Are you Napoleon or Don Quixote? Let's figure out what socionics is and does it work?

Nowadays, there are many techniques that help a person better understand himself and those around him, allowing him to navigate life more effectively and solve both personal and professional problems with greater productivity. It is also interesting that, albeit infrequently, new concepts appear. Socionics, which is relatively young and increasingly popular today, offers an interesting typology of personality, as well as the possibility of practical application in life of knowledge about oneself and other people.

Socionics: a brief history and overview of the basics

Socionics is a special concept of personality types and the relationships between them. It appeared in the 70s of the 20th century, and its creator was the Lithuanian sociologist Ausra Augustinavichiute. The main ideas of this concept were outlined in her work “On the Dual Nature of Man” in 1980.

The basis for the creation of socionics was the typology of psychotypes of the Swiss psychiatrist Carl Gustav Jung, as well as the theory of information metabolism of the Polish psychiatrist Anton Kempinski. From the latter, Augustinaviciute took the idea that the human psyche “feeds” on information signals, thereby activating information metabolism.

But Jung’s typology, which describes eight psychological types, is of greatest importance for socionics:

• Thinking (introverted and extroverted)
• Feeling (introverted and extroverted)
• Sensation (introverted and extroverted)
• Intuition (introverted and extroverted)

Jung also identified one more characteristic - a psychological attitude - introverted (directed “inward”) or extroverted (directed to perceive the outside world). It is with this in mind that each of the four main psychotypes is divided into two (introverted and extroverted).

In addition, thinking, feeling, sensation and intuition are also the main mental functions, to each of which two additional ones can be added - sensation and intuition. With their help, you can more accurately describe the human psyche (you can read more about the ideas of the Swiss psychiatrist in our article “The Ideas of Carl Gustav Jung”).

Initially, Jung's typology was not intended to classify people, but after some time, based on his ideas, tests were born that made it possible to classify people by type (for example, the Myers-Briggs questionnaire, the Gray-Wheelwright test and others), and, naturally, socionics.

Augustinaviciute gave the mental functions of Jung’s theory (in his theory these were quantitative characteristics of mental processes) the form of “variants of information metabolism.” She also suggested that in the process of perceiving the surrounding reality, the human psyche uses eight discrete (interrupted) socionic functions:

• Logic (corresponds to Thinking in Jung's typology). It is divided into introverted or structural (denoted) and extroverted or business (denoted).
• Ethics (corresponds to Feeling in Jung's typology). It is divided into introverted or relational ethics (denoted) and extroverted or emotional ethics (denoted).
• Sensory (corresponds to Sensation in Jung's typology). It is divided into introverted or sensory sensations (denoted) and extroverted or volitional (denoted).
• Intuition (corresponds to Intuition in Jung's typology). It is divided into introverted or intuition of time (denoted) and extroverted or intuition of possibilities (denoted).

Each socionic function perceives one specific “aspect” of information that comes from the outside world. Based on this, the extent to which a certain socionic function is developed affects a person’s ability to understand the relevant aspects of the surrounding reality. And here we need to return to information metabolism.

From the position of socionics, the flow of information that the psyche perceives and processes, in the process of information metabolism, is divided into eight aspects corresponding to each of the functions and processed by it. Socionics is based on the fact that each personality type perceives and processes information aspects in its own way, based on the difference in the development of a particular function. Socionic functions are mental elements that help a person interact with information aspects.

Thus, socionics studies the laws by which the psyche of each of us perceives and processes information relating to the entire diversity of the surrounding world. Using this model, we can make predictions about the actions of other people, establish their qualities and potential, and understand what can be expected from them.

The basis of socionics is modeling and systems approaches. However, due to insufficient empirical validity (according to some experts), it has not yet been recognized as science. Not belonging to either the field of sociology or the field of psychology research, socionics has been and remains an independent field.

In addition, all the criteria for determining the socionic type (sociotype) of a person were established mostly speculatively. Therefore, determining and verifying the results of psychological typing present some difficulties from a scientific perspective. It is for these reasons that socionics is considered as a direction or teaching, and not as a science (we will talk about criticism later).

Despite this, many famous psychologists fully share the ideas of socionics. Among them are A. V. Bukalov, V. M. Shlain, G. A. Shulman, V. V. Megedya, O. B. Karpenko, V. V. Gulenko, V. D. Ermak, S. A. Tartukhin, Yu. V. Lemeshev, Ya. A. Dubrov and others. The International Institute of Socionics was founded, the employees and leaders of which are doctors of philosophy, medical and biological, technical, physical, mathematical and other sciences. (There are no foreign specialists on this list for the reason that in the West the very concept of “socionics” is used to designate an interdisciplinary field of research in the field of distributed AI (artificial intelligence) systems and their applications to sociology.)

Socionics technologies have been used for several decades in personnel management of many large companies, training and formation of aviation and space crews, conducting business trainings and seminars, publishing activities, developing new methods of marketing and advertising, etc.

As for ordinary people and their lives, socionics (personality types, the model itself, etc.) contributes to the understanding and improvement of human relationships and joint activities. And its main value lies, of course, in knowledge about people’s sociotypes. But before continuing the conversation, we recommend watching this short video about what socionics can give a person, from the founder and head of the School of Applied Socionics, Elena Andreevna Udalova.

How does socionics work?

Disclaimer: I’m not ready to discuss whether it works in principle; everyone has their own opinions. I’m telling you from memory what I remember - if you know better and don’t agree, I’m very happy for you. I’m not ready to fight for formulations and defend the truth of my understanding. This is a friendly post-retelling, not a TED talk.

As they say, there are two types of people: the first divide people into two types, the second do not. This is a post for the first ones. And it's long.

Usually, immersion in socionics looks like this: I passed the test, read the description, “hmm, interesting,” closed the tab, forgot. This approach is facilitated by the fundamentally incorrect (and sticky) names of types based on famous white men: are you Yesenin or Dreiser? I am Napoleon. No, you're acting like Hamlet.

It is especially strange that the real Hugo, whose writer, they say, was actually Dreiser in the socionic sense (or vice versa), in general, many names of types were given without proper double-checking.

Therefore, even though they are convenient in everyday life, “True Socionicists” instead use either impersonal names like “Master”, “Mentor”, “Enthusiast”, or even call abbreviations: SLI, EIE, LSE (this is what I will do in the post) . The last letter of the abbreviation is responsible for introversion-extroversion, and the first two speak about the two strongest functions: sensory-logical, emotional-intuitive, logical-sensory - this is how you can describe all 16 types, if you add “vertility” (the third letter).

