Objective Personality compared to Humanitarian Socionics

In terms of objectivity:

It is difficult to agree that this technique is more objective than other typologies. True objectivity is only when instrumentation measurements are made (and as far as I understand, these dichotomies are not instrumentally measured, this is an expert assessment, so this is still a convention), and this is, first of all, a study of the brain.

Yes, it is based on expert methodologies so it doesn't reach a state of maximal objectivity.  The process of having to agree with your partner in a double-blind experiment does help build perceptions which more freed from the problems of subjectivity, in the sense that you have to objectively agree on the typing independently.  However, they are still limited by what the group of people are seeing, which may not be comprehensive, and eventually we will have to test these typologies by more instrumental, scientific methods such as neuroscience, genetics or machine learning.  I will make a detailed video on the question of objectivity soon.  Dave and Shannon are aware that it might take many decades to establish objectivity.

From a technical point of view, such crushing is excessive. These types of types need to be grouped in order to work with them as whole, otherwise there is no overview. It is very inconvenient to work with such a complicated system.

It is true that Dave's system is quite complicated.  It's funny: this is often said of the Entrepreneur of the normalizing subtype, that they have a complicated system, and I believe this is Dave's subtype.  It possible to not deal with all 512 types at once, and to roll them up into 256, 128, 64 and so on, to talk about higher level features.

How is it with the relationship? Unclear.

Yes, there are no established intertype relationships in Objective Personality yet.  In this, Socionics has an advantage.  Socionics has a more integrated structure, particularly humanitarian Socionics which includes fully fleshed out intertype relations.

Now about what is called in the OR animals. These are pairs of functions. Why is the name animals, because the author of this typology read the documents of monkey researchers and 4 patterns of behavior were revealed there. But there they are transmitted through pairs of functions, as far as I understand.

They are transmitted through pairs of functions.  I should explain the functions:
-De: Extroverted Decider, prioritizing the tribe's opinion above the self, builds up the tribe so the self can be respected
-Di: Introverted Decider, prioritizing the self's opinion above the tribe, builds up self so the tribe can be inspired
-Oe: Extroverted Observer, chaotic, takes more info than they organize, over gathers new info
-Oi: Introverted Observer, controlling, is not open to new info, over organizes known info and slow to gather new info

-Play (De+Oe): Expending energy, work, doing, show off
-Blast (De+Oi): Teaching, controlling, get started, bragging
-Consume (Di+Oe): Learning, taking in & respecting info for self
-Sleep (Di+Oi): Preserving energy, processing, introspective

The extreme groups are a combination of extrovert functions according to the formula of LN temperament, on the one hand, or introverted functions according to the formula of CSS, on the other. These animals are pairs of functions that work in a block. On the one hand, maximum extraversion, on the other hand, maximum introversion, is play and sleep, respectively. And the middle groups of functions are vertically mixed groups (one extrovert and one introvert function in a block). These are other types of behavior, they are called consume (consumers) and blast (impulsive, explosive behavior) - the average characteristics between the two extremes in this subsystem.

I don't think the temperament part translated correctly, so I will leave that aside for now.  It is true that play is maximum extroversion, and sleep is maximum introversion.  Play and Sleep are the "energy" animals, whereas Blast and Consume are the "information" animals.  Therefore, there is a similarity to Humanitarian Socionics in that Objective Personality prioritizes energy over information.  Energy defines the greater extremes.

Play is basically spending energy in real time, and sleep is reflecting, acting minimally, preserving energy, going over your known information in your inner world.

Blast is sharing information and teaching in a structured way, whereas Consume is taking in information in a more unstructured way.

Explosive, impulsive behavior might more often be Play than Blast, since you are taking action, spending energy in real time, but Blast can also be controlling and taking initiative.  Also, masculine functions which are extroverted are more explosive and impulsive.  Feminine functions are more flexible and gentle.

These four types of “animal” behavior are most reminiscent of our stimulus groups. Sleep - those who sleep. The lower level of vital energy, there are purely introverted functions. This is an incentive for safety and self-sufficiency - 4 intuitive introverts, or T-types in our system. According to the DCNH system, sleepers are an energy pessimum, an analogue of harmonizers.

Based on the names, I think Victor's conclusions make sense.  But, the correlations are probably more complicated.  Sleep could be similar to the group of introverted intuitives, but it also reminds me of the sensory introverts who are easily exhausted, and the introverted temperaments.  In general, it most resembles introversion, which preserves energy more than extroversion.  The levels in Objective Personality are not distinguished as well as Humanitarian Socionics in my opinion, but I still think there is value to their empirical observations in a more unstructured sense.

Consume, those that satisfy their daily needs (food, drink, and so on), if I understand correctly how this behavior is interpreted. All this is an incentive for sensory introverts, or S-types - their main incentive is well-being. And according to the DCNH system, this corresponds to N.

Consume in objective personality is a wider category: it can refer to consuming sensory objects, but it can also be about consuming all kinds of abstract information and teachings.  Consume types love to research and look up information.  In this case, it could even be extroverted intuition, exploratory behavior.  Initial subtypes will also have more consume on average, or simply people who spend a lot of time learning and taking in many things.  Consume is maybe more irrational, and Blast more rational.  Normalizing behavior corresponds more to Oi, the introverted observer, which organizes known information and isn't very open to new information.

