Tag Archives: Sociology

Personality Types: The Result of Humanity’s Evolution?

A Sensors role is to maintain and protect society, and they tend to think in a one-by-one manner, when it comes to concepts.

An intuitive’s role in society is to innovate, design, enhance, invent, and lead during times of great change or chaos. They tend to think about a million different things at the same time, lol.

I like to look at personality types from an evolutionary standpoint.

Personality types evolved into the psyche of individuals, because each type of personality carries out a certain role or function in society. Therefore, it is the mix of all different types, each taking up a certain portion of the population.

Period.

The percentage of a specific type when compared to the entire population is not relevant to how important that type is.

Society, Nature, The World, Time, Magic, God, and Mayor McCheese all combined forces to figure out what society needed to survive, progress, and continue to enhance.

Advertisements

Sensors vs Intuitives – What Role Does Each Type Play in Society?

I hear often, when talking to another intuitive person for the first time about personality types, the same general complaint:

“So and so” [A Sensing Type] thinks I’m weird. [An Intuitive Type]

The best is the look on the person’s face, when I respond with: “Well, they (The Sensing Type) are absolutely correct.”

“Weird,” by definition, is something that is abnormal, uncanny, strange, unusual, or unexpected.

So, the Sensing-dominant person is correct for multiple reasons:

STATISTICS AND PROBABILITY

Right off the bat, 70% of the population prefers Sensing, versus only 30% favoring Intuition. This means that intuitives are actually less likely to exist, according to pure statistics.

The Sensing Type person is probably “normal,” which means conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected. They are significantly more populous in society, making them more expected.

20140510-012459.jpg

Introduction to Socionics

What is socionics?

Socionics is a theory of human interaction based on fixed patterns of information processing known as “socionic types.” A socionic type (there are 16 of them) is a description of some very fundamental ways in which a person’s psyche works. These psychic qualities define to a large degree a person’s relationships with others, his or her perception of life as a whole, and the niche he or she strives to occupy among people.

Each person’s psyche is a lopsided construction that attempts to pursue certain kinds of information (stimuli) while minimizing others. This is what socionic type describes. This lopsidedness creates a need for social cooperation. The nature of close cooperation (relationships) between people depends on how well-suited people’s lopsided psychic tendencies are to each other. This is what intertype relations are about.

The origins of socionics

As the story goes, founder of socionics Aushra Augusta (she shortened her last name from “Augustinavichiute” to “Augusta” to make it easier for foreigners) was mulling over fundamental issues of human existence (“why are some relationships good and others bad despite everyone’s intention to have good ones?”) in Vilnius, Lithuania in the 1970s, when she came across a number of typological systems that influenced her thoughts — Kretschmer’s psychosomatic types (i.e. endomorphs, mesomorphs, and ectomorphs), Kempinsky’s (now a forgotten Polish psychiatrist) concept of “information metabolism,” and — most of all — Carl Jung’s typology of psychological types.

Augusta created symbols to represent the functions described by Carl Jung and — together with a circle of fellow researchers/hobbyists — eventually created what is known as the “socionic model of the psyche” — a neat description of the psyche where each of the 8 information elements has its place in each person’s psyche. This was quite a development on Jung’s typology and introduced many new concepts, including the mechanisms that explain how types interact.

Socionic types

The 16 socionic types differ on four axes (called ‘dichotomies’): rationality/irrationality, extraversion/introversion, intuition/sensing, and logic/ethics. Each type has one characteristic from each of the dichotomies, making 16 possible combinations. This does not mean there is a complete absence of the opposite mechanism, however. It means that one is more flexible and multi-faceted, while the other is more rigid and simplistic.

Although types often display similar values, life strategies, general behavior, and facial expressions, such traits such as IQ, musical talent, sports abilities, charisma, “personal power,” etc. are little related to type. A review of how socionists have typed famous people will demonstrate this. No type is inherently “predisposed” for success or failure in life. A common error of socionics enthusiasts is to try to relate non-socionic traits to socionic types.

