I will happily provide you with more information. I am taking sign-ups on a first paid, first served basis, as too many people at once will be difficult to manage in a webinar. If you would like to sign up to the course, I ask only for a quarter of the full price (£60 GBP) to be paid via PayPal to worldsocionics@hotmail.com. That will be enough to ensure your place on the course for this year. You may of course choose to pay the full £240 GBP at once, or £120 GBP, but that will only be necessary prior to September 3rd when the course starts.

If your interest is piqued, but you would like some more information prior to making a commitment, please email me or comment on here, and I look forward to answering your questions.

"which I hope will be comprehensive enough to take anyone, whether a beginner, or more intermediate, to an advanced understanding of both the Classical theory (Model A) and how to use it to type and understand other people"

I am not against the existence of courses and certifications but you should know as well as I do that people aren't going to be advanced typists after 24 hours of classes. That's something that takes years of practical experience typing people. At most this should be advertised as a beginner introductory class.

"As I have been forced, in the meticulous construction of this course, to grapple with many of the trickier ideas making up Classical Socionics, there will also be some ‘fresh’ material never seen or talked about in quite the same way before. This is not truly ‘original’ in that I have not added anything new to the theory, but rather, I have spent hours each night thinking about how some of the stranger parts, left in the dusty corners of the model, might actually make sense, and I think this has unlocked some useful insights for my understanding personality type that I would like to share."

What I get from this is that you are going to promote your speculative ideas about Reinin dichotomies and the contact/inert dichotomy that no one agrees with. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[World Socionics]

"which I hope will be comprehensive enough to take anyone, whether a beginner, or more intermediate, to an advanced understanding of both the Classical theory (Model A) and how to use it to type and understand other people"

I am not against the existence of courses and certifications but you should know as well as I do that people aren't going to be advanced typists after 24 hours of classes. That's something that takes years of practical experience typing people. At most this should be advertised as a beginner introductory class.

24 hours of instruction. 3 months' worth of practice and familiarisation. The goal is to give people 1) an advanced understanding of classical socionics theory, 2) a robust knowledge of how to go about typing people in a multitude of contexts, and 3) a decent amount of experience in attempting to do so and getting accurate results.

I'd say that's more than a 'beginner' introductory class. If that's what you say a 'beginner' is, then I think you'll have a hard time finding any, because everyone is either 'not even a beginner', with only a sketchy theoretical knowledge, or else advanced (or very confused) from years of figuring a lot of this out on their own.

"As I have been forced, in the meticulous construction of this course, to grapple with many of the trickier ideas making up Classical Socionics, there will also be some ‘fresh’ material never seen or talked about in quite the same way before. This is not truly ‘original’ in that I have not added anything new to the theory, but rather, I have spent hours each night thinking about how some of the stranger parts, left in the dusty corners of the model, might actually make sense, and I think this has unlocked some useful insights for my understanding personality type that I would like to share."

What I get from this is that you are going to promote your speculative ideas about Reinin dichotomies and the contact/inert dichotomy that no one agrees with. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Not just Reinin dichotomies. There is also some stuff that you inspired me to think about. The 6th and 7th Information Dichotomies, which are actually kind of crucial to Aristocratic/Democratic

My ideas about contact/inert are not controversial. I simply clarified what the pattern of 1, 4, 6 and 7, vs. 2, 3, 5 and 8 is. You say no one agrees with this. Who disagrees that the Leading, Mobilising, Vulnerable and Ignoring exist on their own terms and do not defer to others? The reverse of that quality, being flexible and open to changing with external input is exactly why the Creative function is called the 'creative'. Is the Suggestive, similarly, not open to input? Is the Role not characteristically different to the Vulnerable by its reluctant attempt to adapt? This should be terra firma. That it isn't yet is our collective failure.

The Reinin dichotomy you seem to take issue with is Asking/Declaring, which is less obvious. You need to first work out Aristocratic/Democratic, for which I'd say it's worth thinking more about 1) what it means to have 2x Quadras that bring together doubly-involved and doubly-detached types, and another 2x Quadras that bring together doubly-external and doubly-internal types, and 2) correspond any insights from that with what we already observe to be the stated motivations of people of each Quadra.

