Introverted Socionics

Introvert Socionics
Internal relations in a group as a reflection of its integral type

INTROVERT SOCIONICS
Inward relations of an integral type

V.V. Gulenko , 07.12.1994, Kiev

Published: "Socionics, Mentology and Personality Psychology" , 1996, № 4.

1. Relationships instead of types - Relations instead of types

Socionics, known to us so far, has learned to describe types quite well, but still it is difficult to predict the real relations between them. The predominant type orientation is the extrovert approach [2]. Obviously, the conditions are ripe for “turning the page” - to build an introverted socionics, that is, relationship-oriented.

This also brings me the practice of socionic counseling. Team leaders are mostly extrovert people. Taking an active position, such a leader quickly checks the subordinates in the case, therefore, it does not make sense to describe what people work under his command, when he already knows it. So what does the extrovert want?

An extrovert does not understand where the constant relations inherent in his team are taken from, as well as what they are and how to manage them. The extrovert leader knows how to gather people, how to direct their actions to achieve the organization’s goal, but it is completely incomprehensible to him how to achieve the integrity of the team and the strength of the ties that fasten it from within.

The headache of many business leaders is the distribution of income and incentives in general. As long as the team is retained by intensive work on the external task, everything is going well. But now it is time to divide the rewards, and now everyone has quarreled, irreconcilably taking the accusatory position. The cohesion of the team gave a crack, which is already not so easy to close up. On the contrary, the farther, the more it will expand until the team splits. Conclusion: the collective did not form an introverted core protected from external influences, restoring its structure in case of damage. Or, in other words, the team did not find its integral sociotype.

Let's look at it a moment ago and remember what the main difference between extraverts and introverts is. The first constantly grow, capture, fight, compete. The second ones are improved, adapted, protected, retain their individuality [5]. Consequently, the problem of an extrovert is the inability to provide a stable balance of the internal environment in a group. Extroverts as managers suffer from the fact that a reliable core has not crystallized among employees, cementing traditions have not formed, people do not value relationships. In short, there is no esprit de corps - corporate spirit.

And now I will formulate a postulate that is important for the further presentation - an a priori statement that allows us to understand the essence of the problem of vertness in socionics of groups. TYPES AND RELATIONS ARE CONNECTED BY THE “EXCLUSED THIRD” LAW: if the types are clear, the relationship between them is blurred, and if the relationship is outlined, the types become blurred. From this it follows that it is impossible to work simultaneously with sociotypes and with intertype relationships. One has to sacrifice to another.

Let me explain the effect of the law of the excluded third on the example. Suppose you think inside yourself with words. In this case, pronouncing is accompanied by some visual means. The more clearly you pronounce the words, the more correctly the phrases of your inner speech are constructed, the worse the quality of the accompanying picture, which, while concentrating on speech activity, becomes more and more blurred and losing certainty.

If you remember or construct a clear visual image, then the inner speech fades into the background, breaks up into unfinished pieces, is muffled and loses its grammatical structure. Hence it is clear that both mental forms are interconnected by the “either-or-one” relationship, that is, they exclude the intermediate variant in both their parts. Similarly, the typical (internally conditioned) and relational (externally conditioned) manifestations of personality exclude each other at the same point in space and at the same time.

So far, socionics have sacrificed relationships, waving their hands when they have encountered cases of conflicting conflict or warring duals. This was usually explained by distance (dynamic socionics) or subtypes (specific socionics). But the way to isolate subtypes, although it allows us to better and better describe the characteristics of a specific representative of a sociotype, leads us further and further away from the problem of a satisfactory prediction of relationships.

Relationships get complicated faster than type attributes. Therefore, they cannot be unambiguously derived from the latter. This is an inevitable consequence of the postulate formulated above. After describing the type in more detail, we multiply the number of factors that interact with each other. The number of their combinations is growing exponentially, increasingly making the relationship dependent on the current situation. Relationships are simply crushed, erased, turned into hostages of chance.

I propose this time to sacrifice types for the sake of relationships. The laws of introverted socionics are more like chemical reactions, while the extrovert socionics, which are familiar to everyone, are similar to physical theory. Indeed, in physics, bodies and their charges generate force fields, as well extroverted socionics considers relations to be a kind of psychological field around a sociotype. For socionics introverted, everything is different. Relations exist initially as chemical valencies, that is, the ability to attach to itself the free elements of strictly defined types. Such a somewhat unexpected castling radically changes the course of our socionic party.