In addition, socionics does not view type structure as being so rigid that a person can change little in life. One’s positive or negative thinking patterns, overall outlook on life, and emotional health are not tied to type and are quite flexible. However, socionic type is one of the things — along with inborn physiological traits — that does not change, even if outward behavior, emotional states, and attitudes do. Socionic type describes psychic mechanisms so “deep” that they are difficult to gain a full awareness of, much less modify in some way (but then, why would you want to modify them??).

quadraae8

Intertype relations

The basic difference between socionics and other typologies is socionics’ theory of intertype relations. Socionics is not a typology of personality, but a typology of perceptual traits that define one’s relationships with others. Hence, we should not be surprised to see significant personality differences between individuals of the same socionic type — as long as we see that there is a similar pattern of intertype relations.

Intertype relations describe the nature of interaction and information interchange between two people at a close psychological distance by describing how partners’ psychic functions interrelate. These socionic relationships range from very difficult and potentially harmful to one’s self-realization to very beneficial and pleasant to the psyche. Intertype relations most influence one’s informal relationships with others, where one chooses friends based on pleasure and mutual benefit (cooperation).

Duality and dual relations

Socionics_duality_ILE-SEI   ILE & SEI

A unique aspect of socionics is the discovery of complementary psychic structures. Jung and his followers recognized a particular attraction between individuals with certain leading functions, but these observations were not developed into a full-fledged theory, and the Meyers-Briggs system does not seem to address them at all.

Each of the 16 socionic types has its ‘dual’ type. The essence of dual relations is that the natural information output of one type is the preferred information input of the other. Having a dual or dual around stimulates one to use one’s strengths as much as possible. Even their mere physical presence tends to exert a calming and balancing influence. Dual relations develop around the strongest functions of each partner and keep mental and physical functioning balanced, while directing partners’ energy towards constructive and rewarding activities.

Socionics and the MBTI

At some point Augusta and her associates learned of Isabel Briggs Myers’ and her mother Katharine Cook Briggs’ development of Jung’s typology across the ocean in the United States. Newcomers to socionics in the West often have to face the difficulty of trying to distinguish between the two typologies. They are fundamentally different and cannot be treated as “the same types, but with different type names.”

Those who look deeply into socionics and the MBTI recognize that socionics’ theoretical apparatus is more systematic and logical in nature — and simply larger. Indeed, socionics was created by a “thinking” type, while the MBTI was created by “feeling” types (a quick review of sites on the two fields will make this clear). That is just the beginning of the differences.

I personally, of course, find socionics to be a big improvement on the MBTI, but I’m sure there are ardent followers of the MBTI that hold the opposite opinion.

The four socionic dichotomies appear to be very similar to the dichotomies used by the MBTI system. However, close inquiry reveals that there are many subtle differences. If you assume the dichotomies are the same and equate each socionic type to an MBTI type, some socionic types will overlap to a large degree with their MBTI counterparts, others will partially overlap, and yet others will seem to be completely different. If the types were truly equivalent, a similar theory of intertype relations would have arisen in the MBTI system — but there is none. On the whole, MBTI and socionics types seem to correlate in roughly 30% of cases. That is not nearly enough to consider the two typologies close approximations of each other.

The socionics community

There is a large socionics community across the Russian-speaking world. In many if not most large cities of the former Soviet Union there are people who hold evening classes on socionics and social gatherings for people interested in socionics. Centers of socionics are Kiev (Ukraine), Moscow and St. Petersburg (Russia), and Vilnius (Lithuania). Here socionics conferences take place where socionists present and discuss papers and studies and most books on socionics are published (there are now maybe 40 or 50 books on socionics, primarily in Russian, but also with a few in Ukrainian and Lithuanian).

At the same time, socionics is a decentralized field of study. There is no central body that is universally recognized as the single authority in the field or that dictates methodology, type identification, etc. Socionics arose outside of the academic world (although Augusta was a sociologist) and has not yet obtained official academic recognization, though it is now often mentioned in psychology courses in universities around the former USSR. Competent and respected socionists generally are known in the community and publish in community journals and participate in seminars and professional dialogue.