From there, it's just about thinking which types within the Quadra seem to immediately 'get it' in terms of Quadral motivations, and which in theory should 'get it', but often don't. It's worth also thinking about what role Static and Dynamic can play in this.

Getting Aristocratic/Democratic and Asking/Declaring pinned down has opened the gateway to considering Positivist/Negativist and Process/Result in a way that is appropriately nuanced and not dumb overgeneralisations.

[Exodus]

24 hours of instruction. 3 months' worth of practice and familiarisation. The goal is to give people 1) an advanced understanding of classical socionics theory, 2) a robust knowledge of how to go about typing people in a multitude of contexts, and 3) a decent amount of experience in attempting to do so and getting accurate results.

I'd say that's more than a 'beginner' introductory class. If that's what you say a 'beginner' is, then I think you'll have a hard time finding any, because everyone is either 'not even a beginner', with only a sketchy theoretical knowledge, or else advanced (or very confused) from years of figuring a lot of this out on their own.

Three months isn't enough. If the study was extremely intensive (and in person, with real examples) then maybe you could get people to a decent level after a year. Given that this is still a side gig for you I doubt you have the resources to do that. In any case, you don't know that people are going to be at an advanced level after this course, much less intermediate.

Not just Reinin dichotomies.

So yes, Reinin dichotomies.

There is also some stuff that you inspired me to think about. The 6th and 7th Information Dichotomies, which are actually kind of crucial to Aristocratic/Democratic

My ideas about contact/inert are not controversial. I simply clarified what the pattern of 1, 4, 6 and 7, vs. 2, 3, 5 and 8 is. You say no one agrees with this. Who disagrees that the Leading, Mobilising, Vulnerable and Ignoring exist on their own terms and do not defer to others? The reverse of that quality, being flexible and open to changing with external input is exactly why the Creative function is called the 'creative'. Is the Suggestive, similarly, not open to input? Is the Role not characteristically different to the Vulnerable by its reluctant attempt to adapt? This should be terra firma. That it isn't yet is our collective failure.

As I've explained before, you can't observe this quality independently, it's defined by the relationship with the element in the same domain. The leading function is "stubborn" because it's 4P i.e. stubbornly adhered to, the ignoring function is stubborn because it's 1P and stubbornly rejected. Not the same thing at all. You can observe that an element seems to be one or the other, but the middle ranges are much harder to perceive. I would never say "oh they have flexible Fe so it's definitely not mobilizing", that doesn't work. Nobody does stuff like that except you and maybe some other WSS people.

The Reinin dichotomy you seem to take issue with is Asking/Declaring, which is less obvious. You need to first work out Aristocratic/Democratic, for which I'd say it's worth thinking more about 1) what it means to have 2x Quadras that bring together doubly-involved and doubly-detached types, and another 2x Quadras that bring together doubly-external and doubly-internal types, and 2) correspond any insights from that with what we already observe to be the stated motivations of people of each Quadra.

I take issue with all of the non-presence dichotomies. While Aristocratic/Democratic does seem more important on a theoretical level (not a practical level necessarily), you haven't presented anything definitive for it yet. This is clearly in the realm of hypothetical, unproven ideas and shouldn't be taught in an introductory course.

Getting Aristocratic/Democratic and Asking/Declaring pinned down has opened the gateway to considering Positivist/Negativist and Process/Result in a way that is appropriately nuanced and not dumb overgeneralisations.

There is nothing "pinned down" here as far as I can see.

[Not A Communist Shill]

No Socionics idea qualifies as theoretical. It's just speculation.

[World Socionics]

Three months isn't enough. If the study was extremely intensive (and in person, with real examples) then maybe you could get people to a decent level after a year. Given that this is still a side gig for you I doubt you have the resources to do that. In any case, you don't know that people are going to be at an advanced level after this course, much less intermediate.

To have an advanced understanding of the theory, they need to understand Model A properly. They will have that understanding if they attend the courses.