Who invented socionics?

Socionics appeared in the Soviet Union.

The theory was developed by Soviet psychologist and sociologist from Lithuania Aušra Augustinavičiute based on the works of Jung (see his book “Psychological Types”), who distinguished sensation, intuition, judgment and feeling as ways of contacting people with the world (and each has its own strong ways).

I tried to read Aushra's book, but it was a bit difficult for me to get through. But since then, many people have invested in the theory of socionics, there is plenty to choose from to read. In addition, she described only the very initial scheme; detailed and extensive descriptions of the types were already prepared by her students.

In socionics, it is interesting that the system of relationships was brought to the mathematical plane - everything can be calculated and calculated.

Aushra Augustinavichiute

From Wikipedia:

In 1978, Aušra Augustinavičiute wrote the article “The Theory of the Relativity of Erotic Feelings” and published in samizdat the first version of the book “The Dual Nature of Man” - the first works on socionics.

In 1980, he published an article in the journal “Mokslas ir technika” on the model of information metabolism (Model A), which was sharply criticized by some Lithuanian psychologists, but at the same time aroused the interest of readers, and published a new work, “The Theory of Intertype Relations.”

In the 1980s, he wrote a number of works on socionics, many of which were officially deposited in the library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences (equated to publication), but were ordered and distributed in the form of photocopies. Since the beginning of the 80s, he has participated in a number of scientific all-Union conferences on sociology, psychology and pedagogy, reporting and explaining the concept and methods of socionics, experimental results, and gives lectures in a number of cities in Lithuania, Russia and Ukraine. This led to the emergence of a number of students and followers of A. Augustinavichiute, not only humanists - teachers, psychologists and sociologists, but also specialists in the field of cybernetics, bionics, programming, systems theory, artificial intelligence modeling.

In 1985, after a long correspondence and creative discussion with the Leningrad mathematician G. R. Reinin, who established the existence of 15 orthogonal signs in the socion out of 16 types of information metabolism, he published the work “Reinin’s Theory of Signs” in a deposited manuscript.

Her work receives a response from professional psychologists, especially those working in the field of family psychology, and is cited in educational materials for teachers. In 1991, a short version of Aushra Augustinavichiute’s work “The Dual Nature of Man” was published in the popular science magazine “Science and Religion”, the circulation of which at that time was about 1 million copies.

(there will be more about Reinin below, don’t switch)

Based on socionics, the Myers-Briggs scheme was constructed in a similar way, there are also 16 types, but they are assembled a little differently. The Myers-Briggs questionnaire is widely known on the English-speaking Internet (and socionics is only known in the Russian-speaking segment).

Myers-Briggs is an applied system; unlike socionics, it was made specifically for career reasons. This is a search for a personality type that allows you to find a job you like.

And socionics, like the broad Russian soul, is about life. Therefore, the devil will break his leg in it too.

I immersed myself in socionics in 2009-2014, read Talmuds and scientific works, and interacted with other interested people on the forum.

Time passed, the information in me boiled down to some foreseeable volume, therefore (and also because a conversation came up in the chat and there were people interested in reading about the topic) I decided to write about how I see this system and what its advantages are.

I’ll say right away: to use the advantages, you need to immerse yourself more than “pass the test and read the description.” For the first year or two, a newcomer to socionics infuriates those around him by evaluating all their manifestations and comparing them with the types known to him. After a couple of years this usually goes away, but not all birds reach the middle of the Dnieper.

This kind of obsessive attention from a newcomer can be found in all topics in which people begin to take a serious interest - from football to vegetarianism.

But a novice socionicist is the most infuriating, because he constantly exclaims “Ahaaaaaaaaa!” inappropriately, adding to his little book of knowledge about the world around him and retyping all his acquaintances 16 times a day.

Socionics never became a generally accepted applied science because:

• tests don't work (I'll explain why below)
• even among very famous socionics, the typing diagnoses of other people differ from each other by 30%
• the manifestation of the type depends on upbringing: if in childhood a person was crushed and strong functions were not given to him, they will not be manifested, protective ones will be noticeable, but weak (there will also be an explanation below)

Nevertheless, it was interesting for me to study socionics in order to understand why some people infuriate you (even if they don’t study socionics and don’t type you all the time), and with some you feel calm and comfortable.

And sometimes a person, by the way, really needs to type himself into someone else and live with that opinion about himself for some years. I have seen such cases and I believe that it is everyone’s personal right to see themselves distorted, because right now, for some reason, it is unbearable to do otherwise. Try different views on yourself.

Why don't "Define Your Type" tests work?

Due to the Dunning-Kruger effect.

When, on a scale from 1 to 10, I understand a subject with a two, I am absolutely sure that I understand perfectly, because I do not see the degree of my incompetence.

When I understand an eight, I see that I COULD understand a ten, and I think that I don’t understand enough.

Because of this, the first person will pass the same self-assessment test with the result “I can do this well”, and the second one “I can do this poorly”, which in reality is not true.

How then to type?

“True socionics” type by function: they check the manifestation of each of the functions, and then they put forward hypotheses and offer to read a detailed description of the types, so that when reading a person they say “oh, this is about me!” and made up my mind.

Another problem is that type descriptions are written by people, introducing their subjective biases and projecting personal attitudes. This is inevitable - that’s why I didn’t write this article for a long time, knowing that it would turn out to be subjective as hell, no matter how hard I try to be impartial.

There is only one conclusion: admit that I am biased, and get away from myself with hopes that it is possible otherwise. That's what I did.

In general, every description of each socionic type on the Internet or in books was written by a person who also belongs to some type, and his personal experience will inevitably be reflected in the text.

Each of the 16 types has both favorites and enemies among the others - and he writes descriptions for them based on this, no matter how hard he tries to maintain neutrality. The shirt is too close to the body.

For example, Vera Stratievskaya describes all types perfectly, subtly and in great detail, so I am ready to advise her (this blog, for example) - however, she hates my type and the type that complements me for personal reasons, so our descriptions have only shortcomings, and most poisonously described.

This is also true, but it is only part of the truth. And since it is impossible to be objective - socionics is based on the fact that each of us is subjective and belongs to 1 of 16 types - then the descriptions of each “trust socionicist” are biased, written with personal prejudices. Well, as it is.

Therefore, it is advised to read descriptions in a row from several socionics belonging to different types in order to get a more comprehensive picture.

What is the meaning of socionics?

Socionics talks about the types of information metabolism.