Socionics is held together by numerous enthusiasts and scattered professionals — who publish books and journals, teach courses, diagnose types, and consult individuals, families, and even entire organizations.

socionics_infographic

Who Wants to Build a Startup with Me and Get Super Rich While Changing the World?

let's_get_rich_and-73774

Who wants to change the world (and make some serious cash doing it)?

Change-the-World-Logo

I have the concept and the knowledge… I need a small team who want to change the world.

changetheworld

I really want to develop a new Personality Type testing system, more advanced than the standard MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator). There is so much useful information scattered about the internet, it’s just that you have to look in a million different places and put the pieces together yourself.

As an ENTP, I’m super excited about this challenge and am very knowledgeable about the subject. I’ve even studied up on Socionics, which is like twice as complicated as the MBTI.

I want to build the test, and then make a website, perhaps even an app that:

  • Allows you to take a real test, and then has detailed, complete information about your type. I’m also wanting to go as far as inter type relations (how your type interacts with other types).

I need a few people that can help me out. As an ENTP, I’m a natural collaborator and brainstormer. If I try to complete the project by myself, it’ll honestly never happen.

start-ups-1024x565

I think if we could build an app for iOS and Android, we could perhaps even turn this whole thing into a startup company. I met a gentleman yesterday who has a ton of money, and is looking for a creative way to invest it. For example, he’s in the process of buying 85 used houses, remodeling them, and then flipping them for profit. So, he’s got serious cash.

Not only that, but we could include in the app various types of feedback to find out what kind of music they like, what hobbies they are into, where they work. We could use that data to create a quantified self, and I think we could sell that data for big bucks.

This is the future, ladies and gentleman…

the-future-is-now-700x422

But, I absolutely need a few good people to help me with this.

Please let me know if you would be interested in developing this project with me. Anyone who gets involved in the pre-investment stage would be made a part owner of the business. We could actually make some serious cash here, guys.

team-awesome-t-shirt

I have a couple job interviews in the next few weeks, but if this would absolutely be my first choice if we could work it out. We could be the team, the originals, the Mark Zuckerbergs and Shawn Parkers… the Steve Jobs and whoever the hell he worked with. We would be in control and in it from the beginning.

People love this Personality Type stuff, and I know that we can do it much better.

IMG_1453

MBTI breakdown for Men and Women

IGMen IGWomen

Cognitive Information Functions

IMG_1320

MBTI Chart

mbtiNew

Socionics-based Inter Type Relations Chart

IMG_1353

Socionics Chart for the Different Types.

They have different terminologies, for example an ENTP is an ILE in Socionics (It stands for Logical Intuitive Extrovert). Logical being the Thinking functions, Intuitive being the Intuitive Function, and Extrovert for Extrovert. The reason there is only 3 letters vs 4 is because of the order they are placed in. They don’t need a J or a P at the end to identify the type, it goes by what order the letters are in.

Socionics: Types by Quadra

What the Hell are Those Symbols?

Each of those symbols represents a different cognitive function. The triangle is Intuition, the circle is Sensing, the square is Logic (Thinking), and the L-shaped thing is Ethics (Feeling). The Dark ones represent extraverted functions, and the White ones represent introverted functions.

image

Duality in Socionics

One of the strongest variations from MBTI is the belief in “Duals.” These are two different personality types that compliment each others’ strengths and lessen their weaknesses. It is said that “Duals” are IDEAL companions / mates, as they together form an almost Yin-Yang like full entity.

The Dual Functions:

socionics

Cognitive / Information Functions and their Interaction with Each Other.

They compliment / contradict each other, according to socionics. It’s a brilliant philosophy, but it was abandoned by the inventor of the system (who came from Soviet Russia) several years ago. Nobody has taken up the reigns to fully flesh out the system and simplify it for the regular non-sociologist. THAT is the objective of the startup.

Socionics is a branch of psychology that studies relationships between psychological types.

