Comparison of Critic and Analyst types. Comparative Socionics

1. Why do we need comparative socionics

I have been practicing comparative socionics for many years now. For the first time I applied this approach publicly at a meeting of a scientific seminar on March 21, 2005, when the types of V. Yushchenko and Y. Tymoshenko were discussed. Then I presented a comparative table of types of FEL and LSI, containing a list of ten contrasting differences. The need for such comparisons arises from both scientific and practical inquiries. I will name so far only two reasons that encourage me to develop this area.

First, the comparative will bring considerable benefits for the distribution of seats (functional roles) in a team. And ultimately in the socion, if such communities appear. Without clear distinctions between neighboring types, for example, quasi-identical, it is impossible to understand why similar types are needed. In a natural ecosystem, as is known, each species occupies its own niche and an alien with similar functions is able to force out the aborigine and thereby bring down the natural balance. For example, the Marshal type tends to occupy the role of an engine and a group coordinator in a team. And here comes the Administrator, who is also an extrovert manager with similar complaints. How do they disperse in such a way as not to split the existing team?

And, secondly, the comparative is needed for practical diagnostic purposes. The fact is that during the interview the respondent is often seen at once in two types. This bifurcation arises from the fact that one of the four dichotomies defining the type shows averages, without explicit preference for one of the poles. And in order to make a distinction, you need to know well the points that need to be asked clarifying questions, as well as the reactions that need to be monitored. It is important that such a comparative table for pairs of types that differ in one socionic attribute would be at your disposal already before the start of diagnosis.

2. Critic - Analyst: a comparison in general

These two types play the role of strategic experts in the team. But to what extent are they interchangeable? Which of these two types will you turn to in order to understand a complex and ambiguous situation? And which of them, if you need to predict the likelihood of events? To solve such problems, obviously, we need functions of structural logic and intuition of time. From the point of view of humanitarian socionics, the combination of these functions in strong positions is contained only in two types - Critic (OR, TL formula ) and Analyst (LII, LT formula ).

In the first approximation, the intellectual difference between them is seen as follows. The analyst first analyzes (statics), and then predicts (dynamics) based on the plot. The critic first predicts (picks up the main trends), and then analyzes and draws logical conclusions.

The relation connecting these types is called quasi-identical, that is, the relation of supposedly identical types. If we take the expanded meaning of the prefix quasi-, then this relationship can also be interpreted as a false identity. From my point of view, it is better to transfer quasi-identity as a reciprocal order , since the first function of one type acts on the second of the other, as in the usual order. In terms of model G, of course. Reciprocity of quasi-identities means that, according to the intuition of time, the customer is the Critic in the pair, and according to the analytical logic - the Analyst.

Quasi-identity as a reciprocal order

According to the model G, the second function in the type has the same slope with the first. Thus, each type in a quasi-identical dyad is capable of accepting a pulse from the first function of an interaction partner.

How do they work together in a single facility? The answer is one by one. The sequence is better in the following order. At first, the strategist acts (he determines the main direction), that is, the Critic, and then the tactician connects (he implements the strategy through the development of plans and projects), that is, the Analyst. In other words, first a general direction and vision is created, and then the structure is worked out. Thus, these types could cooperate, for example, in the development of algorithms, writing programs or strategic planning.

I will also cite the opinion of D. Keirsey junior on this issue: “The Architect (INTP) is always seeking answers. " The essence of the order is transferred here as a problem statement (question) and a solution proposal (answer).

I made the first comparison of these types back in 2011, but now I decided to return to this issue due to the fact that I have to interact with foreign representatives of the LII type, who identify themselves with the INTI MBTI type.

3. Ten specific differences between the Analyst and the Critic.

1. Memory

Analytics has a fixed, kinesthetic memory. He remembers only what he is doing at the moment.

Critic has an associative, visual memory. Remembers a lot of data not directly related to the current task.

2. Understanding the situation

The analyst, seeing a new situation, tries to analyze it and draw a scheme of actions.

Seeing a new situation, the critic picks up the context in which it is included and according to which scenario it develops.

3. Leadership

The analyst , if he is in charge, is in small groups and specific projects, moreover, decentralized. Bad business skills.

If the Critic is in charge , then in large groups, centrally, although he does not aspire to be the boss. Has a chance to succeed in business.

4. Speeches to the audience

The analyst speaks well to the audience (if there is a workout), in a formalized setting.

The critic is a bad speaker, communicates better in an informal setting. Experience and training do little for public speaking.

5. Decision making

The analyst focuses on large blocks of information, the details set aside for later. Quickly draws conclusions and makes decisions.

The critic is scrupulous and thorough in details. Of the individual parts builds the overall picture. Not rushing to conclusions and decisions.

6. Mood

Analyst's mood is stable and neutral, does not focus on failures. He thinks more about the future than he does with his memories.

Criticism is changeable, sometimes depressed, as it remembers well failures or mistakes. Often compares the current situation with past events.

7. Politeness

The analyst does not support the conversation, if it is not interesting to him, although he does not leave the company out of politeness.

The critic is able to support any conversation, but in case of fatigue he will leave or fall asleep without worrying about the rules of good taste.

8. Hand skills

The analyst is emotionally enduring, but at the same time, manual skills develop poorly.

Criticism of emotions is very draining, but manual skills (for example, minor repairs) are developing well.