About which channel it is more effective to enter information to each person so that it is understood and assimilated with minimal distortion.

Roughly speaking, an emotional presentation is suitable for some, while a dry manual is suitable for others. The easiest way is, say, to learn from a representative of your same type, because strong functions are easiest to fill directly.

This person speaks my language - this is the feeling when you listen to a lecturer of your socionic type. That is why it is better to choose books on socionics according to the closest types - take your own or something that does not infuriate you if you don’t have one.

A person may not be rooted in his type for two reasons:

• strong functions are not fulfilled in childhood, there is no support for them and there is no respect for them
• the characteristics of my type do not fit into the narrow gender framework of what is acceptable in society, so it is difficult for me to turn around

Rationality/irrationality as an example

An example of the first: everyone in my family was rational, so I only began to recognize and celebrate my irrationality in my late twenties.

Rationality-irrationality is one of the main typing features of socionics; it clearly divides 16 types into 8 and 8.

Rationals may seem narrow-minded, mundane and boring to irrationals. To roughly generalize, these are people who can dig for years towards one goal and easily keep signs.

Irrationals may seem to rationalists to be empty-headed dreamers without a solid foundation in life. To roughly generalize, these are people who enjoy abstract humor and easily switch between approaches without getting stuck in one.

At the same time, of course, among the irrationals there are those who have flown away and are less free. And among the rationals there are those who are completely tabulated and those who are almost free. This is, as usual, a spectrum. Plus personal characteristics and upbringing experience.

In short, you'll figure it out. I warned.

So, an example is that my family taught me very well about signs and moving towards a goal. For a long time I thought that this is who I am, that this is mine - and then I was surprised to find abstract humor and switching deeply hidden (under the shame of incorrectness, difference from “my own”). Rational crutches are what help me in my work and what I can turn to for benefit, but, of course, jokes and freedom fill me.

But if you don’t delve into such details as whether I was filled with irrationality as a child (were there important adults who showed how cool it is that we are like this, how to use it and that we shouldn’t be ashamed of it), then you can mistakenly consider that a crutch rationality is me. And this is not me at all. That is, I can do this because I’ve been training for 20+ years and I’m used to it being correct. But the thrill is completely different, and now I allow myself to fill what there was nowhere to fill before.

Examples of discrepancies with society's gender expectations

Example of the second: a domineering girl or a girl entrepreneur may not be understood and accepted by her parents, just like an acting or design gifted boy.

I have seen cases in which people were absolutely sure that everything was fine with them, and boldly relied on their characteristics, understanding the limitations (this is what fullness of strong functions looks like) - and I have seen people who constantly apologized for their needs to live a full life, because they were taught that they cannot be like that.

In socionics, this refers to the preferred type of information metabolism, but the patterns are the same as everywhere, in all systemic discriminations.

How the socionic type structure works (with picture)

Socionics simplifies all possible human characters into a box in which 8 typical functions lie in a certain sequence. Where each one falls is important. Each type will have the same functions in the box, just the order in which they are arranged is different.

I like the logical order of the system, where there are no exceptions.

Life, of course, is more complicated, but socionics provides a model that can be understood and then applied in a more complex living situation.

Each function can be white or black. White is a conventionally “introverted”, inward-directed, focused function that sorts what is already existing and what is finite. Black is conventionally “extroverted,” directed outward, constantly expanding and absorbing new things.

From the arrangement of functions in the first two positions, it is clear how the rest will be decomposed further. Therefore, the abbreviation type speaks only of the first two positions. The rest is derived from the combination of the first two in a simple (for those who have strong logic, haha) logical way.

If we know that a person is irrational, let’s say, this immediately tells us that the first position is BS, CHI, BI or ES. The rest can only be in the first position for the rationals: BL, CHE, BE or CHL. This is incomprehensible to beginners, but if you start to figure it out, you quickly understand how convenient these supports are: either this way or that way, there are only two options.

If a person is an introvert, then in the first position he will have an exclusively white function - and if an extrovert, then a black one. Also either-or, without exception.

With the depth of your delving into socionics, the number of factors that you can take into account when typing increases.

For example, the first four functions in each type of schema are conscious. But the next four are not. Therefore, each person usually verbalizes exactly the first four, and the second (they are called vital) work as if “on their own.”

For example, there is a “limiting” function. If a person has time intuition (TI), this can be determined by the following facts from life: buses and planes are constantly waiting for him, he manages to jump into the last car of the train on time, and if suddenly it smells like kerosene, then he also escapes on time, but at the very last moment.

True, this can be confused with a person whose BI is in strong functions - but from a conversation one can notice whether this achievement of time occurs “by itself” bypassing consciousness or whether the person simply constantly freely handles time, lives in this element, can talk about it. I have emergency in my limiting function (all introverts have a black function in it - isn’t it convenient?).

This means that if pushed, I will show sharpness and confident management of the situation. But I won’t be able to consciously pull this thing - just like a person who has time to catch a plane at a restrictive time.

The restrictive one works like a blow of a whip, unexpectedly for everyone and at the moment when it’s almost fucked up, but there’s a last chance.

About the strength and weakness of functions - from 1 to 4 dimensions

Another example of a factor is function strength. As, perhaps, it has already become clear, all people have all 8 functions, that is, everyone has access to a vivid manifestation of emotions (PE), to work with boring tablets and manuals (BL), to building complex dynamic systems (PL - you Have you noticed that I describe “my” logic as a plus, and “someone else’s” as a minus? This is how what I said above works - a person forms all descriptions from his preferences and prejudices, and his favorite strong functions, if there were filled with quality in childhood).

Everyone has access, but what kind of access? I said above that a function can end up in a conscious or unconscious block (more precisely, if one function is in the upper block, then the same function of a different color will be mirrored in the lower one, without options. If white ethics is at the top, then black is at the bottom. Which one is then the aspect of ethics will always be unconscious). And each function, depending on its position, occupies a place of different strength.

From the first position to the fourth position the strength decreases, and in the second block it’s the other way around. The very first function for everyone has a quadruple valence; it works in four dimensions. The next one is in three, the third is in two, the fourth is in one, that is, it is the weakest.

The dimension that always exists, even in the weakest positions, is personal subjective experience. If a person answers questions about function (there are tricky questions that encourage a person to give information on a certain type of information metabolism) only with “I always do this,” this may be a signal of weak function.

The following measurements add volume. You can do this not only based on personal experience, but also because it is accepted in society. The “role” function has a second dimension, which is in third position. According to it, we act very articulately, but acceptable by the standards of society.

