- Type: SeTi
- Development: ll-l
- Attitude: Directive
1) Conductor Brow: Is brow heaviness a factor of usage or anatomy? I think it might be a mixture of both and it may be the case that anatomical features may correlate with psychology, but I wasn’t aware of that signal.
2) Taut Square Cheeks: I don’t understand how the taut square cheeks signal is read without a smile present.
3) Behavior: Economics does match the Te behavioral profile. However, I think I see sociology and politics as more related to the behavior of animate systems. I can more easily wrap Te around engineering than I can the applied social sciences.
4) Theory Building: Modern socionics might also classify itself as more of a Te framework. Modern MBTI may be more Ti in spirit due to it being concerned with static type categories, whereas a socionics and more specifically information metabolism is by definition a dynamic process. In socionics, Ti is static and Te is dynamic.
5) Implications: I don’t think there are separate typology systems. They are all studying discrete patterns in human behavior and thus aiming at the same target from different locations. The correlations I’ve found between CT and WSS celebrity typings is one example of this. When separate theories disagree in science or break down, there is an opportunity to find a deeper underlying theory that encapsulates the strengths of past theories and leave behind some of their weaknesses in order to make progress. I’d imagine that the same goes for typology. A single human being is at root a single system. Everything is interconnected within that system. Therefore, using multiple discrete models to describe the system is not congruent with the reality that there is only a single (albeit complex) system in operation. I already mentioned that economics is literally a social science and thus may be more indicative of Fe as Je is linked to administration in general.
I don’t think socionics has the systemic problem you described. It is an eight function model but it is also an eight slot model. Each of the information elements are defined by combining the seven elemental dichotomies and each of the slots in the model are defined by combining the seven functional dichotomies. There is an explicit dichotomy for describing the other four functions, it is the values subdued dichotomy. It describes our favored and rejected approaches to processing information. I don’t think that the subdued functions are used to automatically account for any discrepancies. Theoretically, each function in socionics is used in a very specific way depending on its location in Model A. Role Te should manifest as Mental, Contact, Situational, Subdued, Accepting, Bold, and Weak. I personally don’t see this as providing lot of wiggle room provided that the dichotomies are each defined rigorously which may or not be the case in practice. The model is falsifiable. If I have lead Ti than I should also display Role Fi, Suggestive Fe and Ignoring Te. If any one of these is not the case, the claim that I have lead Ti can be falsified.
6) Attraction: Not much to say here. Didn’t know where else to put this. In the past you’ve said that my Fe manifests in my interest in understanding my own human behavior. I see socionics as along the same lines it is a model of human information metabolism. It’s not building a system to understand inanimate causalities, it is strictly animate. Because of this I see socionics as more of an Fe system given my current understanding of the Je functions.