In order to convey more clearly the distinction between classical socionics and relative socionics, it will be useful to compare both approaches on the key problems of personality research in tabular form:

Problem	Extrasocionic	Introsoculars
1. Personality	An object that forms around itself a communicative environment, directed by its internal psychological structure	The set of interpersonal relationships, determined by the overall goal of sustainability
2. Compatibility	Automatic consequence of a certain state of psychological properties of people, collected on the principle of addition	The result of mutual lapping of interacting people who comply with the conditions of sustainability of the group
3. The cause of conflicts	There are no conflict people, there are tensions that do not allow to live peacefully	There is no conflict relationship;
4. Counseling method	Radical: remove conflicts and bring types compatible with you	Adaptive: shift the emphasis in your relationship, without touching the people themselves

2. Unifying approach - The united approach

If earlier the appearance of a relationship was considered the result of the interaction of two types, now we will do the opposite and the appearance of a type will be considered the result of a meeting of two or several relationships. These approaches are impossible at the same time, but they act complementing each other, if alternated. This is how Bohr’s complementarity principle is realized: theory then reaches maturity when it describes the same phenomenon from two mutually exclusive positions.

Where are the laws of introverted socionics? “Where extroverted laws lose their power.” And if extroverted socionics reflects the functioning of a person in a team as a result of the realization of his internal typical potential (distant communication distances, short-term communication), then introverted socionics takes effect when reflecting a collective in a person through the behavior of a person who adheres to the rules of relationship adopted by him besides his will (close communicative distances, long-term communication).Consequently, the main carrier of the integral type of a collective is an introvert, conserving the system of relations developing in this collective.

Imagine that the reserves of a company are so limited that a manager cannot afford to hire new employees. An ordinary socionic turns out to be powerless in such conditions to offer something constructive to improve matters: after all, his recommendations are actively extrovert in nature - to remove such and such, to cooperate with such and such type. And here introverted socionics comes to the rescue, which can determine the integral type of any a dyad, and therefore, to strengthen or weaken certain socionic parameters of a collective only at the expense of internal funds — by regrouping the existing sociotypes.

A generalizing approach that would combine both the extrovert and introverted side of socionics would equally take into account the open, active side of human life, and the closed, passive-adaptive side of its existence. The unifying law was first formulated by one of the forerunners of socionics A. Kempinski. In particular, he wrote: “From the point of view of the functioning of a group, consistency of secondary features, but the opposite of the main ones, seems to be expedient. The secondary features relate to the forms of behavior and joint plans of partners. "[3]

Under the "minor" traits should be understood inherent in the type of stable habits in a small group that can be compactly described through one or another socionic attitude. Thus, moving further along this path, it is possible to attribute to any person any intertype relationship (with a more complex approach, a set of relations), which turns out to be partly inborn, and partly beneficial in the process of education and adaptation in the team.

Then, with a 16-type gradation, not just dual sociotypes are fully compatible, but duals that are also set for duality. If dual partners come together, one of whom is configured, for example, arrogantly dismissive, audit-based, and the other for exclusively equal cooperation, as is the case with classical duality, the compatibility between them will be minimal.

Therefore, taking into account the introverted, relational side of psychic life, for full coverage it is necessary to consider a person dually - as belonging to one of the 16 types, on the one hand, and as being the carrier of one of the 16 relationships, on the other. Variants of personality turn out to be 256, which is quite enough for modeling psychological phenomena not only at distant, but also at close communicative distances, in particular, in the family.

We should not confuse our concept with the concept of a double type, when a person’s personality is described as a mixture of the basic type with an additional one. For example, TR with a subtype of ET. Between these approaches lies the abyss. A double type is simply the next step in the concretization of socionic personality modeling, that is, forcing an extrovert approach. Combining a type with an attitude into a holistic structure is the intention to synthesize the extrovert and introverted sides. I emphasize that such a synthetic formation exists only in dynamics. If one analyzes the psyche statically, then one has to choose, according to the law of the excluded middle, either extraverted (typical) or introverted (relational) manifestation of a mental object.