And if a function has only one dimension, it is weak and quickly overloaded. Therefore, the fourth, the weakest of the conscious ones, is called “painful” - all arrows fly into it. It’s most comfortable with people who have this function in an unconscious block, so they don’t really notice it and don’t use it as a tool. But with those who have a strong one, it’s difficult. Because if a function has 3-4 changes and it is conscious, then this is either a basic need (first position), in which you feel like a fish in water, or it is a tool for achieving everything (second), which you apply creatively and often think about it ( the first is so wide due to its maximum four dimensions that you can’t even notice it, naively believing that 1) it’s nothing special and 2) everyone has it - but the second has three dimensions and is more encompassing, so you want to work creatively with it, somehow use it, lean on it.

For example, for the ESE type, the ethics of emotions (EE) is in the first position. These people know how to laugh, make fun, improve the atmosphere in the room, and feel the mood of other people. This is a manifestation of a strong function - I know that I can do this, I have it pumped up, I probe it and understand the world.

For me (SLI type), the PE is in the fourth, painful position. Noise and emotions depress me and exhaust me. I find it difficult to stand the company of people who communicate, especially loudly and in groups. I spend a lot of energy trying not to die in such an environment. The function is the same, but it is available to me only in the weak filling of the weak fourth position, it has only one personal dimension, I don’t care how society looks at it (if I had at least two dimensions in the SE, I could pretend to be) : I personally feel bad and that’s it, I’m suffering. I also have PE in the first block, I can realize it - I can realize the depth of my wretchedness from it, that’s why it’s so painful that you can think about it. In the second block, everyone also has a weakly filled one-dimensional function, but due to its unconsciousness it does not loom before their eyes, information on it is also perceived through a personal dimension, but with gratitude and interest. Although there is also a lot of information here, there is nothing to take it from. But at least it doesn't hurt.

Signs of Reinin with an example (quest-declaration)

After Aushra, who outlined the general visionary concept, other thinkers came to socionics and began to expand it. For example, Reinin developed new sections, dividing 16 types into groups in other ways.

There are so-called Reinin signs, which can also be used for typing. They are even less obvious than functions (ha!). But they often come out when analyzing speech and text. This helps with introverted typing, when the subject is unaware that he is being typed. I will give one example: the questim-declamation sign. According to Reinin, all 16 types are again divided into 8 and 8.

Quests (from the word “question”) often ask questions in speech, listening with interest to what they are told, weaving it into the dialogue. I do quests, and I often start a story about a series with a question: have you watched such and such? - this gives me information about how deep to dive, whether there is a lot to explain or whether it can be shortened.

We declare that if he asks questions, they are rhetorical (how could you not have seen this series?? And he went off to scratch with a story about how cool the series is). And speech is sharpened more towards telling than asking questions.

The type that complements the quest will always be a declatim, because the quest will be enraged by another quest (can you already tell, and not interrogate me??), and the declatim will be enraged by the declatims who tell him, without tailoring the story to him personally, as if giving a lecture ( as if they themselves do it differently, hehe).

When you study the signs of Reinin, the world simply explodes around you, because there is too much information about each person: how and what he says, how he behaves, what he prefers not to touch. We constantly give ourselves away with our actions and words!

More sections: quadras, an example with “combat socionics”

There are also more general cuts. For example, 16 types are evenly divided into 4 quadra: 4 in each.

Quadras symbolize the life cycle of any system. To roughly generalize, in the first there are start-ups, in the second there are security officials and bureaucratizers, in the third there are entrepreneurs and subtle cunning people, in the fourth there are caring cats (and again my personal prejudices are visible, haha).

You can also type by quadra, because belonging to a quadra gives an understanding of values. The first is important to cut through new windows, the second is to streamline to the gnashing of teeth and introduce a vertical of power for order (blue and red according to spiral dynamics), the third is to engage in entrepreneurship and making a profit (orange), the fourth is to support what is already ready, take care, prolong the life of the living (green , yellow).

My quadra is fourth, so the routine doesn’t bother me. Routine is the basis of care and maintenance of the system. But the first quadra takes away from the routine, they need to open something new and run to discover something else.

The first quadra (to discover something new) conflicts in values ​​with the third (to skim off the cream from what is already open). The second (divide and conquer) conflicts with the fourth (caring and establishing equality).

I read another way to divide 16 types into 4 groups in the so-called “combat socionics”. There they are divided according to the way they handle resources and are divided into card heroes. Kings (extroverted sensory types) possess resources and manage them. The nature of the resource depends on the king.

Ladies (introverted sensors) can cultivate the resource and feed from it. They stably hold the resource, but do not gush it out, unlike the king.

Knights (extroverted intuitives) fight for the resource and drag it to the ladies. They cannot retain the resource, so life is a constant battle, and an alliance with a lady helps not to lose what has been accumulated.

Pages (introverted intuitives) strive without resources. All they can do is find the King and feed from him. But the king is not sorry and even pleased that someone finds the fountain useful.

I’ll make a few wild guesses, for which I’m not particularly responsible, because I haven’t delved deeply - for a rough generalization and illustration of the idea.

The Moomin muskrat is definitely a page. But Moomintroll (as often happens with characters) and Mu are knights. Moominmama is the king of caring. And Miss Snork is a self-sufficient lady.

In general, combat socionics even has videos that show the characteristics of types based on movie characters.

Relationships

On the one hand, socionics is useful in determining what my strengths are and what I can trust in myself. And why are the values ​​of my quadra not shared by other people? Well, they have their own quadra and their own values.

By the way, if you apply the quadra to the countries, then ours is the second. Mine is conflicting, alas.

On the other hand, you can figure out what in others infuriates me and what attracts me. Why do some people first attract me and then infuriate me? And how do dual relationships feel in general for my type - when a person complements me and does not put pressure on my sore spots? I must say that my dual couple is considered the most comfortable in the entire socion. We are already in the fourth, harmonious quadra - but in terms of functions it also turns out that we have neither strong emotions nor rigidity. We are cats, as I already said.

The dual relationship in my pair SLI + IEE is peace and quiet. I care about bodily comfort and the physical (hedonic and cozy) side of life for myself and at the same time for my partner, and my partner cares about endless possibilities and builds relationships with people as a resource. It sounds good.

