Hello,

Is Socionics better than the MBTI?

Yes, here’s why…

Brief History:

Socionics theorem, available since the 1970s, currently represents one of the least known albeit newest interpretations of Carl Jung’s original Psychological Types. Created primarily by Aushra Augusta, a Lithuanian Psychologist and ‘ILE’ type according to the Socionics model of the psyche. A relatively new and modern theorem with re-worked theories and ideas from Carl Jung, Sigmund Freud and Antoni Kepinski.

The MBTI®, available since the 1940s, currently represents one of the most widely used and accepted interpretations of Carl Jung’s original Psychological Types, first written in the 1920s. Created primarily by Isabel Briggs, an American psychotheorist and ‘INFP’ type according to the Myers-Briggs Temperament Instrument®. Based almost entirely off Carl Jung's theories with the inclusion of a 'four types of person' model derived from centuries old observations.

The Sixteen Psychological Types:

In Socionics, the sixteen base types are identified as secondary reference points for understanding relationships. Generally places an emphasis on an individual type as relative to other types to varying degrees. Minimal potential for The Forer Effect when describing individual as types.

In the MBTI®, the sixteen absolute types are identified as primary reference points for understanding individuals. Generally places an emphasis on an individual type as absolute with specific 'pros and cons'. Maximal potential for The Forer Effect when describing individuals as types.

The Sixteen Inter-Type Relations:

In Socionics, relationships between four out of sixteen types appear unequal and asymmetrical. It is generally ‘easier’ to understand relationships because inter-type interactions are the 'reference point'. Integrates an information metabolism (IM) theory to describe effects of social interaction. Integrates an idea of clubs also known as 'occupational mindsets' that links four types with common interests together. Integrates a recent ‘small group dynamics’ quadra model that focuses on the effects of specific individuals interacting together. Integrates a new temperaments model linking four types who share similar dispositions.

In the MBTI®, relationships between all sixteen types appear equal and symmetrical. It is generally ‘harder’ to understand relationships because the individual types themselves are the 'reference point'. No such IM theory describing effects of social interactions. No such idea of clubs described. No such 'small group dynamics' quadra model described. Integrates an ancient temperaments model that links four types with similar purposes.

Personal Development:

Socionics theorem can potentially facilitate growth through the social collaboration of specific types. A functional analysis with the standard Model A can potentially facilitate growth by outlining the building blocks of your type.

The MBTI® can help facilitate growth through detailing your supposed 'pros & cons' for your type. The MBTI® doesn't usually discuss Jungian functions and has no standard model of the psyche.

Freedom of Speech:

Socionics operates (largely) as an open-source and decentralized area of study driven by a growing community around the world. An enthusiast, a so-called Socionist would reasonably require a passion to understand and discuss their conclusions. FREE as in 'freedom of speech' although not necessarily free as in 'free beer'. Flexible and on-going debates generally revising new ideas.

The MBTI® is a (somewhat) closed-source and centralized discipline developed in-line with a few so-called MBTI® Trusts around the world. An official practitioner of the MBTI® would ideally require a certification from an approved institution that offers it. COMMERCIALISED as in costing money, prone to piracy and misuse by non-practitioners. Rigid and stagnant debates generally revising old ideas.

Compatibility:

Socionics Types are superficially approximate to the MBTI® types. A complete functional analysis that goes beyond the surface of each type will uncover the Jungian building blocks of each revealing the exact differences.

Why should I study Socionics?

- To gain an awareness of different ways of thinking and resulting lifestyles.
- To increase your level of tolerance towards others with inter-type relations theory.
- To help resolve your relationship issues lowering your need for external assistance.
- To guide your 'good-for-me' relationships and avoid the 'bad-for-me' ones.
- It’s free, as in 'freedom of speech', to learn, discuss and apply from growing resources around the Web.

Why should I study the MBTI®?

- To gain an awareness of general differences in personality theory such as introvert and extrovert, sensing and intuition, thinking and feeling etc.
- To increase your appreciation of another type's 'pros and cons' relative to yourself.
- To keep things relatively simple in appreciating differences without going too deep.
- To indulge yourself with personality descriptions, career suggestions and other dogmatic advice for your type.
- It's free, as in plagiarism of information reverse-engineered from official practitioners past, present and future.

Socionics versus the MBTI® – at a glance:

- If you want a comprehensive and modern look at how types work and relate with other types consciously and unconsciously then take a look at Socionics.
- If you want a simple, traditional and “pop psychology” way of appreciating differences in personality theory then stick with the MBTI®.

Conclusion:

In short, Socionics is better except remains a niche field of study compared to the Pop Psychology and Branded status of the MBTI®.