Without introverted socionics can not do in research that relate to the integral type of the team. The types in the group may vary, but the integral socionic structure remains constant. Only such a group can be considered a collective, since it self-reproduces its stable system of relations. A group of people that does not have an internal fixed relational structure cannot be recognized as a full-fledged team.

In the first approximation, in any team that exists for quite a long time, a persistent inner core can be distinguished, which, up to a certain threshold, does not collapse under any of its external deformations. This introverted core defines the integral type of the collective. Having determined which relations reign in the core, we will determine its type according to the law of transition from relation to type. The integral type is a shell from the relationship, creating a common psychological field of team members.

It is impossible to determine the integral type of a collective simply by summing up the Jung signs of its members. After all, individual types can be “shuffled” in many ways, and the integral type defined by the dominant relations in the group remains one and the same.Therefore, in introverted socionics it is advisable to make a rigid binding of relations to types. Or rather, to binomials - informational aspects paired into the “input-output” functional unit.

What kind of intellectual block to choose as a starting point? I think IL is an intuitive-logical extrovert. The explanation is that it is this functional pair that is the core of a universal, independent of the type of mental process: S -> I -> L -> E [4].

This scheme shows that any person perceives information from the surrounding world through the S sensory organs (sensation of sensations), then translates it into the language of abstract meanings, realizes I (intuition of possibilities), then compares meanings among themselves and draws logical conclusions L (structural logic) and, finally, gives the result in the form of certain subjective emotional reactions of E (ethics of emotions). Then we will rewrite the scheme of the stages of the information flow as follows:

S -> (I -> L) -> E.

The functions S and E are external, and I and L are internal. And if we understand by a sociotype the naturally fixed sequence of information processing within the human psyche, then the IL bin and ILE sociotype, in which this bin occupies the intellectual level, must be accepted as the carrier of identical relations.

The remaining transitions from types to relations are obtained automatically from the table of intertype relationships for ILE. Here they are:

1. ILE -> Identity	9. SEA -> superego
2. SEI -> duality	10. OR -> repayment
3. ESE -> activation	11. LIE -> quasi-identity
4. LII -> mirroring	12. ESI -> conflict
5. EIE -> reverse order	13. FEL -> direct order
6. LSI -> Reverse Audit	14. EII -> direct revision
7. SLE -> business	15. IEE -> affinity
8. IEI -> Mirage	16. SLI -> semi-duality

But since a sociotype is not confined to a single binom, but is a hierarchy of at least four levels (other than intellectual, social, psychological, and physical manifestations of the type [5] are considered), in principle it should be attributed to four stable intertype relationships distance of communication and abrupt changes with it.

3. The psychological climate in the team - Psychological climate in the community

Below I will describe the psychological atmosphere of all 16 integral types of a collective, which is virtually indestructible through external influences. It will be a question only of far communicative distances, i.e. about relationships in the macrosocium (intellectual and social levels of the communicative space).