It is based on somewhat modified system of psychological types described by C.G.Jung in his Psychological Types (1916, 1920 etc.) and Tavistock Lectures (1935).

You also know a different version of Jungian typology known as the Myers-Briggs Type Theory (MBTT). It is based on the test called Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). It is well known in the US, and for the last years in Europe as well.

The Myers-Briggs Type Theory is sometimes confused with socionics, although there are some differences between these two theories. Let us describe them shortly:

  1. Different methods of type evaluation. MBTT almost completely relies upon tests, while socionics from the beginning developed alternative methods – determining type by interviewing, observation, etc. Verbal testing is considered as a secondary, not primary method, because it says nothing about the nature of types. This does not mean that tests are not known in socionics. For example we the authors of this article developed the Socionic Multifactor Test, which we are going to discuss below. In the last years socionics focuses on biological parameters of types.
  2. Somewhat different definitions of the 4 basic type criteria. In MBTT, the type is defined as 4 basic choices: extraversion (E) or introversion (I), sensing (S) or intuition (N), thinking (T) or feeling (F), judgment (J) or perception (P). Socionics uses terms logic/ethic – instead of thinking/feeling, and rationality/irrationality – instead of perception/judgment. However, more important is the contents of these definitions, they do not always coincide.
  3. Intertype relationships. Although several representatives of MBTT proposed their own views on compatibility between the Myers-Briggs types, a thorough theory of intertype relationships does not exist in MBTT. By contrast, Socionics, from the very beginning, was created as a theory describing and explaining some regularities of relations between people.

On the other hand, there is also a lot in common between these two theories. Main fields of application are the same: family and business consulting, education etc. When first publications about MBTT appeared in the former USSR (a very short overview appeared in 1984, and several popular books were translated since 1994), socionists found a lot of useful information there. We believe in fruitful cooperation between these two branches of Jungian typology is possible; we should not forget about the differences, but we believe they can be resolved.

Here are some links that go into depth more about the way the functions interact with each other (and it goes into much more detail about socionics:

I know it’s a little tricky and complex, but that’s the point. We make it simple and user-friendly and we disrupt society.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/32-foundations

http://www.socionics.us/relations.shtml

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/10-socionics

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/22-socionics-hypothesis

http://www.socionics.us/theory/information.shtml

http://www.socionics.us/practice/duality.shtml

http://www.socionics.us/philosophy/scientific_theory.shtml

Evolution of Knowledge

How knowledge is becoming breadth over depth

evolution_of_seo2

Why?

Technology

  • Google
  • Wikipedia
  • Internet
  • Access from anywhere
  • Access to anyone

Change in culture

  • Openness
  • Sharing
  • Removal of societal boundaries
  • A better understanding of different cultures and societies

Change in the way the mind operates due to technology + culture.

  • Less depth of knowledge regarding individual topics.
  • More topics understood on a basic level.
  • The individual “nodes” of knowledge are weaker, but there are more “nodes” created.
  • The mind creates webs that connect all of the nodes, in order to make sense of life.
  • The newer generation may only have a cliff-notes understanding of a topic, but they’ve read a lot of cliff-notes.

The Moment of Truth

THE MOMENT OF TRUTH: Logo.©2007 FOX BROADCASTING

As a society we’re divided, for the most part, into two main groups.:

1. The Old-Schoolers

These are the people brought up in a different world. They’re afraid or disinterested in radical changes.

They think the next generation is way too obsessed with social media, technology, and pleasure.

They think we are uncommitted to picking one occupation and mastering it.

They think we are lazy, with a short attention span.

The old-schoolers are the ones in power. They are our leaders of government and massive corporations.

2. The New-Schoolers

They embrace new technology and love social media.

They like to mix business and pleasure, personal and professional.

They like to write about their opinions on the public net, unafraid of who sees it.

Due to social media, and innovations such as Google Search and Wikipedia, don’t like traditional education.

They may not get the depth of knowledge from reading expert’s books and scholarly articles, but have a breadth of knowledge about many different topics.

