Should Quadra Values Be Taken Seriously?

[anndelise]

Those mostly just end describing people's preferred politics (e.g. Conservatives ↑Purity, Liberals ↑Fairness, Libertarians ↑Liberty…). Can't see much correlation with Socionics (but we might be agreeing).

I came back to delete that post before you responded. I guess I wasn't fast enough. This isn't much of a conversation I want to get into. But yeah, I think much of the "quadra values" often described are BS. Especially when political/moral labels are being attributed to any quadra. Such ones like: NTs and SFs are individualistic or NFs and STs are conformative...these irk me. Especially the ones that place a political label on a quadra...while forgetting the context and influences of the changing Russia politics happening at the time the originators were coming up with this stuff.

If people want to talk about ethical/moral values, socionics isn't it. The two that I listed are far more useful in understanding a person's or group's values.

The only real acceptable quadra values would be along the lines of "Delta values Ne, Fi, Si, Te".
Or in aspectonics terms: Delta values =
* implicit states (static NF),
* explicit dynamics (dynamic ST),
* abstract objects (NeTe)
* and experiential fields (SiFi)

[mfckrz]

The only real acceptable quadra values would be along the lines of "Delta values Ne, Fi, Si, Te".
Or in aspectonics terms: Delta values =
* implicit states (static NF),
* explicit dynamics (dynamic ST),
* abstract objects (NeTe)
* and experiential fields (SiFi)

That's how I try to construe it too (e.g. γ = Explicit Objects + Implicit Fields)