1. The Seeker (IL) is the bearer of the relationship of "identity" on the intellectual level and the "superego" on the social.
   The IL-collective reigns very democratic intellectual atmosphere, which is based on a strong tradition of understanding each other. People treat others as if they were all similar, therefore they often do not bother with explanations of the motives of their actions. Behavior relaxed, like at home. All are focused on new information, are looking for alternatives. They cannot communicate for a long time, because they quickly bore each other. A strong desire for change. There are frequent clashes with the surrounding teams, ending with temporary compromises and unfulfilled promises.
2. The Mediator (SE) is the bearer of the duality relationship at the intellectual level and the redemption at the social level.
   The SE team is a well-balanced whole, where contradictions exist in a collapsed form and are constantly discharged by separation of duties. The members of such a team feel relaxed and peaceful, subtly notice the change in the state of the partners and know how to help each other. The SE-team is internally integral, its participants are very attached to each other by informal connections, putting the principle of comfort and joy of life above all else. However, with neighboring groups, there is a parallel-redemptive interaction with mutual criticism and attempts to adapt to a different life rhythm.
3. “Enthusiast” (ES) is the bearer of the relationship “activation” at the intellectual level and “quasi-identity” at the social level.
   The ES-type team is permeated with accelerating, unwinding relationships, where everyone addresses to everyone with requests and instructions and relies on an emotional response to his appeal. Helping each other is based on the formula “you - me, I - you”; informal connections are cultivated. And over time, the emotional tension is growing due to the fact that the guest principle “you have no right to refuse me” is taking root. Due to the physical impossibility of establishing an equitable exchange of services and information, the participants in such a collective exhaust each other. Relations with other groups remind intellectual rivalry, permeated with the desire to be the first to introduce innovations, to pick up a fashionable hobby.
4. “Analyst” (LI) is the bearer of the relationship “mirror” on the intellectual level and “conflict” on the social. 
   A team with an integral type LI is built according to the reflection system as if in a mirror, i.e. comprehensive analysis of what is happening around from mutually exclusive points of view. This is a team of reformers who constantly improve the existing, live one by one, then by another system. Members of the LI team tend to discuss everything that comes into their field of view, express different opinions and correct each other. In such a team it is easy to engage in research, to find the causes of entangled phenomena. However, the surrounding community is annoyed by its incomprehensibility, stubbornness and intellectual dissidence, as well as unwillingness to adapt.
5. “Mentor” (ET) is the carrier of the relationship “order acceptance” at the intellectual level and “order” at the social level. 
   In the team, whose integral type is ET, the attitude of missionary, chosenness, faith in the significance of the work being done reigns. Members of the team sincerely believe that they have a rare lot to be preachers of some supraindividual ideas, and they never change their beliefs. They treat strangers like a teacher to students - from the top down, underestimating them. They react painfully if they reject their mission, distort their actions, and laugh at their goals.
6. “Inspector” (LF) is the bearer of the relationship “revisibility” at the intellectual level and “revision” at the social level. 
   In a team with an integral type of LF, participants fear if their ignorance, incompetence, or lack of preparation in an important issue suddenly emerges. They avoid situations where it is necessary to generate ideas, to show fiction and fantasy. Such a team relies on the orders of higher authorities in everything and is distinguished by reliability. In relation to outsiders, members of the LF team behave incredulously, oppose violations of accepted traditions, control their behavior. This integral type is good for army teams and law enforcement. Surrounding people often consider the LF team ossified and fenced off.
7. “Marshal” (FL) is the bearer of the relationship “business” at the intellectual level and “affinity” at the social level. 
   In the "marshal" team, people of exact calculation are gathered who clearly realize the goals set before them. The methods of actions of each have their own, often contradictory, which leads to inevitable periodic collisions. such power flashes occur suddenly, but in their duration are transient. They end in temporary compromises and regrouping of forces. The business nature of communication with strangers is changed to "related" - when the methods coincide, but the goals are opposite. Therefore, the FL team makes a good impression on others "of their children" with whom you have a lot in common.
8. “Lyric” (TE) is the bearer of the relationship “mirage” at the intellectual level and “semi-duality” at the social level. 
   This is a team of adaptive relations, whose members struggle for autonomy from the pressure of the external environment, the right to engage in such a thing that pleases. The members of the TE-collective will willingly compromise in order to maintain a good emotional atmosphere. He not bad finds a common language with others, although not immediately. Usually such a team is busy searching for reputable people who can provide support and become a patron. In general, the atmosphere is optimistic, albeit somewhat alarming. Such a team is able to communicate with others, taking advantage of their connections.
9. “Politician” (FR) is the carrier of the “superego” relationship on the intellectual and “identity” on the social level. 
