2030's , 2040's ?
When will socionics be accepted publicly and globaly, used by intelligence agencies, taught at schools..?
Which decade do you predict socionics being accepted globaly?
2030's , 2040's ?
When will socionics be accepted publicly and globaly, used by intelligence agencies, taught at schools..?
I like to think it’s already being used by some intelligence agencies. There are some bored Russian spies on here who have nothing better to do than troll this forum because they’re posted up in a remote place like New Zealand or something.
Socionics as we use it now? Never. But some of its ideas have potential and may integrate with mainstream psychology at some point or some kind of "modern socionics", closer to current state of science will appear and get popular. 10-20 years for this, after this time I don't see a chance for anything resembling socionics to become popular, progress in AI and neuroscience should generate better typology from scratch at some point.
Hopefully never. I'd lose interest if Socionics / typology became dominated by normies who have jobs, their own cars, "careers", and nearly-paid off mortgages. If typology stopped being the domain of crazy psychotics and loners with personality disorders, I'd go hang out on the deep web with fucked up drifters on the margins of society.
Most likely never. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy Socionics and it has its merits, but it's nowhere near empirical enough to ever be generally accepted like you're imagining. I don't think the same is true for Jungian analysis generally though. I think Jung's ideas will continue to be used as a foundation for many great systems to come
“Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
— James Russell Lowell猫が生き甲斐
@xerx honestly this forum is such a weird little niche of the internet and I love it. Glad I'm not the only one here afraid of the normies lol
“Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
— James Russell Lowell
I try my best to put on a normie face, but this is where I belong tbhOriginally Posted by AWellArmedCat
Probably never and I'm happy for it because ppl use it un here as if it were astrology.
I don't
It will be 1210's. Just don't ask how because I'm not in mood of writing a scifi novel.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
You never know. Socionics might be forgotten for hundreds and thousands of years and disappear completeley. Until it's rediscovered and treated as some kind of arcane, esoteric knowledge which never went anywhere in society. Maybe someone accidentally reinvents it at some point without knowing that it already existed. Maybe only small parts survive or only the stuff developed in MBTI.
Taking into account how the MBTI works (With a thousand and one caricatured type descriptions that seem taken from Netflix series of low narrative quality, with an assignment of psychological traits and tastes so absurd as having high or low self-esteem, being OCD or whatever evidently externally dependent trait or outside of typology, with the incoherence with reality and the irrationality with which cognitive functions are defined like Si which is defined as having a good memory for example, with how simplistic and stupid the MBTI is in general, being little more than a fandom of adolescent turkeys) and seeing how in socionics this also happens to some extent today (A lot of socionics fans associating functions with academic disciplines such as STEM with logical functions or history and social sciences with ethical functions, when both IMs are related to preferences, structure ... of information, people who sincerely believe that being X or Y type is related to interest in one subject or another (Some people sincerely believe that to be interested in physics or programing you have to be Ti-ego, or for being interested on economics you have to be Te-ego, or to be interested in philosophy you have to be Ni-ego, and some even believe that Ni is actually about philosophy, or Ti about programing or IT or whatever), lack of contextualization and reasoning on how interest and abilities are formed, playing by social stereotypes irrelative to reality, which are also closely related to the North American way of life and culture, the superimposing of arbitrary typing methodologies as non-verbal behavior with too little room for evidence or directly first impressions, or the "I disagree with this person,thus he/she is my conflictor or some absurd caricature of a type that will paints him as horrible" above the methods that try to test either defined features or the expression of IM as defined in the theory or adapted but still more measurable...).
Seeing that in the current moment both the driver as the owner of all modern Western culture is the United States, and the tendency of American culture towards stupidity and simplification, as well as the general tendency of the masses to reject deepening and imbuing themselves in one field and prefer the simple and easy "truths" that don't make them think much about, have been signs that tell me that we are going in exactly the opposite direction. Possibly socionics would become more and more absurd and simplistic, concepts invented without base even in the empirical observation of people with extensive knowledge of the theory after making thousands of personalized diagnoses, but simply created by users of extensive social networks and Reddit-style forums or YouTube would slowly be memed into absolutes (socionics is vulnerable to this, being a decentralized discipline) and end up being even lower level than astrology, with thousands of stereotype based vine by type compilation videos like if it was MBTI, if it becomes popular in the west someday.
BTW I want to rant a little about another thing; a lot of socionist into integral typings tend to say that America is a Gamma quadra culture, when in fact it is either Beta or Delta culture. American culture is extremely aristocratic as defined by socionics, with certain options, careers, jobs being considered as "Low class" and "high class", with discrimination between "Groups" of people (and I'm not referring to racial discrimination) with the dismissal of the ones considered in the lower position (college dropouts, manual laborers, incels...) and an average aspiration to get to the perceived "higher class" position through the classically official channels of the system (Universities) sometimes destroying themselves financially in the process and all of it out of an absurd cultural sandcastle.
