Socionics: Basic Concepts

Contents:

• What is socionics?
• Basic concepts: the socion
• Basic concepts: sociotype
• Basic concepts: dichotomy
• Basic concepts: aspect and function
• Model A

What is socionics?

Socionics is a personality typology based on:

• a universally symmetric structure of traits originating in the research of C. G. Jung (and later supplemented by the so-called Reinin traits);
• the concept of the individual’s functions (initially - 8, whose program positions de facto correspond to Jung’s 8 types; today - 12);
• the theory of intertype relations developed by Aušra Augustinavičiūtė.

Socionics is not a separate science, but an interdisciplinary tool for classifying the diversity of human characters. At various times, attempts have been made to connect socionics with cybernetics (the information metabolism hypothesis), sociology (the theory of quadras, etc.), philosophy (aspectonics, the concept of metaenergy), neurophysiology (the research of V. L. Talanov), and biopsychology.

Today, there are many directions (schools) within socionics, including purely recreational ones that make no claim to scientific status, openly pseudoscientific ones (attempting to “cross” socionics with astrology and other similar systems, or exploiting the so-called linguistic approach), and those that use mathematical apparatus to study the diversity of human characters.

Contrary to some widespread views:

1. The information metabolism hypothesis (hereafter - IM) is not identical to socionics, although it was introduced into socionics by A. Augustinavičiūtė. We are skeptical of the concept of IM in its refined form - as one that strips away the true meaning of the sociotype, reducing it to purely verbal, superficial features of personality. Whereas in reality, the sociotype reflects to a greater extent deep personality traits associated with the implementation of one or another biosocial survival program.
2. The existence of 16 quantized sociotypes was refuted by V. Talanov’s research; at present, it is correct to speak of the socion as a continuous space of character diversity.
3. Socionics is entirely self-sufficient for classifying the intratype diversity of characters; for this, there is by no means any need to resort to external typologies such as Psychosophy (moreover, such “crossing” of socionics with other typologies rather confuses and complicates classification, making its conclusions ambiguous and internally contradictory).

Basic concepts: the socion

SOCION - a 15-dimensional (by the number of Reinin traits) continuous space of psychological traits containing 16 symmetrically positioned points corresponding to the 16 reference types considered in socionics. The set of points for which one of the reference types is the nearest in this space unites all real individuals for whom this type is the leading one (more simply - the set of real people of one type). Thus, within the socion, the boundaries between the regions of people of different types are determined according to a Voronoi diagram in 15-dimensional space. Since each of the 16 regions is extended, it should be said that intratype variability is very large, and a particular person A of type X will by no means always be more similar to B of the same type X than to C of type Y.

At the point of intersection of all coordinate axes (the zero point) lies a character that is the statistical norm for the population of individuals under consideration. The distance (vector length) from this point to the point of a particular individual in socion space denotes the level of that individual’s general personality accentuation. The distribution of real people by the aggregate of their properties along any of the axes of socion space is normal - because all traits are complex, and their balance is governed by many randomly combined factors - from genetic to situationally acquired ones. Accordingly, the overall distribution of individuals in this space is also spherical normal - with a relatively uniform increase in density toward the zero point. In reality, no 16 groups isolated from one another and corresponding to the 16 types exist, as is often assumed. Moreover, owing to various endogenous factors (changes in current mood), the points of the instantaneous position of particular individuals in socion space can shift, oscillating to a greater or lesser extent around a certain equilibrium point that is individual for each person. And if the oscillations are greater than the distance to the boundary with the region of another type, then periodically and for some time a person’s leading type can change.

Basic concepts: sociotype

SOCIOTYPE - a particular strategy of survival and genetic reproduction within a social system.

Socionics considers 16 sociotypes originating from Jung’s 8 psychological types.

The existence of sociotypes is a consequence of the natural genetic variability of all living things. The diversity of genes and conditions of ontogenesis leads to the formation of individuals who differ within a single population. A particular neurophysiological balance of an individual’s organism that differs from the average (if it is stable over a long period of time) causes, with statistically significant probability, behavior of a particular kind which, through repetition, leads to a particular mode of interaction with the external environment and, ultimately, to the consolidation of the choice made in a particular worldview - a stable system of the individual’s life values. Thus, the sociotype manifests itself at all levels of organization of living evolving systems - from the chemical (genetics) to the social (ideology).