   In a FR-type team, relationships are formed on the balance of power. Any gain of certain people or groups leads to immediate reactions to restore imbalance. The atmosphere of such a collective is permeated with a diplomatic game, negotiations, promises and all sorts of temporary compromises. Short-term quarrels and misunderstandings flare up in it, which are regulated by positional bargaining. People relate to each other with suspicion, with the idea that everyone pursues his own egoistic goals. But with the outside world, the FR group has a variety of connections and complete understanding.
10. “Critic” (TR) is the bearer of the “redemption” relationship at the intellectual level and “duality” at the social level. 
    In a team with an integral type of TR, there is a constant comparison of various information, the accumulation of information of the most diverse nature and the sifting out of the illogical, trivial, already encountered. Relationships are very variable, people are willing to adapt to each other, tolerantly react to strangeness and inconsistency, if only they do not interfere with their business. Disputes periodically flare up due to the critical attitude of the partner to your opinion on the issue of interest. However, after some time comes reconciliation. Relations with surrounding organizations are calm and comfortable. An internally critical team with neighbors usually lives in peace and friendship.
11. The “entrepreneur” (RT) is the bearer of the relationship “quasi-identity” at the intellectual level and “activation” at the social level. 
    There are a lot of intellectual discussions in the team of RT-type, democratic atmosphere of communication. Understanding is somewhat difficult, since despite similar interests, participants set completely different goals. Starting in the same vein, people are increasingly divided, moving away from the original base. For this reason, many bold, adventurous plans are crumbling, but the phase of approbation and experimentation is very good. The RT team is energetically influencing others, pushing them to vigorous activity. Living next to the "entrepreneurs", forget about comfort and serene tranquility.
12. The Guardian (RF) is the bearer of the relationship “conflict” on the intellectual and “mirror” on the social level. 
    In the RF-collective, a rather intense communication proceeds, based on a difficult understanding of each other. In such a team, people are ready for any trouble, which is why they appreciate the fleeting glimpses of calm and relaxation. In such a team, they can stand up for themselves; they sharply divide people into “their own” and “enemies”. This tightness and emotional stress lead to conservatism, lack of faith in one’s own strength and the desire to survive alone. The surrounding teams are analyzed and compared. The “custodian” collective as a mirror reflects all the imperfections of the macrosocium in which it lives. Its advantage is that it trains people to survive in difficult conditions.
13. The “manager” (PS) is the carrier of the relationship “order” at the intellectual level and “acceptance of the order” at the social level. 
    Intellectually, a PS-type team is full of confidence in the rationality of its methods of action and their exemplary nature for all similar teams. Its participants consider themselves to be setting the example of rational organization of work, hard work and quality of work. At the social level, however, the collective seems to be “under the pressure” of duty and tradition. He continues what he inherited from previous generations. Discussions and exhortations in the PS-collective are ineffective, they all get it by personal example through trials and mistakes.
14. “Humanist” (RI) is the bearer of the relationship “audit” at the intellectual level and “revisibility” at the social level. 
    The RI-team is critical of all sorts of bold, non-standard ideas, especially those that destroy the existing ethical atmosphere in it. Its participants note for themselves moral vices - dishonesty, indifference and lack of principle among people. At the social level, the RI team becomes “audited” by the surrounding society. This is manifested in particular in the subordination of someone else's business goals. The accusatory bias turns into social helplessness, the need for external evaluation. Dependence on the power of society leads to experiencing the discrepancy between moral beliefs and the actual practice of interpersonal communication.
15. The “Advisor” (IR) is the carrier of the relationship “affinity” at the intellectual level and “business” at the social level. 
    In such a group, the participants act in similar ways, although they pursue different goals. There is a tendency to give advice to each other, to discuss complicated ethical situations. However, there is no real psychological closeness in the IR team, everyone relies on himself. In an extreme situation, rallying takes place on the basis of the desire to preserve a related lifestyle. The IR team members are curious, have various intellectual hobbies. Cultivated informal, friendly relations. A tense, competing relationship is established with the surrounding society, with frequent changes of sympathy and agony.
16. The Master (SP) is the bearer of the semi-duality relationship on the intellectual and the mirage on the social level. 
    In the SP-team there are comfortable, warm relations, although they are accompanied by some fear of fragility. Employees cover each other’s weak points, often helping out in difficult situations. Such a team is united by similar goals and benefits that people derive from joint actions. Despite the mutual complementarity in work, in an extreme emotional situation, harmony is temporarily lost. Contacts with the surrounding society are particularly sensitive, but in general it is possible to adapt to external influences, passing like a mirage through seemingly impenetrable barriers.

Literature

1. Jung, K.G. Psychological types. M., Alphabet, 1992
2. Augustinavichiute, A. The theory of intertype relationships. 1982
3. Kempinski, A. Psychopathology of Neuroses. Polish medical publishing house. Warsaw, 1975
4. Lawrence, Gordon. People types and tiger stripes. A practical guide to learning styles. Second edition. Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc.
5. Gulenko, V. Unknown about the known. Jung signs in the communicative space. Section " Extraversion - introversion ". Kiev, 04.23.1994.