The problem is that a type according to socionics is, of course, not a death sentence. To this we must add social status, upbringing, personal preferences and injuries, age, habits. Socionics only talks about how convenient it is for a person to receive and give out information. This is important, but personality is much broader. Therefore, I will not meet with all IEEs for friendship, even though their undoubted advantage is that they admire my strengths immensely (and this is mutual), and we don’t press on each other’s sore spots: I can fill out all the boring forms myself (for IEE painful structural logic), and I don’t have to participate in emotional exchange with a bunch of people, my partner will take on that.

Other dual pairs, by the way, are not like that. Depending on the functions, everything fits together differently. For example, a dry accountant will be paired with a bright emotional actor - because only such intensity of feelings can melt his heart. And I would have run away three times already.

Or a bright entrepreneur (and this is a bright euphemism for extroversion) in a dual couple relies on a subtle connoisseur of human souls, who can hint that business is business, but people are finally alive. And a strong manager will be paired with a strong expert on human suffering, who will be able to push through the ideas of ecology and caring for the weak. But again, this is my interpretation and a rough generalization.

By the way, you can also type through relationships between types. How does this person make me feel? And by the type of our relationship we can calculate its type. Of course, you can make a mistake. But no one forbids you to try.

What different opposites are there?

Actually, it was for this question that I sat down to write the article. But it would be difficult to explain without saying everything that goes above.

I will give an example of how different “opposites” feel very differently to me. Something is opposite and therefore complements me, and something is OTHERWISE opposite and that is why it infuriates me. The point, of course, is what functions stand where and how strong manifestations of a partner are felt - like what I can’t do and what I admire? Like what overloads my pain? Like what I am not aware of in myself, and therefore do not consider important?

Let's take my type (SLI).

The strongest functions of the dual (CHI, BE) will always end up in my type scheme in the unconscious weak 5th and 6th positions (activation and suggestive). I don’t know how to do this, I need it, I’m delighted and bring bouquets of roses to the stage. Moreover: it is mutual. What I do by default is just as incredibly important and inaccessible for my partner. Finale, curtain.

In general, being surrounded by duals is a cool approach to life, very supportive. You don’t need to explain anything and they think you’re cool. And they are cool (all this, of course, is subjective). Totally awesome.

Conflicts: the other opposite

Relationships of conflict also occur with a person who is seemingly opposite to me. Moreover, it sparkles so much that it is easy to confuse conflict with passion. The dual of the conflicter is in many ways similar to me, he has the same functions in the first positions, but of a different color (when this happens, we can conclude that this person and I are different in rationality - we are).

Therefore, at first glance, everything seems to be in place: it feels like I have strong sensory skills and strong logic. It’s just that my sensory and logic are of a different color: EIE is looking for a combination of BL + BL, but I have strong conscious BL + BL.

Here is the title of the post “how socionics works” - this is an approach through dynamic, black logic. She is interested in how everything works and moves. And how to explain the complex in a simpler way. Irina Eglit’s book, for example, is called “Definition of Socionic Type. Self-instruction manual from A to Z."

An approach from white, structural logic would be “what is socionics.”

And a white ethicist with a request for black logic to the dual would call a book about socionics “How to make sure that we don’t part” - which is what Vera Stratievskaya did, in fact.

Our strengths are visible in everything.

The nuance is that, of course, I also have BL and ES (everyone has them), so I show them too. Moreover, they are also strong for me - this is how the type scheme works, the functions in positions 1 and 2 are mirrored in positions 7 and 8: a different color, but the same spreading power. It’s just that they are unconscious to me. The emergency is restrictive: if you get at me, as I wrote above, I’ll still fuck you with it. And you can really confuse this with passion, where I need to be pumped up well in order for the hot one to go. And this will be the moment before a nervous breakdown. The second nuance of conflictual relationships is that the strongest function of one partner directly targets the painful function of the other. And it's mutual!

In socionics there are also asymmetrical relationships, for example revision, but conflicters have complete and hellish symmetry.

The third opposite

The third example is a relationship of complete opposites (they are also called repayment relationships). For me it's SLE.

It would also seem that “we are very different.” But this is a completely different parsley.

Firstly, the opposite partner (although, unlike the conflicter, he is at least on the basis of rationality - SLE irrational) comes, like the conflicter, from the conflict quadra - the second. That is, we have different values ​​and different understandings of whether the goal is worth the effort.

And secondly, my partner’s strong functions are in an unconscious block (and this is mutual). I think that he is doing some kind of nonsense, but he thinks so about me.

In general, socionics helps a lot to see the light and learn that everyone is valuable, different and cool. But to do this, we have to abandon the “I’m a good guy, and they’re torturing me” approach. It's a process.

I think I still think in places that some are deliberately tormenting me - but I lie in the direction of universal value and importance.

Literature I can rely on on the topic of socionics

Books:

• Irina Eglit, “Definition of socionic type. Self-instruction manual from A to Z"
• Victor Gulenko, “Humanitarian Socionics”
• books from the publishing house "Black Squirrel" - choose the one closest to your type, so that the author does not infuriate

Websites:

• Socionics according to Vera Stratievskaya (type descriptions + some relationships)
• old Socionics info website (different descriptions of types, detailed explanation of the structure of Model A, table of relationships and a brief description of relationships)
• combat socionics - funny and about life, as well as about cinema

You need to understand that in the topic of socionics (as well as in the topic of feminism) there are a lot of opinions, often contradicting each other. People can fight to the last drop of blood for the ultimate truth. Therefore, if you want to look at the forums, you need to fasten your seat belts, it’s stormy in places.

I have been delving into this topic for a long time - new materials have probably appeared since then.

If any socionic books or websites have helped you personally, please recommend something in the comments too!

But there are cute illustrations of the quads, but I don’t know how to sign the author. In general, if you know the authors of the pictures that I used in the article, I would be glad to receive hints.

Share link:

• Click here to share content on Facebook. (Opens in a new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Send this to a friend (Opens in new window)

Similar

Socionics: personality types and their influence on character

As we said, Jung’s typology was taken as the basis for socionic typology. But if in his theory these were psychotypes, and there were eight of them, then in socionics they are called sociotypes, and there are sixteen of them (they are also called TIMs from “type of information metabolism”). It is very interesting that the names of these types differ in their figurative and artistic nature (we will also give scientific names), and they are based on the names of famous personalities (real or fictional), to one degree or another corresponding to each of the types.