The definition of sociotypes through a combination of socionic traits is given in the table below.

At the same time, it should always be remembered that:

1. The variances of different Reinin traits differ greatly from one another, and with them, so does the contribution of these RT to the properties of the sociotype. Thus, for example, extraversion/introversion is an order of magnitude more important for determining the properties of a sociotype than Carefree-Farsightedness see table.

2. A real person is always characterized not by a single sociotype, but by a type profile what is this?. At the same time, it is by no means necessary that all traits will “fit” into the model of a particular type. That is, if, for example, a person is an extravert and a rational type, that person will also be a Dynamic with a probability that is by no means 100%, but close to 50%. Whereas only slightly less than 50% of particular extraverted rational individuals will be closer to the Static pole (and the same is true for any other trio of interrelated traits). Thus, inversion of some traits, especially those making a weak variance contribution to the overall set of properties of the sociotype, is common see below; more details.

Basic concepts: dichotomy

A socionic dichotomy (i.e., literally, a pair of traits) is a fundamental concept of socionic classification. Each dichotomy consists of two mutually exclusive sets of personality properties - two traits. In colloquial speech, the dichotomy itself is sometimes called a “trait”, although terminologically this is not entirely correct.

The socion, as a set of 16 sociotypes, can in a first approximation be formed by four dichotomies, provided that each of them is independent of the other three. The dichotomies first considered by C. G. Jung (the so-called “Jungian basis”) are usually taken as the basic set of four.

JUNGIAN BASIS - a conventional name for four dichotomies whose existence follows directly from C. G. Jung’s description of 8 personality types in his book “Psychological Types”. The Jungian basis consists of the following traits:

• Extraversion - introversion
• Logic (calculation, thinking) - ethics (feeling, experience)
• Intuition (imagination) - sensing (sensation)
• Irrationality (perception) - rationality (judgment)

In Jung’s original typology, each of the 8 types was obtained at the intersection of three of the four traits of the basis (extraversion-introversion, judgment-perception, and, if judgment predominates, thinking-feeling, while if perception predominates, sensation-intuition). In MBTI, each of the 16 types corresponds to one of the 16 possible combinations of the 4 traits. In socionics, the situation is more complex, because additional Reinin traits contribute to the semantic content of each sociotype, and their poles may not be aligned with the poles of the traits of the Jungian basis.

REININ TRAITS (sometimes also: Reinin-Augustinavičiūtė; hereafter - RT) - additional dichotomies obtained from the basic ones, as well as from one another, by Boolean multiplication of the conventional signs of their poles, and forming an Abelian group. The values of Reinin traits in theory depend nonlinearly on the values of the parent traits, although in practice they are for the most part independent of the latter.

The existence of additional symmetrical divisions of the socion was first mathematically proven by Grigory Reinin in the mid-1980s - after the founder of socionics, Aušra Augustinavičiūtė, proposed the possible existence of additional traits not reducible to the “Jungian basis”.

The diagram below shows the theoretical distribution of Reinin traits across the 16 sociotypes.

Reinin traits in socionics and the principle of their agreement in small groups

By multiplying the mathematical expressions indicated in the left-hand column, we obtain the expression corresponding to the third dichotomy that completes the small group. For example: logic-ethics * intuition-sensing = a*b = ab = democratism-aristocratism. If the multiplicands contain identical symbols, these cancel out: sensing-intuition * static-dynamic = b*abc = a*bb*c = ac = judiciousness-decisiveness; tactics-strategy * positivism-negativism = acx*abx = aa*b*c*xx = bc = merry-seriousness; and so on.

The pole of the third trait of a small group, if the poles of the other two are known, is determined by Boolean multiplication of the conventional signs + and −, for example: extraversion * static = +x * +abc = +abcx = irrationality; merry * aristocratism = +bc * −ab = −ac = decisiveness; ethics * decisiveness = −a * −ac = +c = questimity; and so on.