With that, and a knowledge of good processes for typing, becoming very good at typing is just a matter of time, and I'm not claiming that said time will be contained in three months, but they will be given a decent amount of experience in applying what they have learnt, with a third of the course being dedicated to that.

So yes, Reinin dichotomies.

Yes, nothing wrong with Reinin dichotomies, provided they are defined correctly. By the end of the course and having passed the assignment, each newly qualified socionist will know the 7 information dichotomies, 7 function dichotomies, and all 15 type dichotomies, including many of the ways they can be combined to form small groups.

As I've explained before, you can't observe this quality independently, it's defined by the relationship with the element in the same domain. The leading function is "stubborn" because it's 4P i.e. stubbornly adhered to, the ignoring function is stubborn because it's 1P and stubbornly rejected. Not the same thing at all. You can observe that an element seems to be one or the other, but the middle ranges are much harder to perceive. I would never say "oh they have flexible Fe so it's definitely not mobilizing", that doesn't work. Nobody does stuff like that except you and maybe some other WSS people.

I don't follow. If you can observe someone being stubbornly for or against something, then you can observe stubbornness. It's easy to see stubborn Logic and Sensation in yourself, for instance. I've even come up with small groups specifically for Stubborn/Flexible. It's pretty important for inter-type relations, allowing us to explain why duality is better than activation, and why extinguishment and conflict often are the most frustrating relationships. When stubbornness and values are both aligned, it creates competition, and when stubbornness is aligned, but values are opposed, it creates a loggerhead effect.

I take issue with all of the non-presence dichotomies. While Aristocratic/Democratic does seem more important on a theoretical level (not a practical level necessarily), you haven't presented anything definitive for it yet. This is clearly in the realm of hypothetical, unproven ideas and shouldn't be taught in an introductory course.

Non presence dichotomies? What are these?

Aristocratic/Democratic, or rather Identifying/Transforming describes whether the type is trying to 1) occupy a certain, absolute position in relation to the universe, or 2) enact absolute change upon a certain locus. Abstract stuff, but enables one to clearly articulate the terrain on which Alpha and Gamma, as well as Beta and Delta, clash and form dialectics.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

1. This isn't "helping" anybody- it's exploiting them

2. You are a con man, and I'm about as "anonymous" as as a str8 male in a Sasha Grey porno convention. Your comment assumed people who call you out are "hiding something" or have something to hide- I think that's a mistake used to deflect responsibility. Which reveals to me you know what you're doing is shady, but you're trying to justify yourself. It's like when Regina Hurt would project and said people who do wrong are 'trying to get away with something' because that's what SHE would do. I'm not a Rogue class- I have shitty stealth abilities and I'm piss poor at hiding anything.

3. To be fair (real orientation notwithstanding) you are faggy and theatrical, and I like faggy and theatrical. So I'm not saying I dislike everything about you or anything. And I don't think *you* are without value just because you are trying to scam on something that is without much value. As the beautiful Lady Olenna implies, there's always worse LoL

4. This could still qualify as spam & solicitation which is against the forum's rules, but I'll let other moderators make the call.

5. There is no fifth point, but I like the number 5 better than 4 - so hi.

[World Socionics]

1. This isn't "helping" anybody- it's exploiting them

2. You are a con man, and I'm about as "anonymous" as as a str8 male in a Sasha Grey porno convention. Your comment assumed people who call you out are "hiding something" or have something to hide- I think that's a mistake used to deflect responsibility. Which reveals to me you know what you're doing is shady, but you're trying to justify yourself. It's like when Regina Hurt would project and said people who do wrong are 'trying to get away with something' because that's what SHE would do. I'm not a Rogue class- I have shitty stealth abilities and I'm piss poor at hiding anything.

3. To be fair (real orientation notwithstanding) you are faggy and theatrical, and I like faggy and theatrical. So I'm not saying I dislike everything about you or anything. And I don't think *you* are without value just because you are trying to scam on something that is without much value. As the beautiful Lady Olenna implies, there's always worse LoL

4. This could still qualify as spam & solicitation which is against the forum's rules, but I'll let other moderators make the call.