Let's briefly look at these types:

1. “Maxim Gorky” (logical-sensory introvert). He is pedantic, excessively clean, and quickly inspires confidence. He is distinguished by a sober view of things, adequately assesses his strengths, and thinks rationally.
2. "Stirlitz" (logical-sensory extrovert). Very hardworking, social, rational. Life is always in full swing around him. An excellent motivator, he openly shows his feelings, loves noisy companies. He is distinguished by his cordiality and kindness.
3. "Robespierre" (logical-intuitive introvert). Original as a person, independent, organized. Able to think deeply and calmly, stays away from noisy companies. He is inclined to have intimate conversations, thinks clearly and logically, and has developed intuition.
4. "Jack London" (logical-intuitive extrovert). Quickly adapts to new circumstances, perfectly determines his own and others' potential. Likes to take risks, prefers active pastime and extreme sensations.
5. “Dreiser” (ethical-sensory introvert). Analyzes his own and other people's actions, tends to understand himself. Able to persistently, but in a gentle manner, defend his views. He is of the opinion that all people are equal.
6. "Hugo" (ethical-sensory extrovert). Easily manipulates people, always active. Differs in communication skills and efficiency. Altruistic nature, capable of sacrificing its interests.
7. “Dostoevsky” (ethical-intuitive introvert). Prefers to trust people and feels them easily. Has the ability and desire to learn. He is distinguished by excellent pedagogical qualities.
8. "Hamlet" (ethical-intuitive extrovert). Overly emotional, very expressive. Characterized by active gestures. He easily senses when he is being lied to. Has excellent intuition.
9. "Gaben" (sensory-logical introvert). Explores the world through his feelings. Loves to work with his hands. He is distinguished by a technical and rational mindset, the thinking of an engineer.
10. “Zhukov” (sensory-logical extrovert). He gets his way at any cost. Likes to lead and analyze. He prefers to always win and find benefits for himself in everything. Excellent plans.
11. “Dumas” (sensory-ethical introvert). Clear and easy to communicate, non-conflicting. He has a good sense of humor and likes to spend time actively. Characterized by a need to be needed, loves to provide support and help.
12. “Caesar” (sensory-ethical extrovert). Strives for leadership and prefers to surround himself with weaker people. Likes to appear unusual and interesting, as well as melancholic. Maintains a distance in communication, never reveals all his thoughts.
13. “Balzac” (intuitive-logical introvert). He is inclined to philosophical thoughts and reasoning, loves to read. He prefers to analyze everything and double-check it several times. He is neat, careful, appreciates others, strives to live in comfort.
14. “Don Quixote” (intuitive-logical extrovert). Differs in breadth of interests and views. Quickly adapts to new things. He does not like routine, knows how to convey complex things in simple language, and constantly generates ideas.
15. “Yesenin” (intuitive-ethical introvert). A dreamer, he loves to write poetry. He has a great understanding of people. Likes to spend money. Enjoys great success with the opposite sex. Uses his advantages to achieve goals.
16. "Huxley" (intuitive-ethical extrovert). He has many talents and a rich imagination. A person with a subtle soul who loves creativity. Does not like boredom and routine. Quickly finds a common language with others.

We’ll talk about how to determine your sociotype a little later, but for now let’s note that, of course, it doesn’t fully determine your character. Each person is unique in nature, and even with the help of sixteen personality types it is impossible to give a comprehensive description of character and other personality parameters.

And in its pure form, any socionic type is never present in a person - there is only one predominant one, and all others exist in the individual to a lesser extent. Moreover, seemingly incompatible things can be combined in one person. For example, an intuitive-logical introvert who takes care of his family, trusts people and likes to think, may strive to achieve his goal by any means and benefit from everything, which is typical for a sensory-logical extrovert.

The socionics model allows us to establish a way of perceiving information that reflects a person’s reactions (and their stability) to certain circumstances, events, etc. This, in turn, allows you to get to know yourself (and others) better, understand what you need in life, how to communicate with people more correctly, what ways to achieve goals, etc. The socionic type can be determined using special methods.

How is socionics used?

The classmate I already mentioned told me the following. The task of the scientists who developed the socionic approach was to form an effective group of astronauts. A team in which members would complement each other and conflicts would be reduced to a minimum.

In today's reality, I use socionics to explain to the client phenomena and the world in a language that is not mine, but that which is inherent to man. In terms he understands.

Socionics allows you to easily accept the pros and cons of people, including your own. It gives a chance to understand the reasons for actions and predict behavior.

Some experts use socionics to predict the development of relationships in a couple. This is not my approach, although I do not and do not dispute it.

I would also like to note that knowing your type makes it possible to set real goals for self-development and be more effective.

Socionics: methods for determining sociotype

Traditionally, to determine a person’s sociotype (typing), the following are used:

• Socionic tests and questionnaires . The Myers-Briggs questionnaire is very popular (you can take it here), although experienced specialists (socionists) point out that the Myers-Briggs typology does not fully correspond to the socionic typology, so these questionnaires are adapted. There are also Weisband and Meged-Ovcharov tests, Talanov questionnaires, Gulenko test, Lytov multifactor test, Keirsey socionic test.
• Socionic interviews . This is a conversation between a socionicist and a person being typed on an arbitrary or planned topic (often accompanied by testing or questioning). When conducting a diagnosis, the specialist evaluates how clearly the signs of IMT and some other specific parameters are expressed. After this, the socionician compares the received data and makes a conclusion about TIM.
• Experiments . To implement this method, as a rule, socionics create special conditions for those being typed and set specific tasks for them. In the process of completing tasks, specialists monitor people’s actions, reactions, decisions, and then draw conclusions about TIM.
• Observations . A specialist observes a person (or a group of people), evaluates his appearance, behavior, actions, and non-verbal manifestations. But in order to draw reliable conclusions, a socionicist must have the skill of figurative-sensual recognition of TIM based on impressions.
• Research dossier . Socionics studies a person’s personal file, eyewitness accounts, personal texts and/or diary entries, photo and video materials, and creative results.

It is believed that experienced people and professional specialists can determine a person’s sociotype by his reactions, appearance, manner of communication and even style of clothing, without resorting to lengthy research. In addition, some are able to adequately determine their own sociotype. But in order to achieve such a level in socionics, it is necessary, firstly, to understand in detail the system of this direction and its sociotypes, secondly, to study the psychotypes proposed by Jung’s theory, and thirdly (if it comes to self-typing), to learn objectively perceive and evaluate yourself, your character traits, reactions and other features of your personality. We should not forget about the main problem of socionics - that from a scientific position it lacks objective criteria for determining the socionic type. In other words, any analysis of a person using socionics will not have reliable scientific justification.