They become curious about a topic, google it, and learn about it on their own.

They are a generation of polymaths, with diverse sets of skills and knowledge.

They don’t want their entire life or career mapped out ahead of time, don’t mind flexibility, and believe in collaboration.

They are frustrated with the way the world, business, and society runs.

They despise the old-school way of thinking, but feel powerless to change it, since the old-schoolers have all the power and control.

Partial Truth / Not Seeing the Big Picture

Both sides have valid points. It’s simply the way society has evolved. At the same time, both sides are blind to something the world constantly forgets:

Even though big changes are difficult and seem impossible, they always happen.

People look at the current state of affairs and base their personal view of the world on this alone. Best case scenario, they notice the most recent changes from the last 5 years. This is an inaccurate way to see things.

A New Perspective 

Go back 20 years into the past, and compare that world to the world of today:

Radically different.

Now, take that same measurement of change and apply it to 20 years in the future:

Wow.

If you really do this, you’ll realize how dramatically things do change in every aspect of life. This cycle has happened a countless number of times throughout history.

If you see a person everyday, they seem to be the exact same; unchanging.

Run into someone from back in school from many years ago, that you haven’t seen. You hardly believe it’s the same person.

Taking Advantage of This New Perspective

The key to making big changes is to stop looking at things in such a day-to-day, year-to-year manner.

Force yourself to actually look back 20 years ago.

Look at today, and see what has changed.

Force yourself to imagine how much will inevitably be different 20 years from now.

Take into account the right-around-the-corner changes we already know about.

Use these vantage points to form an educated prediction of the future.

Use this prediction of the future to dream up all the problems and opportunities that will occur.

Determine the best way that you as a person, group, or company can make an impact to this predicted future.

Invest at least a portion of your current profits into begin developing the innovation.

Look past next quarter’s earnings, and devote a portion of your operations to these ideas, even though there won’t be a return on investment for quite a while.

Your company will profit a bit less right now, because of this.

Keep calm and stay committed to the long-term vision.

The Disruption

Even before the “future” arrives, you will, out-of-nowhere, pop up with an innovation that blows everyone away.

It will appear as magic to the mass population, because they’ve still been living in the present / immediate future this whole time.

This “magic” will create a massive following. It will inspire future generations, and restore faith to those who had given up hope. It will disrupt everything.

The best part is that you weren’t any more talented than your competitors. You may have even been a smaller player in the industry. You may have had less resources, cash flow, and reputation than everyone else.

Suddenly, and without warning, you are now the big player — you hold the power. Consequently, you can use your new prestige to keep the mindset going.

All of your success is derived from forcing yourselves to see ahead and then staying committed to the big vision.

One Individual vs The World

It’s easy to see how an already successful business can do this, simply by changing their perspective a little bit.

It’s harder to see how a single person can innovate on such a massive scale.

That’s where some of the “right now” technology at our disposal changes everything: Tools that allow easier collaboration and sharing of knowledge.

These tools are available right now, but do we use them? A perfect example is Google+.

It’s 100% possible for like-minded individuals to come together and form companies of their own, combining their strengths and shared vision.

At first, it may mean forming small companies / collaboration teams, and then presenting this information to larger companies (better yet, people that will invest directly in you and allow you the resources to actually create the innovation on your own, i.e. Facebook).

The key here is collaborating and getting things started. Create the products, concepts, and ideas that you truly believe can make a big impact.

If you start to make it happen, it may actually happen. If you sit on your ass bitching about the way things are, it won’t.

*The Future is Inevitable. Still Open to Suggestions*

The future is going to change dramatically, like it or not. However, it may not be the one we wanted or needed.

If you don’t jump in soon, you won’t be a part of what made it happen. Plus, that one crazy idea you had could have potentially had the biggest impact.

Missing out on one person’s insight or dream, could mean the difference between SkyNet and a utopian global awakening.

It’s easy to point out flaws in the system. Actually having a solution planned out is what makes you an innovator instead of a critic.