In reality, most ignore the changing and dynamic nature of reality and prefer to contract enormous debts to be paid through decades, in order to achieve a position of perceived high status through university (Sometimes being even incapable of finding a job after it) ignoring that by doing manual or "low-status" work they would have immediate money without having to pay an exponential debt (That could eventually be saved and invested, generating greater value) and that with the amount of capital needed to pursue a university career they probably don't even have interest in they could investigate a niche, learn how to create, position and grow an online website and social media accounts, buy a little bit of stock and slowly scale their store through ads, without much hustle, with a higher possibility of success as the amount of capital to invest in campaigns would be very high, and eventually reach financial independence and a superior income than a STEM graduate a lot of the times, and without depending on the state of the labor pool, yet I have the impression most would still choose the first option. The actual "Low class" people in americans society are the ones usually acting smarter than the "high class" ones, onlyfans thots are actually taking advantage of the present possibilities to a higher extent than industrial engineers. Lucky bastards, you have access to the biggest market in the world by birth while others need to find affiliates outside, pay excessive taxes to start selling even in their own frontiers, you have one of the lowest unemployment levels in the west, while in other parts people fight to tooth and nail to be able to work in what you consider "low status job" and you're wasting all you have in order to do what others tell you you have to do.
Before you say "Muh STEM or IT and you learn and make a Start-up" you just need to realize that blowing startups have usually been a result of highly innovative sites or enormous investments in marketing starting out with relatively big teams, and although there's good money to be made on AI applications that could make processes cheaper by replacing jobs (Example; AI copywriting tools) the moment you start you will do it with a huge debt and far less money, while you can learn online marketing for yourself even for free, learn SEO... and start either working as freelance, starting a service business or doing your own thing.
Also it is better long term to imbue yourself in a specific market outside of tech and start your own thing for less money and without exponentially growing loans to pay, and in the event of success earn enough to be financially independent, than wasting your teenage years contracting a huge debt, get out of college with a degree, and when you start investing in your field you have a huge loan to pay back and four or more years of 0 savings to start, situation in which the event of failure is far more catastrophic than in the previous. If you get into STEM or IT with a specific startup idea you might find out that what you need to do is impossible for a single person, and when you get out of college, you will have zero dollars to start, an exponentially growing loan, and the impossibility to start for lack of resources, while if you spend those four years living with your parents but working at a minimum wage job and saving it you would have saved 60.088 dollars to start buying equipment and hiring professionals if you are even that lazy to not learn for yourself or simply need someone with a college level knowledge, you have zero debt, and you can go get an even higher loan for your business. In that case, if you succeed, you will have contracted debt but for an actual reasonable reason.
Also, take a look into the "self development" fraudulent industry. There's a good portion of people making money out of useless courses and seminars in which they teach others how doing inconsequential shit that doesn't matter but is socially perceived as important is being productive.
The whole focus is on people with a twisted use of language in which doing th bed, cleaning the floor and running seven miles, as well as other socially favored activities are perceived to be productive, essentially defining productivity not as a state of working, reading, running or doing anything faster, better or for a longer period of time without burnout, but as a state in which you perfect the task that made up social stadards define as good or appropiate, and defining self-development not as becoming more constructive or developing the methods to be better in skills, knowledge or mentality, but as becoming less divergent and more in line with what your culture defines as "The standard" of what you have to be.
If you want to be productive, choose an activity, and start doing it. If you have some work to do, do your work properly and without cheating, develop methods to do your work faster with the same quality, or increase your experience with the task thus mastering it, it doesn't matter if you do it from 5 am to 5 pm or if you do it from 5 pm to 5 am. If you wake up at 5 am, make a perfect bed, start cleaning everything like you have OCD, write a journal, go out to do running, come back, meditate, and then start working until 5pm you will have wasted half the evening, you will essentially be far less productive than the average person. Yet most would prefer being, doing, thinking and saying what most of their enviroment does, and call that "self-development" and "productivity" when it it the actual opposite. Another good example about how american culture is centered around simplistic decontextualized stereotypes that mean nothing, and how american culture seems to be heavily centered around public opinions, even more than most cultures.
Last edited by RBRS; 06-08-2021 at 11:40 AM.
2050, just prior to the collapse of western civilisation.
ἀταραξία
we are the world
I'm thinking in similar ways. Socionics/Jung is such a fundamental discovery that it will be accepted at some point. It's just a matter of time, maybe hundreds of years or longer. Our current western civilization is very extroverted, but maybe a future civilization has become more introverted and is able to see these things more clearly.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
A good criterion to decide whether socionics is accepted globally or not, can be the appearance of state-certified diplomas delivered within prestigious universities. One can think of a psychology degree with a specialization in socionics, at Harvard. Now, we can wonder if such a thing is feasible or not in a near future. I might think about it later.
