Socionic types and relationships: identified himself as a load - climb into the back
On that day, a friend of Glafira came to me and announced that she was Robespierre. “It's good that it's not Napoleon,” I thought. Everyone is almost used to the extravagant antics of her friend, but you never know … Fortunately, Glafira immediately said that this is not a split personality, but …
On that day, a friend of Glafira came to me and announced that she was Robespierre. “It's good that it's not Napoleon,” I thought. Everyone is almost used to the extravagant antics of a friend, but you never know …
Fortunately, Glafira immediately revealed that this is not a split personality, but a classification she recently learned about. This classification was called socionics, and the types of people according to this classification were assigned the names of famous characters. At least, this explained why she was attracted by socionics, whose types are distributed among outstanding personalities. Who would refuse to feel like the leader of the French Revolution?
There were sixteen socionic types in total. Glafira herself took "Robespierre" for herself, and attributed her neighbor's Raichka to the socionic type of "Gugosh". This is such a gender derivative from "Hugo", the slang of local socionics, since the characters of the types are all male. Glafira has not yet managed to determine my socionic type. She doubted whether she should be ranked as a Dreiser or as a Huxley. I agreed to listen to her confessions in my usual role. And even studied socionics from the point of view of attitudes towards psychology.
For some time my Glafira threw herself headlong into socionics with personality types. She especially wanted to improve her relations with the opposite sex with the help of socionics. As I learned from the filing of the newly-made "Robespierre", in socionics, type compatibility is of varying degrees. The most suitable for compatibility are considered duals - socionic types that complement each other in terms of the missing parameters for each. Shows Glafira a photo of her then boyfriend and says: "You see, he was not a dual to me at all!" Soon, she showed me another male photograph, one that pointedly captures the face of the duala candidate.
Alas, despite Glafirin's attempt to build personal relationships using socionics and a dual combination of personality types, the collapse was not far off. After a series of heartbreaking scandals, Glafira spoke about the dual only in the past tense. A fallen voice scratching the ear.
Soon Glafirin's interest in socionics faded away, since this classification did not fulfill its main function. She did not explain herself to the person. She did not teach me how to build relationships in real life, and not in a toy mechanistic model. That quite naturally comes from the erroneous, flat structure on which socionics is built and which leads to a distorted, extremely simplified construction of personality types.
Carl Jung himself, the discoverer of extroverted and introverted phenomena in the psyche, was skeptical about attempts to transform his discoveries into a typology of a crude, clumsy model. This is what Jung said: “I say this from my own experience, because as soon as I published the first formulation of my criteria - this event will soon be twenty years old - I discovered, to my displeasure, that I somehow got into a mess, something did not fit Apparently, I tried to explain too much by simple means, as is most often the case with the first joy of discovery. I discovered a fact that could not be denied, namely, downright huge differences within the groups of introverts and extroverts themselves."
It is impossible to deny the contribution of the creator of socionics and her followers to the global aspiration of all mankind to reveal the inner motives of man, the psychology of human relations. Even being a dead-end branch of psychoanalytic genesis, the pre-systemic definition of the socionic type shows how important the very idea of psychological typology is.
As we can see, in the thorny history of offshoots from psychology and socionics, her unscientific stepdaughter, descended from the classics of psychoanalysis. Taking Jung's extraverted-introvertive dualism, and at the same time borrowing from him the 4 functions of the human psyche - thinking, emotions, sensations and intuition, socionics strongly confused with types. To put it mildly, I messed up … For example, the function of thinking was assigned exclusively a logical modality in the types of socionics. “If a person thinks, then he is a logician” (?!) Absurd … But where are the other types of thinking? Where is analytical thinking? Where has figurative thinking gone, which is understandable even in everyday life for every cook? Not to mention the intuitive, visual-effective, abstract, systemic types of thinking …
A systematic description of types of thinking in full appeared only in our century, together with the innovative paradigm of System-Vector Psychology. Eight vectors, conditional fundamental measures, give a three-dimensional picture of the entire nature of man, his inner unconscious. The number of system combinations for eight vectors is 255, not just 16 socionic types. And even these 255 possible combinations are not a hard mathematical set. There are additional factors that change the external and internal vector manifestations, sometimes by 180 degrees. At the same time, all additional derivatives are easily recognized and felt, making it possible to add a volumetric clear picture of the mental both of an individual person and of his interaction in a couple and society.
This picture can be easily formed by any person who has mastered even the first, initial training course in System-Vector Psychology. Since each vector is the essence of the internal mental, associated with erogenous zones, and with physiology, and with psychosomatics. An entity that determines, among other things, the type of sexuality and the type of thinking. It would seem, what is the connection between them? This connection, previously incomprehensible to anyone, was revealed in the latest systems paradigm. And now it is available for any non-lazy mind who gets acquainted with System-Vector Psychology.
This non-lazy mind comprehends what, in his words, the famous Jung "got into a mess" with introversion and extraversion. And socionics fell into the same Jungian trap. Without going far for examples: she appointed Yesenin exclusively an introvert. "Moscow mischievous reveler"! And only on the basis of System-Vector Psychology, the whole life scenario of Yesenin with his urethral-sound vector complex is clear. It becomes clear how the incongruous, systemic extraverted and introverted properties are combined. The suicidal complex of the "Dead Poets' Club" becomes systematically clear.
As for the compatibility of psychotypes, in socionics - an unscientific, non-systemic approach prevents practical application in life. Even with the example of my friend Glafira, we were convinced that this does not work. If she knew the system of vectors, she could at first glance identify under the guise of socionic dual an ordinary sexual user in a certain vector status.
The so-called “dual” combination proclaimed ideal, in which each partner supplements with his strong parameters the same weak parameters for the other, looks primitivism. A simple question refutes the original false statement: "How long will a sensually developed woman, strong in compassion and cultural development, last next to an underdeveloped type who hates culture due to her natural deprivation of it?"
The mossy myth about the halves, occasionally finding each other, does not work in the realities of our world. Without going into the details of the fact that socionics did not even come close to explaining such relationships between personality types as natural polygamy, natural monogamy. In contrast to the old flat theories of the last century, on the basis of System-Vector Psychology, we understand the psychological unconscious roots of such criminal phenomena as pedophilia, such social phenomena as prostitution and homosexuality …
All compatibility issues - at the everyday, psychological, sexual, intellectual and spiritual level - are revealed only in a new systemic methodology. The most difficult problem, if we proceed from the old myth of one single half, becomes a systemically solvable task on the way to harmonious relationships. And according to the theory of systemic probability, there are much more complementary “halves” suitable for each person …