However, if you learn to identify sociotypes, you will be able, with a certain degree of probability, to establish what the behavioral differences between people are and look for the right approach to them, determine the habits, interests and abilities of those around you, and understand what dictates their actions and actions. Possessing socionic knowledge, a person is also able to determine his compatibility with people, predict the development of relationships, highlight which qualities in other people should be perceived as basic, and which it makes sense not to pay special attention to. In short, socionics, despite the lack of scientific status, can be very useful, both for one person and for society as a whole.

Conclusion: is socionics scientific?

The answer is obvious: no, it is unscientific. Perhaps someday in the future socionics will be recognized by the scientific community as a separate discipline, but for now it is only an empirical model based on the subjective perception of the author, interesting as intellectual entertainment, but without any statistically confirmed basis. The only test of this typology that is close to a scientific instrument has insufficient validity and reliability. Works on socionics published by scientific (non-socionics) publications are practically absent, and the scientific community does not even try to prove its inconsistency - after all, the evidentiary work in this case falls on the shoulders of the supporters of the theory.

Despite this, socionics is a popular hobby for many and will remain so in the future. In this capacity, it can exist indefinitely along with other typologies not recognized by science, for example, horoscopes. Why? It provides an interesting reason for communication, the illusion of control over one’s own life and relationships, and it simply brings pleasure, like a game or a puzzle. Well, such entertainment has a right to exist, but, apparently, it does not represent any value for people in general, since it does not carry tools for solving problems or other benefits.

Socionics: benefits for individuals and society

The socionics model today is penetrating into an increasing number of areas. Those who accepted it more than others include:

• Recruitment, training and development of personnel
• Improving the efficiency of organizational management
• Creation of innovative educational technologies
• Diagnosis and treatment of psychosomatic diseases
• Vocational guidance for teenagers and adults
• Raising children in families and specialized institutions
• Organization of dating
• Self-knowledge and self-development

The most popular area of ​​application of socionics is building comfortable relationships in any social group. With the help of socionics, we can understand that complications in communicating with another person (an acquaintance, colleague, relative, etc.) may not at all be a consequence of his malicious intent or internal “unsuitability” for us. It’s just that different people perceive the world and life individually, have their own opinions, and have different values. And just understanding how our and other people’s psyches work can lead to getting rid of many problems in relationships and relieving tension. And this is important in absolutely any area of ​​​​life.

In addition to this, studying socionics allows you to grow personally, expand boundaries, get out of your comfort zone, learn to be yourself and understand yourself without squeezing your personality into the framework of how it “should” be. Despite the unreliability of methods, biased results, and the lack of scientific status, this direction has an undeniable advantage. It consists in the fact that socionics helps everyone to form correct self-esteem, communicate more effectively with people, achieve their goals faster and easier and find their place in this huge world.

At the same time, from its very inception to this day, socionics has been subject to serious criticism. Let's consider it to get more objective conclusions.

My introduction to socionics

Socionics attracted me in the 11th grade, when I was trying to understand how the world works. Like any teenager, I loved tests. And I came across the MMPI test. In Russian adaptation it is called SMIL. But the information provided in the test seemed to be insufficient. Indeed, the test result is the American version of the approach. My inquisitive mind forced me to continue searching for information. So I got into socionics! She gave answers to all questions. Yes, it's a little confusing that this is pseudoscience. But, unfortunately, not everything in the world can be proven. For now.

Surprisingly, years later I took advanced training courses with a female psychologist who was in Aušra Augustinavičiūtė’s research group! A fellow student told how the work was structured. It was a delight! It was like I had touched history!

Now let's understand what the socionic approach includes.

Criticism of socionics

Many researchers say not only that socionics is not a science and therefore does not deserve much trust, but also that personality typing can generally harm a person.

First of all, we need to remember once again that socionics is based on Jung’s typology and Kempinsky’s theory of information metabolism. If Jung's ideas can be attributed to scientific knowledge, then scientists have ambivalent attitudes towards Kempinski's theory. And in general there is very little information about it, and evidence of its accuracy and validity requires searching and numerous checks. It also makes sense to say that the founder of socionics, Aušra Augustinavičiute, was an economist, not a psychologist by profession, which also causes some caution.

Who develops socionic tests today is often unknown, and, again, not all reputable psychologists recognize them. Actually, the accuracy of these tests is far from ideal. You can go through several of them and get different results (different socionic schools can type the same person differently, since none of them has a clear evaluation system, and the characteristics of sociotypes often diverge), which indicates their low reliability and validity. But that’s not all - there are other indicators that indicate that socionics is unlikely to ever become a science.

In the same psychology, there are specific criteria for objectivity in research (objectivity, repeatability, homogeneity of results, etc.), and any experiments that do not meet them and are not confirmed on different samples are automatically considered questionable. And socionics cannot imagine such experiments, because they have not been carried out at all and are unlikely to be carried out, because socionic criteria are subjective and vague. And according to another principle of scientific knowledge, the less subjectivity in a statement, the more it can be considered scientifically reliable.

According to the principle of verification, which was developed by Karl Popper (Austrian and British sociologist and philosopher), scientific knowledge can only be verified through observation and experiment. Although these research methods are used in socionics, they are all subjective and depend on a specialist guided by his own thoughts and experience.

Another principle – the principle of falsification (read the article “Popper’s falsifiability as a scientific criterion”) indicates that only knowledge that can be refuted can be called “scientific”. And when some direction or teaching is structured in such a way as to explain any facts, it can no longer be scientific. In socionics there are a lot of different lengthy formulations such as “sometimes”, “usually”, “inclination”, etc., generalizing information in such a way that any person, if desired, will find something to agree with in such descriptions. She uses mostly everyday language in describing mental phenomena, but it is imprecise and vague. For this reason, scientific statements appear that are impossible to prove or disprove.

Since its inception, socionics has hardly changed and does not produce any new knowledge, but a science that can be trusted is developing and producing new knowledge. Socionics does not require serious in-depth research and many years of education; it easily and simply determines the psychotype and everything connected with it, right down to a “favorable” partner for family life. Reliable psychological knowledge requires the most serious study, is difficult to master and never evaluates a person unambiguously. Socionics allows everyone to become their own psychologist, to find easy answers to the most complex questions.

As for the detrimental influence on a person, socionics can “justify” negative character traits, such as anxiety, hysteria or rudeness, as a result of which a person stops working on himself (“I am who I am”). In other words, the same thing that can be used for your benefit can also have negative consequences. Everything depends on interpretations, aspirations, discipline - in a word, the person himself. Such self-diagnosis also has little to do with science.