Beginning with A. Augustinavičiūtė, various socionists repeatedly proposed mutually contradictory hypotheses about the semantic content of RT (some still doubt even that such content exists). At present, as a result of the analysis of a large body of questionnaire statistics carried out by V. L. Talanov, it has been established that RT possess different amounts of internal semantic content and make different contributions to the variance of the personality properties considered by socionics:

Basic concepts: aspect and function

A socionic aspect - literally: a particular view of the surrounding reality that represents it as a set of phenomena of a particular kind. The number of ways of distinguishing the most general categories of phenomena is apparently limited by the logic of reality itself. According to the author’s concept of metaenergy, there are 12 of them - corresponding to 12 socionic functions.

A function is an apparatus by means of which a system (in the case of socionics - an individual, a personality, a society) manages one or another aspect of reality.

Depending on which aspects of reality, owing to a combination of objective and subjective circumstances, are most in demand in society here and now, that society cultivates particular functions in its members (to the extent that this is possible), and, even more importantly, promotes to leadership positions people who are specialists in one or another function.

Functions in socionics are divided into:

• irrational (Ne, Ni, Se and Si)
• rational (Ti, Te, Fi and Fe)
• questimity-declatimity (Qi, Qe, Di and De).

The table below presents the coefficients currently used, by means of which the value of a function is uniquely derived from the values of Reinin traits.

Coefficients for converting Reinin trait values into function values:

for example: Ni = −x +1.5*abcx −abc +3*b −3*ac = introversion + 1.5*irrationality + dynamicity + 3*intuition + 3*decisiveness

The main characteristics of a function are its STRENGTH, INERTNESS and VALUEDNESS.

FUNCTION STRENGTH - is determined according to how much of an individual’s physical and mental resources is spent on the given function in comparison with the others. Since the amount of such resources in different (relatively healthy and intellectually intact) people is comparable, the same function can also be compared in strength across different people, and a conventional population mean can ultimately be determined. At the same time, because of natural variability, any population will contain people with function strength above and below the mean, and its entire distribution of strength will be close to normal.

Most often (with an average probability of about 40-50%), the subject’s strongest function is the program function (according to Model A of the leading type), and the weakest is the vulnerable function. In addition to the program function, the creative or background functions relatively often occupy the position of the strongest. Similarly, in addition to the vulnerable function, the suggestive or role functions are sometimes the weakest. The limiting and activating functions can be either the strongest or the weakest, but in both cases much more rarely more details.

FUNCTION INERTNESS - indicates how far the function deviates in its strength from the population mean (regardless of whether it deviates toward strength or weakness). A function in an inert position is the one with respect to which a person is most accentuated: the person possesses unique properties, but at the same time often cannot respond in accordance with the norm, is inflexible, vulnerable, and requires support. Activity involving inert functions is especially important for the survival of the personality, so the corresponding aspects of reality are very well consciously apprehended by it. The program and vulnerable functions are most often the most inert.

The opposite of inertness is contactness - the proximity of a function’s strength to the population mean. In the aspects of contact functions, a person much more easily engages with the current situation, switches, finds a “common language” with the surroundings, and more often and more easily makes compromises. The aspects of contact functions usually do not evoke a strong response in consciousness and, overall, are less well consciously apprehended, “in the background”.

FUNCTION VALUEDNESS - is a trait indicating the total strength of a pair of complementary functions.

A function is valued if, together with its complementary function, it is stronger than the sum of the antagonist functions (or, equivalently, if the pole of the dichotomy from the group of quadra values that contributes to its content coincides with the pole of this dichotomy that predominates in the personality).

For example:

• Ne (and also Si) is valued if Ne+Si > Ni+Se (i.e., if the personality is closer to the “Judicious” pole of personality properties than to the “Decisive” one);
• Ti (and also Fe) is valued if Ti+Fe > Fi+Te (i.e., if the personality is closer to the “Merry” pole of personality properties than to the “Serious” one);
• Qi (and also De) is valued if Qi+De > Di+Qe (i.e., if the personality is closer to the “Democratic” pole of personality properties than to the “Aristocratic” one).

Model A

The definition of sociotypes through the order (hierarchy) of functions is carried out in classical socionics using Model A.