5. There is no fifth point, but I like the number 5 better than 4 - so hi.

Hi there. Pre-empting trashy comments doesn't mean I am guilty of what said trashy comments claim. That's a trashy thing to say. I just know what some of the people on this forum can be like.

I have no clue who you are, so until you make yourself known to me, I will have to assume that you are operating under the cover of anonymity. Who on earth are you?

What I offer is no different from attending any other paid training course. I have a level of knowledge and experience in a niche field that is currently only shared by a handful of people, and I'm offering that knowledge and the tools for building experience to people for some money (and not much money at that). If that's exploitation, then attending private school is exploitative. There is a much stronger argument for Universities being exploitative (largely due to inflated prices and societal pressures) than for what I am doing.

Either way, as you piped up, you get the opportunity to come on my channel, and argue in public why I am a con man. How does that sound to you?

[Metaphor]

I suppose anything but Session 8 and 12 are somewhat relevant.
Albeit, not quite sure as to why you need 3 typing sessions or even 4 sessions to run the quadra. That doesn't seem to be proper enough.
Also, if you could do it for free, that might be more beneficial to do so than promoting it as a label for business instead.

[Exodus]

Yes, nothing wrong with Reinin dichotomies, provided they are defined correctly. By the end of the course and having passed the assignment, each newly qualified socionist will know the 7 information dichotomies, 7 function dichotomies, and all 15 type dichotomies, including many of the ways they can be combined to form small groups.

You'll have to elaborate on the definitions, I have never heard of any reasonable definitions for these dichotomies.

I don't follow. If you can observe someone being stubbornly for or against something, then you can observe stubbornness. It's easy to see stubborn Logic and Sensation in yourself, for instance. I've even come up with small groups specifically for Stubborn/Flexible. It's pretty important for inter-type relations, allowing us to explain why duality is better than activation, and why extinguishment and conflict often are the most frustrating relationships. When stubbornness and values are both aligned, it creates competition, and when stubbornness is aligned, but values are opposed, it creates a loggerhead effect.

ex. You can observe that someone has 4P Se if they tend to be very loud and dominating, aggressive, etc. 1P Se can be observed as someone being very antithetical to conflict and soft etc. The fact that these are separately observable does not imply that their union 4P+1P i.e. stubborn is "observable" - if that were the definition of observable then every Reinin dichotomy is observable because, for example, you can determine that someone is a Questioner or Declarer by simply figuring out their type by actual observable dichotomies and deducing it from there, so trivially all of the Reinin dichotomies would be "observable".

And it is generally more difficult to observe the opposite, that a function is contact / in the middle priority range - if I was deciding between mirrors I might say that something seems less likely to be the mobilizing function if it's less present but again, it needs to be observable on the first level, throughout the whole range of types. There is no observation that would lead me to say that a type has either valued and cautious Se or subdued and bold Se as an isolated conclusion.

Non presence dichotomies? What are these?

The presence dichotomies are SeNi valuing vs SiNe valuing, FeTi valuing vs FiTe valuing, intuition vs sensing, logic vs ethics, and introversion vs extroversion. These are the only ones that can with any certainty be called observable in general.

Aristocratic/Democratic, or rather Identifying/Transforming describes whether the type is trying to 1) occupy a certain, absolute position in relation to the universe, or 2) enact absolute change upon a certain locus. Abstract stuff, but enables one to clearly articulate the terrain on which Alpha and Gamma, as well as Beta and Delta, clash and form dialectics.

Needs much more elaboration. Not even really sure which is supposed to be which from this description.

[World Socionics]

I suppose anything but Session 8 and 12 are somewhat relevant.
Albeit, not quite sure as to why you need 3 typing sessions or even 4 sessions to run the quadra. That doesn't seem to be proper enough.
Also, if you could do it for free, that might be more beneficial to do so than promoting it as a label for business instead.

