Adventures in Socionics

I.


A while ago, I took the plunge after seeing some videos by DJ Arendee (a.k.a. EJ Arendee) on socionics and began looking at some websites and reading some books. I've discovered that while socionics doesn't contradict MBTI - it complements it and explores it in more depth - it clearly doesn't reach as wide an audience as MBTI. Why is this?

The answer, to me, lies in marketing. Americans are the ones promulgating MBTI through the English-speaking world and Americans outshine all others when it comes to packaging and selling things. Quite a few American MBTI consultants manage to make money of MBTI, which is impressive. MBTI has been brought to the masses in a big way. In contrast, one can find only a few books on socionics in English, and the work of Aushra Augusta and Antoni Kapinski remains untranslated and unpublished, so far as I know. In English, I've only found three socionics authors: Ekaterina Filatova, Spencer Stern and the controversial Rod Novichkov.

One of the differences between socionics and MBTI is that the former looks at each type in more depth: it considers eight functions, not just four. This leads to a fuller picture of each personality type. 

The two leading functions in MBTI, that is, the dominant and auxiliary, get lumped into the 'ego' category or block in socionics; the two, relatively inferior functions, that is, the tertiary and inferior, get put into the 'super id' block. A type (for example, the INFJ in MBTI) feels on strong and safe ground with the first two functions (Ni and Fe) and values them; he feels weak and unsure when using the tertiary and inferior functions in the 'super id' block, but still values them, knows that he needs to improve in those areas and acknowledges that they can only be improved with the assistance and input of others.

In contrast, he feels weak and unsure when it comes to two hidden functions not considered in the MBTI model - in an INFJ, these are Si and Te - but doesn't value these and doesn't want the help of others when it comes remedying the defects in this area; in fact, he doesn't want other people to know about his perceived weakness here at all. He's ashamed of these two functions. Thus, he consigns them to the 'super-ego' block.

Last but not least, he feels strong with two of the functions and doesn't value them very much; these represent an area of competence and efficiency which he takes for granted and aren't worth celebrating (as Wolverine says, 'I'm the best at what I do, and what I do isn't very nice'). These two functions are relegated to the unconscious, or 'id' block. He remains unconscious of them for the part, that is, he doesn't show much awareness of them (any more than most of us pay any attention to automatic bodily functions such as breathing). In an INFJ, these would be Fi and Ne. 

Socionics differs from MBTI in its notation (which is very confusing to people coming from MBTI to socionics). If someone's dominant, leading function is a judging or rational one, socionics puts a j at the end; if perceiving or irrational, a p. So an INTP in MBTI becomes and INTj: the leading function of an INTP is introverted thinking, a judging function, hence INTj. On the other hand, an INTJ's dominant function is a perceiving one, Ni, so an INTJ becomes an INTp.

This takes some getting used to. But I believe that the socionics approach makes more sense. In MBTI, the type gets a j or a p at the end according to which of the two main functions - dominant or auxiliary - is extraverted. Because of the ISFJ's judging function - feeling - is extraverted, the ISFJ gets a j at the end and becomes known as a 'judger'. In Keirsey, this muddles things. For instance, an ISFJ's leading function (Si) is a perceiving and irrational one, not a judging, but the ISFJ in the Keirsey system is christened a 'judger'.


II.


Socionics, unlike MBTI, focuses a lot on intertype relations - relations of romance, friendship, business - and has identified sixteen different kinds of relationships, one for each of the sixteen types. Michael Peirce does a good, accessible YouTube presentation here on the theory.

The socionics relationships can be used to work out what the function order is - that is, which functions occupy the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and so on - in each type. If you know the leading functions of each type, then you can work out - in perfect order - which two functions go into the ego, superego, id and super-id blocks of your type, as you'll see that each of the four blocks contains a type which you have a fixed socionics relationship to.

Let's take the INFJ, for instance - an INFp in socionics. In the ego block, we find the two leading functions of the INFp himself - Ni and Fe. The relationship between INFp and INFp is one of Identity. In other words: 

I N F p

= = = = 

I N F p

That was easy enough. Are there any couples in popular culture who have a relationship of Identity? I can only think of one: Daredevil (ISTP) and Elektra (ISTP).

What of the super-ego block? Unsurprisingly, the INFp's super-ego block contains the type he has Super-Ego relationship with: the ISTp (ISFJ in MBTI). So:

I N F p

= ¹ ¹ =

I S T p

The Super-Ego relationship doesn't sound very promising: 

If Super-Ego partners cannot find a common interest to discuss and ponder, their interaction can quickly descend into strife. The partners would rather express their own points of view than listen to the other partner's point of view. The latter tries to defend himself by projecting his own confident points in return. This can easily devolve into a vicious cycle. Partners normally show interest and respect to each other if they do not know each other well enough. When partners begin to close their psychological distance, they start to experience many problems understanding each other. 
Super-Ego partners may think that they have each other figured out. However, when it comes to the two collaborating on a group project, they can easily begin to believe that the other is trying to ruin the project. Super-Ego partners do not make each other aware of their intentions. Therefore their actions may look exactly opposite to what was expected. Although the hope of better collaboration between partners remains as before, it does not prevent conflict penetrating their relationship.

Some famous Super-Ego pairs: Batman (INTJ) and Commissioner Gordon (ISFJ); Han Solo (ISTP) and Luke Skywalker (INFP).