Socionics was obtained using an unscientific method, which means that it is a priori incapable of becoming a science and claiming reliability and objectivity, especially taking unconfirmed concepts and unprovable statements as a basis.

These are just some of the cons regarding socionics, and if you search, you can find entire scientific works criticizing it. How to treat this teaching - as a useful tool for learning about yourself and others, or as a fun idea and food for thought in your spare time - is up to you. Of course, you can take something useful from it for yourself, but you should always remember that you should not blindly believe it - there is no scientific basis for this.

And to maintain balance (after all, we already had a video about the application and benefits of socionics), we invite you to watch a video on the topic of criticism of this direction from Alexander Neveev, candidate of psychological sciences.

Criticism from the scientific community and independent researchers

Sergey Vladimirovich Kruchinin, candidate of political sciences, in his research article critically substantiates the inconsistency of using socionics for marketing research:

“In [the book by E.S. Kiseleva “The role and importance of the consumer in the marketing system and ways to manage his behavior based on socionics”] the authors make... bold statements... that a marketer must know the socionic type of market segments. This is an extremely ambitious statement, which is methodologically correct to present as reality only after confirmation by relevant statistics and a double-blind study that has proven itself in medical research. The lack of involvement of socionics in this case is due to one of its provisions about the innateness of the socionic type and its irreplaceability. Linking the types of preferences with socionics requires proof that these preferences will not change, since the types do not change, according to socionics. (...) But there is no evidence provided that human behavior... will not change. On the contrary, a person with age and life experience can change his preferences in choosing a product and change his behavior strategy.” He also expresses deep skepticism regarding the use of socionic types established using the MBTI test for personnel selection, and doubts about the realism of the results of some studies related to socionics that could give it a scientific appearance, for example, those given in the article by A. G. Shmelev “ No longer socionics, but not yet differential psychology”:

“...Perhaps, for the first time, attempts have been made to correlate socionics with the analysis of patients with affective pathologies. The attempt is interesting, but the result of 100% ethical rationality among people with affective disorders allows one to either doubt the representativeness of the statistical sample, or doubt the legitimacy of cause and effect.”

He makes the following conclusions: socionics, of course, is a well-promoted brand, is of interest to researchers as a mathematical puzzle, but has no serious scientific value [1].

An article on socionics published in the “Society of Skeptics” also questions the scientific nature of the methodology of socionics, compares it with astrology, and all similarities in behavior by type are explained by the Barnum Effect. This effect is that people highly rate the accuracy of personality descriptions that they believe are tailor-made for them. Not only popular, but also so-called “advanced” literature on socionics is critically analyzed - the problems in all these sources are similar and are also related to methodology.

Objectives and methods

In the process of development of psychology as a science, changes in the subjects of study occurred. If at the beginning of its development it studied the human soul, his consciousness and unconscious actions, now modern psychology pays more attention to personality traits, states, as manifestations of mental processes. Recently, a new approach to the subject of study has emerged. It mainly examines the psychological laws and mechanisms of human mental activity. It helps the individual understand the essence of ongoing phenomena and teaches methods of managing them. It makes it possible to use this knowledge for self-improvement and increase the efficiency of life.

There are certain methods that help achieve goals:

• Collection of information. To do this, surveys, tests, self-observation, and biographical studies are conducted.
• Data processing.
• Psychological impact. Conducting discussions, trainings, seminars. Teaching relaxation techniques.

When turning to a psychologist, a person strives to know the reasons for certain actions, to get to know himself, and to build harmonious relationships with the world around him.

Socionics and personality

One of the first difficulties that a person encounters on his path is the problem of self-identification, that is, determining the strengths and weaknesses of his psychotype. Knowledge of socionics helps you quickly and accurately determine your own character traits and learn, based on your strengths, to make correct and adequate decisions.

In socionics, a harmonious person is called dualized. Such a person always approaches solving a problem rationally and, if his strengths cannot help in solving a problem, then he willingly uses the help of a suitable partner without experiencing a feeling of inferiority. Knowing the basic principles of socionics, you can easily select the best assistant to solve each specific problem.

The problem of communication and mutual understanding with others can probably be called the most important factor determining the success of mastering reality. Knowing how you perceive information yourself, and how others perceive it, and the ability to use this information is the shortest path to building good relationships and mutual understanding with others.

The ability to change your socionic type or influence it

According to the founder of depth psychology, C. G. Jung, a person cannot have an equal number of all the functions that determine a person’s sociotype. Usually one or the other function is the strongest and achieving harmony through the development of weak functions is impossible. That is, a person cannot change his socionic type on his own. Forcibly changing it under the influence of external factors, as experience shows, can only lead to psychoses and neuroses.

There is no such thing as a “bad” or “good” type, but there are different sociotypes. Socionics advises to perceive your weaknesses not as shortcomings, but as features of your character. Such self-esteem allows you to get rid of feelings of inferiority. If a person develops his strengths, then after them the weak ones always improve, and he gradually transforms himself from a complex person into a harmonious person.

Ease of mastering socionics

To take advantage of all the opportunities and benefits that knowledge of socionics provides, you need to master its basic principles. There are not too many basic concepts that you need to know and study. These include:

• eight criteria for information exchange;
• model A, consisting of eight functions;
• what aspects each function deals with.

Each person can acquire this knowledge in just two days and enjoy the enormous opportunities and advantages that they provide in the field of personal development and interpersonal relationships.

Application of socionics in various fields

When forming personnel policies at enterprises in any sphere of the economy, relying on socionic methods for determining the type of person, it is possible to determine with a high degree of reliability the nature of professional activity corresponding to the sociotype of the employee. In addition, socionics allows you to determine in which direction a person should develop in order to achieve the greatest possible success.

Socionics will help you choose a business partner and tell you what line of behavior to choose in your relationship with him, as well as tell you how to build relationships in a production team and what changes you need to make in your own behavior so that they are optimal.

Based on the capabilities of socionics, you can build a team of mutually complementary like-minded people to solve any individual production or research problem.

The experience of using socionics in pedagogy is interesting. By determining the sociotypes of teachers and students, it is possible to change for the better the psychological climate and academic performance, both in each individual class and in the school as a whole.

The use of socionics in medicine is just beginning, and a study of the connection between a particular disease and a certain sociotype of people has shown that intuitive extroverts usually develop diseases of the liver, pancreas and gastrointestinal tract, ethical extroverts have kidney diseases, and logical extroverts have heart diseases. In other words, knowing the patient’s sociotype will simplify diagnosis and increase its reliability.