Well, understanding how the Relationships are meant to work is important for then applying what they have learnt to other people. The Assignment will be good to ensure people have paid attention throughout the course and have used the three Typing sessions to get in valuable practice to help with that Assignment.

Each of the 4 sessions named after a Quadra cover all 4 types in each Quadra in detail, so it will take up a good amount of time to be a dedicated session.

Can't afford to dedicate all of my free time to creating something for free. With my mortgage and high taxes, my main job is not enough, so if I couldn't earn money from doing this, I simply wouldn't be able to do it, and I'd probably be consulting in some other field. Plus people who aren't willing to pay for something often are less likely to take what is given to them seriously.

[World Socionics]

You'll have to elaborate on the definitions, I have never heard of any reasonable definitions for these dichotomies.



ex. You can observe that someone has 4P Se if they tend to be very loud and dominating, aggressive, etc. 1P Se can be observed as someone being very antithetical to conflict and soft etc. The fact that these are separately observable does not imply that their union 4P+1P i.e. stubborn is "observable" - if that were the definition of observable then every Reinin dichotomy is observable because, for example, you can determine that someone is a Questioner or Declarer by simply figuring out their type by actual observable dichotomies and deducing it from there, so trivially all of the Reinin dichotomies would be "observable".

And it is generally more difficult to observe the opposite, that a function is contact / in the middle priority range - if I was deciding between mirrors I might say that something seems less likely to be the mobilizing function if it's less present but again, it needs to be observable on the first level, throughout the whole range of types. There is no observation that would lead me to say that a type has either valued and cautious Se or subdued and bold Se as an isolated conclusion.



The presence dichotomies are SeNi valuing vs SiNe valuing, FeTi valuing vs FiTe valuing, intuition vs sensing, logic vs ethics, and introversion vs extroversion. These are the only ones that can with any certainty be called observable in general.



Needs much more elaboration. Not even really sure which is supposed to be which from this description.

Your point around the observability of 4P vs 1P is sound. Nevertheless, it is based on an understanding of 'observability' as X Y Z traits, rather than tending to hold a fixed position in a particular domain. Simply noting that the person tends to object and be insistent about X area not being in line with what they want, regardless of what exactly they want X to be, is possible, and is something that has helped a lot to elevate my typing ability in recent years. It has allowed me to pinpoint quite quickly, whether a person is an IEI, rather than, say an EIE or an SEI, for instance, because their Sensation will be Flexible, rather than Stubborn. There is a way of teaching this that is helpful, but yes, if we try to teach it in the way you are suggesting, that would not be helpful.

I could go into detail describing what I think for each Reinin dichotomy for you, but then that would spoil a lot of the course

Thanks for your explanation of 'presence'.

[Poptart]

Two leaders of rival socionics camps battle for power and position on the16types.com.

@World Socionics is founder and self-anointed king of WSS.

@Exodus is our benevolent totalitarian ruler at sedecology.com.

The two rivals are striking with the power of unbounded Ti.

With victory in reach for both, who will seize this critical moment to deliver the decisive blow?

[Exodus]

Your point around the observability of 4P vs 1P is sound. Nevertheless, it is based on an understanding of 'observability' as X Y Z traits, rather than tending to hold a fixed position in a particular domain. Simply noting that the person tends to object and be insistent about X area not being in line with what they want, regardless of what exactly they want X to be, is possible, and is something that has helped a lot to elevate my typing ability in recent years. It has allowed me to pinpoint quite quickly, whether a person is an IEI, rather than, say an EIE or an SEI, for instance, because their Sensation will be Flexible, rather than Stubborn. There is a way of teaching this that is helpful, but yes, if we try to teach it in the way you are suggesting, that would not be helpful.

I've seen you give examples of this before and they were not convincing, I found the reasoning flawed.

I could go into detail describing what I think for each Reinin dichotomy for you, but then that would spoil a lot of the course

Elaborating on one would suffice, for example Aristocratic/Democratic. If this is just your private reasoning then I will continue to assume it's unproven speculation along the lines of the other ideas that you've come up with so far (most of which I don't find convincing).