Introduced into Jungian typology by Aušra Augustinavičiūtė, this model remains the best-known and most popular among socionists today, although, as practice shows, the order of functions specified in it (their distribution by strength, inertness and valuedness) is observed far from universally. Nevertheless, it is precisely this order that defines the “reference” representative of a particular sociotype (that is, one whose description is used in type diagnostics).

Among the functions, the program and vulnerable functions are the most important in determining the properties of sociotypes - about 2/3 of the entire volume of personality properties used in type diagnostics is associated with their balance. The remaining functions can vary greatly in strength among representatives of the same sociotype.

Model A does not take into account the balance of questimity-declatimity functions, which were introduced into socionics later by V. Talanov and A. Khizhnyak.

Traditional designation of functions by symbols:

FUNCTIONAL STRUCTURE OF A SOCIOTYPE (from the perspective of Model A)

“Mental ring” - functions that are well consciously apprehended by the personality, the realization of which (one’s own and others’) is actively verbalized and evaluated.

“EGO block”. “I want and can” - strong, valued functions. The basis of the personality; they determine the priorities of the individual’s worldview, its most mature, developed part.

1 - PROGRAM. “I have everything necessary.” The strongest function, and at the same time inert - prone to getting stuck, stubborn, not accepting compromises or other viewpoints that contradict its own. It is switched on most of the time and is switched off with difficulty. The subject views the world through the prism of its aspect and strives to maximize it (primarily by minimizing the aspects of the role and limiting functions).

2 - CREATIVE. “I explain how to obtain it.” A strong, but at the same time contact, function - flexible and controllable, switched on and off by the program function when necessary. It has no difficulty listening to and taking into account others’ opinions on the aspect, makes compromises, and searches through options in pursuit of the best solution that is most appropriate to the situation.

“SUPEREGO block”. “I do not want and cannot” - weak, unvalued functions. Manifestations of their aspects in others cause irritation and are perceived as an annoying hindrance that interferes with normal life. The personality feels its defectiveness in these aspects and strives somehow to correct it, to compensate for it in one way or another.

3 - ROLE. “Do not touch this unnecessarily.” A contact function whose aspect in itself is of no interest to the subject, but which can be used as a “mask” covering the subject’s vulnerability in a situation of “playing on someone else’s field” (for a program logician - this is the field of ethics, for a program sensing type - intuition, etc.). By demonstrating patterns developed for this function, the subject may believe that they are thereby engaging in full-fledged creativity. However, to people who have this same function in a stronger position, such creativity looks caricatured.

4 - VULNERABLE. “Spare me.” The weakest function. Inert, it strives to remain switched off all the time. The subject strives to minimize its aspect in themselves and in others (primarily by shifting attention to the aspects of the activating and creative functions). Other people’s manifestations of the aspect of the vulnerable function are perceived as a threat to one’s own subjecthood and are avoided whenever possible; if this is impossible, they are devalued and reduced to nothing by any possible means (usually - with the direct involvement of the program function).

“Vital ring” - functions that are often not consciously apprehended and usually not verbalized.

“ID block”. “I want, but cannot” - weak, valued functions. In these functions, a person is most suggestible; manifestations of their aspects are associated in their conception with the joy of being, which they themselves are unable to attain, and they want to obtain it from others in one way or another.

5 - SUGGESTIVE. “Give me.” A weak function; there is a desire to develop in it, but no conception of how to do so. It is “omnivorous” - greedily absorbs information on its aspect, but poorly senses the quality of this information and retains it poorly. The subject has a tendency to be drawn to vivid manifestations of this function in the surrounding world, often without being aware of the reason for such behavior.

6 - ACTIVATING. “Teach me.” Weak, but trainable to a quite decent level - willingly follows others’ wishes and absorbs patterns. Praise regarding this function is especially motivating.

“SUPERID block”. “I can, but do not want” - strong, unvalued functions. The subject is capable of accumulating a great deal of information in them, but not in order to maximize their aspects; on the contrary, it is in order to reduce their influence to nothing.

7 - LIMITING. “I do not touch it.” The subject understands well what to do in order not to engage the aspect of this function unnecessarily.

8 - BACKGROUND. “I spare others.” The subject understands well what to do so that those around them do not encounter the aspect of this function.