9. Participation in disputes

The analyst does not like to argue and criticize, he is satisfied with a keen and enthusiastic discussion without irony.

The critic gets pleasure from exacerbations, disputes, revealing errors and contradictions in the positions.

10. Close relationships

The analyst gets along with emotionally caring (until obtrusive) people who demand gratitude in return. From security forces stays away. Bad resists aggression.

Critic gets on with the power people, testing partner for strength, taking "for fear". Do not tolerate obsessive care. Does not stand the emotional people who demand a response.

4. Comparison of the types of INTP and INTJ in the MBTI

On the Internet you can find a lot of materials on this topic. However, the question arises, which of these two types corresponds to our Critic, and which one - to the Analyst? If we take into account the leading function, then INTP should correspond to our Analytics, since introverted logic L dominates in its functional stack (functional stack) according to the MBTI model.

If judged by rationality / irrationality, the INTP will correspond to the Critique. In the characteristics of the letters-signs it is stated that for him, as a P-type, adaptation to the environment is characteristic, while the J-types require an organized environment. From the point of view of socionics, there is an obvious contradiction. It is impossible for a type to be irrational, but the leading function in it would be rational.

So what match do we take? Perhaps there is a solution if you look at the descriptions of the corresponding types. I tried to do this, however, I found that the MBTI descriptions mixed in themselves qualities of both types and it is rather difficult to derive a one-to-one correspondence. For example, read the brief descriptions of the official Myers and Briggs Foundation website at www.myersbriggs.org .

Intj

And goals. Quickly see explanatory perspectives. When committed, organize a job and carry it through. Have high standards of competence and performance for themselves and others.

He has an original mind and a great desire to realize his ideas and achieve his goals. Quickly notices patterns in external events and develops strategic perspectives based on them. Upon completion of the plans organizes the work and conducts it. Skeptical and independent, committed to high standards of competence and performance for both themselves and others.

INTP

Seek to develop logical explanations for all that interests them. Theoretical and abstract, interested in social interaction. Quiet, contained, flexible, and adaptable. Depth abilities Skeptical, sometimes critical, always analytical.

Strives to develop logical explanations for everything that interests him. Theoretical and abstract, more interested in ideas than in social interaction. Quiet, informative, flexible and adaptable. Has an unusual ability to focus on depth to solve problems in his area of ​​interest. Skeptical, sometimes critical, always analytical.

Both of the above characteristics are so abstract and devoid of living examples that it is not possible to transfer them to a level more vivid, characteristic of our descriptions of these types, without serious stretch. And that means correct comparison is hardly possible.

It is easier to distinguish at the level of the image of the type as a whole than in a detailed listing of their individual psychological qualities. So, INTP appears before us in the form of a thinker and philosopher, and INTJ - in the image of an engineer and developer. With this approach, the INTP is more similar to the socionic "Criticism" with the initial bias, and INTJ - to the socionic "Analytics" with a terminal bias.

On the Internet you can find the comparative characteristics of these types. Here, for example: https://personalityhacker.com . If we take the four-letter code, the difference J / P between them is explained as follows. Creates an organized environment - INTJ. Adapts to the environment - INTP. In this paragraph, J clearly corresponds to rationality (in its terminal variant), P - irrationality (in its initial variant).

Also on this resource are five points of differences, summarized in the table.

This is what happens if you go through all the points:

1. Guided by accuracy (accuracy) or guided by future prospects.

According to the GE, the Critic is more meticulous and accurate in calculating or searching for errors than the Analyst.

2. In his youth, creates strategies to protect against errors or strategies to be less vulnerable.

This item is related to the previous one. For Criticism is more important than for Analytics not to be mistaken. And for Analytics, it’s more important not to be depressed and repressed.

3. High threshold for ignoring emotions, but very sensitive to emotional signals or better aware of their emotions, but less emotional outside.

According to GE, the Critic is less balanced, his emotions are worse managed.

4. Unwilling to play social / status games or more inclined to play social / status games

According to the GE, for rational Analytics with its role ethics it is much more important to observe propriety. For the rest, they are both Democrats, so status superiority for them is insignificant.

5. Gives the world radical honesty or gives the world intellectual integrity.

This item is very ambiguous. If you put a radical question, who is more honest, how to check it out? Intellectual integrity or a complete picture of the world is present in both one and the other, because it is related to their social mission. And ethical things belong to their slave functions. However, if you ask who is more sensitive to dishonesty, the answer will be in favor of the Critic. Recall G. Perelman, who rejected the millionth prize for ethical reasons. How to explain such ethical sensitivity? - The fact that the critic has this fourth function, that is, it works in the binary mode “all or nothing”.

The first thing that suggests itself on the results of my study of this question is to recognize the priority of the rationality criterion over the leading function when comparing these types. However, many Western socionics do not agree with this. In order to eliminate the ambiguity that has arisen in WSS, it was decided to designate the socionic types to write the last letter in their abbreviation lowercase. As a result, we get: INTj = Analyst, INTp = Critic. It remains for us to act in the same way if we want to establish cooperation, and not immediately enter into confrontation with the adherents of the MBTI. Only over time, conducting joint research, it will be possible to find a reasonable compromise on the J / P-problem.

The second report by Viktor Gulenko at the 33rd IIA Conference

September 19, 2017