Unless Finland is much different in this regard, social sciences seem to have become focused exclusively on what can be empirically verified. Psychology for instance focuses almost exclusively on external behaviors; the only inward thoughts it seems to recognize are those directly linked to these behaviors. Jung and Freud have been thrown out; perhaps there’s some advantage to that, but also many of the advances they spearheaded have been abandoned (for instance, we’ve seemingly gone back to embracing the innocence of the child, a view which Freud should have destroyed long ago). I’m not sure what it would take to change this, or even if most social scientists see any problems with this current trend.
3000s
Idk, it could have its day. It seems almost everything becomes a fad eventually.
although the thing with some other personality theories like MBTI is they are a lot more simple and approachable. I mean even a lot of people that are into personality theories like MBTI don’t always delve into socionics. I seriously doubt most people would be interested enough to delve that deeply into it. Not only that, but if there’s no way to ‘confirm’ a type, It’s basically almost the same level as MBTI with that imo.
if type could be proven, it would be a game changer.
Ya, I'm an mbti enthusiast, but I never wrapped my mind on socionics. There's some good online descriptions, and it can be fun to play with masks and image to get the siphon or codex on what makes us redirect and define things in certain terms.
On a more practical note, type answers very little. We have so many interests and soul fluctuations that diversify and fissure us off greatly from the norm.
As of now, we can refer to the types as "Different Psychological Categorizations", and not a true science.
No that science matters so much to me though, more like the implications of it, to fly with dragons, or to germinate in the jungle of new travels and flavors of the fruit loops.
Chinese Fortune Cookie ~ A fair face may fade, but a beautiful soul lasts forever. Lucky Numbers - 53, 10, 29, 14, 1, 21
Mr. Mime = Mastermind
Marius Florin aka LeoSuperCluster as Raging Bolt the Raikou number 1021 and SolitaryWalker brought glory to the years of Silver and forged Pichu, wisdom of force and flair to exhibit dinosaur questing pointers electrocuting cinema and blueprints of emporiums to undertow flows jungle tossing galaxy spanning shivers of essence gems and portals of roads to destruction and arboretums folding castles and swordsmanship of dreams and counters to pleasant vibrations and holy water sprouting evanescent stars and puzzles of grades to saffron climax
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...k-2024-edition
Probably 30-40 years down the road if it does happen.
That seems to be the time gap for when something is too weird/loser/nerdy/abnormal and when it is accepted more into the Karen mainstream. Like for example in the 80s it was really off putting and weird to be a computer geek I think, or even use/own a computer. Then by the mid 2000s or so it was common for every Karen to post what they were doing on facebook about every aspect of their mundane lives.
Weirdos/nerds/losers/outcasts/misfits are always ahead of the game and everybody always ends up following us rather than the other way around (Like that Glee song Loser Like Me) - but the price we pay for being that way is being discriminated against, being social outcasts, being looked down upon- not fitting in, etc. It's not so bad. Everything has a price after all! (Te)
Now socionics then might be changed to be more acceptable and less offensive in ways- which happens to everything. Like I just read some article Google is modifying it's search results to be less "toxic" and 'more appropriate' cuz virtue signaling gives them a hard-on and it always has. What they consider to be 'toxic' is probably not what the average person considers to be all that bad- so I'm kind of wary about that. But the internet hasn't really been natural or fun since 2009 or so.
I should probably clarify. I don't think people should use (or be allowed to use) the internet to commit sexual abuse, to traffic little kids or anybody else, to destroy or terrorize people. But I am wary about the attacks of freedom of speech & the freedom to be who we are. I don't think people should be 'bullied' either but that can be a gray area.
I don't really like when society tries to be too clean because I find it hypocritical and annoying- and it just pushes certain underground things to be even more toxic in a way. You don't really get rid of anything bad as much as you make it more appealing to be that way because it's even more against 'The Rules' now.
I kinda fear that in the future everything will be so "appropriate" in this suffocating, needless way. People that are really the most awful and the most Toxic will rule the world under the guise that they are more righteous and better than everybody else- so they deserve to lord over others. If you use the wrong word even once- even as a joke or even in a heartfelt/friendship way- you will be immediately killed by a robotic Illuminati Laser. Since it's too difficult and annoying to properly gauge "noble intent" for most people- it's much easier to just make some blanket rule that's toxic and then if somebody is 'toxic'- they instantly get lasered by an Illuminati Robot.
George Orwell's 2064.
We need a celebrity sponsor.
Perfect
In 20 years
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I don't know. I'm not optimistic though.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