In the weak super-id block, we find the leading functions of the INFp's dual type, the ESTP: 

I N F p

¹ ¹ ¹ =

E S T p

Socionics gives the Super-Ego relationship a low rating, the Dual the highest. In one's Dual, one can find one's ideal romantic partner, business partner or friend. I'd say that the most famous Dual pair in popular culture are Walter White (INTJ in MBTI) and Jesse Pinkman (ESFP).

Others that spring to mind, are Wolverine (ISTP) and Jean Grey (ENFJ), an almost-romantic couple; husband and wife Bill Spencer II (ENTJ) and Katie Logan (ISFP) in the long-running soap opera Bold and the Beautiful; in Jack Kirby's Fourth World, husband and wife Mister Miracle (INFP) and Big Barda (ESTJ). 

In the Dual relationship, the leading and strong functions of one type's Ego block make up the inferior and weak functions of the other's Super-Id block. Each of the pair's strengths complement the others weaknesses; development of one's weak functions in the Super-Id block with the assistance of another type leads to self-actualisation.

Finally, we come to the Contrary relationship (also known as Extinguishment). The Contrary of the INFp can be found in the Id block: 

I N F p
¹ = = =
E N F p

The Contrary possesses each of the same functions in the same order as your type, only the orientation (extraversion or introversion) faces the opposite way. The leading function of the INFp is introverted intuition, the leading function of the ENFp is extraverted intuition. The INFp's secondary function is extraverted feeling, the ENFp's is introverted feeling. And so it goes, from the first function to the eighth.

Generally, Contraries don't get along: consider Han Solo (ISTP in MBTI) and Princess Leia (ESTJ) or Rust Cohle and Marty Hart in True Detective, another ISTP / ESTJ pair. Without a doubt, the most famous Contrary pair is Batman (INTJ) and the Joker (ENTP). Generally, Contraries in a movie, TV show or comic book make for exciting fireworks.


III.


In its methods of type identification, socionics leans to, or shows greater tolerance, for visual identification. As Sergei Ganin states: 

V.I. (Visual Identification) is the fastest and most reliable method of Type identification of today. It works on the principle that an inner process will always manifest itself through its outer boundaries - a sack with a brick will have a different shape than a sack with a football.

Analogously, mental processes inside the human head will have their manifestation through the face, the eyes and the appearance of an individual. Since the major part of one's mental activity is carried out according to their Type, there is a significant correlation between the type and the look of a person. In other words, people of the same Type look similar.

In the same way people can tell women from men by their looks, it is also possible to distinguish between the Psychological Types of people. Each Type has peculiar features in their appearance and it is possible to recognise and identify those features. There are groups of people within the same Type that share similar looks. This leads to a number of different looks that can be associated with the same Type.

The little-known book by Rod Novichkov and Julia Varabyova, How to Find Yourself and Your Best Match: Socionics: The Modern Approach to Psychological Types (2007), sums up the visual identification method the best. The book hasn't received good reviews on Amazon.Com and it shows itself to be a poorly-edited, poorly-formatted piece of desktop publishing work; nevertheless, it contains a wealth of information.

In my experience, Novichkov's visual identification method has proven itself to be accurate. Many, many years ago, I took an MBTI test as part of a careers counselling course. I found out my type and agreed with the type description overall, but didn't pay much attention to MBTI until only this year. I've taken a few tests (mostly unreliable online ones) since then, and have gotten results which have differed wildly from each other (I've flipped from being an intuitive to a sensor, an extravert to an introvert...). But Novichkov's methods have confirmed the results of my original test. He declares that anyone my type will have a certain kind of face, pair of hands, neck, posture, gaze, etc., and physically, I match his description of my type a 100%. One of my best friends - an ISFp - looks exactly how Novichkov says an ISFp should look (in fact, my friend closely resembles Elton John, who Novichkov identifies as an ISFp). In the MBTI community itself, we find plenty of self-declared INFJs / INFps, especially on YouTube, and these - for example Michael Peirce - fit the Novichkov physical description of the INFJ to a tee.

Ekaterina Filatova's books use a lot of photographs of types, even though she doesn't endorse visual identification. If we look at the photographs, we'll see some striking similarities. See, for instance, this group from the 'Alpha quadra' (ISFJs, INTPs, ENTPs, ESFJs in MBTI). These, to me, match up with Novichkov's book: the ENTps and INTjs wear the faces of Thinkers; the ISFps and ESFjs, Feelers. We can also detect in the faces in these photos extraversion or introversion. The extraverts (especially the ESFjs) look excited by having their picture taken, so excited they seem willing to jump on you; the introverts, on the other hand, hold themselves back. To me, their faces look opaque, almost doll-like. Type Tips does a good series on the Filatova photos.

One's gaze and facial expressions say a lot about one's character, and one's body affects one's character and how we perceive the world. A cat would behave in a different way in a dog's body, and so would a shark in a crocodile's. 

Some may denounce visual identification as pseudo-science, being no better than phrenology, but to me it's very scientific - scientific in the sense of 'empirical'. You could put all the celebrities identified in Novichkov's book on a spreadsheet and collect photographs and footage of each, and thereby confirm (or disconfirm) his theories against a database of hundreds, if not thousands, of people.

Mark Hootsen signing off.