Sleep = Harmonizing and Normalizing = Distant
Consume = Harmonizing and Creative = Initial
Blast = Normalizing and Dominant = Terminal
Play = Creative and Dominant = Contact

But Objective Personality is so complicated so these things will not always align, and also Dave and Shannon might make mistakes in some cases in terms of assessing where someone fits in their system.  Temperament and stimulus group might also be noticed and interfere with this subtype correlation, so they could benefit from having more levels of personality distinguished like Humanitarian Socionics has: type, subtype, accentuation, state.

The rest of the analogies are more difficult to obtain, the Play energy is maximal, and blast is a step lower. Play - those that play. Game behavior that characterizes the manner of monkeys. What will it correspond with us? These are types with incentive uniqueness, intuitive extroverts. They pick up and develop all the novelties, it seems to others that this behavior is childish (infantile), that is, frivolous, imitative, playful.

Yes, play types will often be extraverted intuitives and contact subtypes.  Also, just extroverts, people who spend more energy.

And, finally, blast - those that act impulsively, have an explosive reaction, sharply throw themselves at the enemy, if compared with animals. These are sensory extraverts (function F), their stimulus is status. They react strongly when status things are violated.

Blast probably most corresponds to the Linear-Assertive temperament.  Those with high blast take initiative, are direct, and have a strong verbal channel.  They talk and teach a lot.  American typology does not have a clear concept of power sensor, since for them Se is more a consume, novelty seeking function, like extroverted intuition or introverted sensation.  So, power sensors might be recognized with less regularity than other types in Objective Personality.

Mitchell wrote that his animal is sleeping then consume. That is, in translation into our language TS is obtained - a harmonizing subtype. Those sleeping are T types, and consuming S. But there is R still to be added, but you see that the system is not triple, but double. It turns out TS - pure receptive-adaptive temperament. In this case, it coincided. But if you take the subtypes, immediately by the group of functions, you get interesting nuances. Mitchell first has harmonization, because sleep is H behavior, and then in this row he has a consume that consumes behavior, and this is normalizing in our country. Then we will translate it into our language with OP according to the combined subtypes in HN (harmonizing-normalizing). But here I have a doubt about the second part of the formula, we cannot agree. If I agree with harmonization, then the second component of Mitchell’s character is not rationing, but creativity. Mitchell is clearly not standardizing, because he is very open to the new (in addition to harmonization and unwillingness to argue, to fight hard), he has creativity. People with a creative component are seriously reaching out to our school and delving into it. Mitchell himself always has ideas born, he has a craving for a new one, like in intuitive extroverts, I’m a creative function. He does not have rationing, he does not require "only in any way." Mitchell, in comparison with the same Jack from London (where there is a bright rationing, strict system, intransigence), this is not. But there is always creativity in him; I don’t have any doubts about his behavior. He is harmonizing and creative.

I actually think that my Consume second corresponds well to the creative subtype, since it is about taking in new information, exploring without structuring and processing things too much.  So, Sleep followed by Consume could fit me as a Harmonizing-Creative, which is a very interesting subtype that I am glad to have confirmed.  But if Victor was basing Consume off the name, I can see why this fits a comfort sensory role and thus normalizing.  But normalizing fits more like a Sleep and Blast.  I'm not sure Dave and Shannon look into how widely people consume though, so I don't know if they could differentiate between a normalizing subtype who likes to learn, and a Harmonizing-Creative subtype like me.

When many systems and these systems study not only types, but also more subtle intra-type differences (and there are many such systems already, and they will continue to appear), we can compare and translate from one language to another and see analogies, discrepancies. Here by subtypes we partially only coincide. In such systems, 3-4 component systems (we have already analyzed psychosophy), there is no rigid order. All components are combined in random order according to the stacking principle.

I forgot to mention that Objective Personality does not have a random stacking principle like Psychosophy.  Play and Sleep are energy animals, and Blast and Consume are information animals.  For your top two, you need to have one energy animal and one information, and same for your bottom two.  So, there are 16 possible animal combinations, not 24.

Your top animals can only be 4 pairs, but in different orders, so 8:
-Play+Blast: Expends energy and shares knowledge (BP or PB)
-Play+Consume: Over gathers then wants to do something with it (PC or CP)
-Sleep+Blast: Reworks the same info and then shares knowledge (SB or BS)
-Sleep+Consume: Deep inner world of taking in and processing (SC or CS)
*You cannot have PS, SP, CB or BC as you top animals, since they are strict opposites.

These correspond well to temperaments and subtypes:
-Play+Blast = Linear Assertive and Dominant
-Play+Consume = Flexible Maneuvering and Creative
-Sleep+Blast = Balanced Stable and Normalizing
-Sleep+Consume = Receptive Adaptive and Harmonizing

But since the types are so jagged between the systems, there will still need to be many principles better sorted out to understand the translation.