Socionics versus Beebe
John Beebe's full model has now been made more accessible, in two books published in 2016; one by Beebe himself; Energies and Patterns in Psychological Type, and Mark Hunziker Depth Typology. Now with these books out detailing Beebe’s model, this may further bring to mind Socionics’ own eight-function model, “Model A”, which seems to be what a lot of people on the type boards have taken to increasingly (along with Enneagram, which is a completely different system). In fact, it seems people slow to learn Beebe’s model have taken up this one readily.
Yet, the positions (which are actually “the functions“, while the actual “Xy” function-attitudes are called “information-elements“) seem very different. For an INP, Se is the “Trickster” function, which they may experience in feelings of “double-binds”, or trying to turn the tables on others. But then we hear it is their “Vulnerable” function (Which we might think would apply to any non-preferred function, or what Socionics calls "weak"). So just as we finally getting a full view of Beebe’s model, here comes a new batch of character roles for the same functions, and one more people seem to be more enthusiastic about (being they think of Socionics as being so much more developed than MBTI. In reality, with Beebe’s model, Type Logic, and Berens’ new “Intentional Styles”, we have just about everything Socionics does!)
So like Berens’ function “roles” (and in practice, the way some use Beebe’s archetypes), the information elements (function-attitudes) are the “players” that “do” the behaviors, rather than complexes (ego-states; lesser senses of “I”) being what interpret situations through the situations. So this makes it a bit hard to make the comparisons.
To start, here are the comparisons of the eight positions and several other operational terms:
| Socionics | Beebe | Lenore Thomson "ship"/"lasagna" stack |
| 1. Base (leading, program) | Hero (1) | Captain (1) |
| 2. Creative (implementing, realizing) | Parent (2) | First Mate (2) |
| 3. Role | Demon (8) | Crow's Nest #1 (3) |
| 4. Vulnerable (place of least resistance [PoLR]) | Trickster (7) | Crow's Nest #2 (4) |
| 5. Suggestive (dual-seeking) | Anima (4) | castaway on lifeboat to shore (8) |
| 6. Mobilizing (activating function; hidden agenda) | Puer/Puella (3) | castaway on skis (7) |
| 7. Ignoring | Opposing Personality (5) | Double Agent #2 (6) |
| 8. Demonstrative | Witch/Senex (6) | Double Agent #1 (5) |
| "Ego Block" | "Preferred functions" | |
| "Super-Ego Block" | ["deep" shadow] | "Crow's Nests"; left/right brain alternates |
| "Super-Id Block" | [unpreferred functions] | castaways |
| "Id Block" | [near shadows] | opposite-brain "Double agents" |
| "Strong" | Preferred functions and their shadows | |
| "Weak" | unpreferred functions and their shadows | |
| "Valued" | Ego-syntonic ("primary") | |
| "Unvalued" | Ego-dystonic ("Shadow") | |
| Accepting | "spine" | |
| Producing | "arm" | |
| Mental | [same "J/P"] | same brain hemisphere |
| Vital | opposite brain hemisphere | |
It should be noted, that “mental” functions are considered “conscious”, while vital ones are “unconscious”! So they divide the stack between conscious and unconscious along the lines of 1-4 and 5-8 just like Beebe’s model, only all of the preferred brain hemisphere functions (including what we consider the bottom of the shadow and thus furthest from the Ego) are now “conscious”; while all of the brain-lateral opposites (including what we consider the “ego-syntonic” tertiary and inferior) are considered unconscious. This would in a way correspond to Lenore’s “preferred + right/left brain alternates”, as if based on a misunderstanding of it, thinking these two functions are “conscious”, because (according to her theory), they happen to come up first when the dominant can’t solve the problem. But that’s not really “conscious”, and she at that point (the book) was speaking of the functions as things “used” pretty much like this model (and most other typologists), but later on moved more toward a focus on them being conscious or unconscious “perspectives”. Plus, she also says when the person grows, they begin using the tertiary (what Socionics would consider “mobilizing”, and an unconscious #6) more instead.
How the eight “function” roles seem to correspond to the Beebe archetypes (http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/model_a)
Function 1 (Base/Leading) Source of confidence; how someone lives their life; most comfortable state of mind; personal motivation in life
Function 2 (Creative) Used to Interact with others; feel: needed when used to help solve others’ problems; overuse by others can cause irritation
These two naturally make a clean analogy to the Hero and Parent (including #2 being the head of the “arm”, involved with relating to others)
Function 3 (Role) Perceived as personal weakness; sometimes makes hard attempts to improve; criticism causes irritation: activated when anxious
We can see a connection with the Demonic Personality here, especially in the “personal weakness” part, especially now with the revelation from Beebe in the book that the complex is about “narcissism” and seeking “integrity”. (And so it would naturally produce “anxiety” and particular “irritation” at criticism).
Function 4 (Vulnerable) Usage causes extreme irritation; avoided as much as possible; has to be developed by personal experience; often ignored
This is a totally generic “shadow” description, that does not tie into a specific Trickster analogue. Since it is in the “conscious” half, then this probably covers the old dispute of the attitude of the tertiary. So this model essentially has it as the opposite attitude from the dominant, (instead of the same attitude, as the Grant/Beebe model commonly used) and makes it 4th place instead of tertiary.
Function 5 (Suggestive/Dual-Seeking), Entertaining; soothing; Energizing; leads to self-actualization; deficiency causes attempts to self supply
“Dual-seeking” and “self-actualization” are the clues for the “anima/animus” archetype!
Function 6 (Mobilizing/Activating) Appreciated; overuse by others can be seen as excessive; may be overindulged or severely neglected; can cause boredom
This sounds compatible with the Puer/Puella, which “inflates” (“overindulged”), and then “deflates”, and can be overwhelmed and intimidated by too much of the function.
Function 7 (Ignoring/Observing) Constantly annoying; mostly used in private; can be summoned when needed; causes boredom; avoidance makes it appear weak
“Ignoring” may cover the fact that this is the rejected attitude of the dominant function. “Constantly annoying” is general “shadow” trait, and “causes boredom” brings to mind a citation someone made of a Beebe lecture; that we think the “Opposing Personality” functional perspective is “so stupid”.
Function 8 (Demonstrative) Used often in private; often made fun of; important to worldview; perceived as obvious information
This at first seemed to have nothing to do with the Witch/Senex, especially the term “Demonstrative”. But if one thinks of it, you take your dominant attitude, and then the auxiliary function, which you “parent” others with (or even in this model, are “creative” with), pair the function and attitude together, and this is what you have (The shadow of the auxiliary). “Obvious information” might cover it being the opposite attitude of the auxiliary. You focus on the preferred attitude, and probably take the opposite attitude for granted (which again would tie right into the whole Senex/Crone[witch] concept). On that point, it might also explain the “made fun of” part. (Think some “young whippersnappers” harassing the old cranks). “Important to worldview” might also connect to the archetype, since it involves “wisdom”. “Used often in private” I don’t know about.
The “blocks” (from above link and http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/258-Model-A-Blocks-and-Functions-of-the-Socionic-Model-of-the-Psyche):
RING 1 (Conscious, Mental) Strive to verbalize information and formulate observations and form the core of the individual’s intellectual activity
Block 1 (EGO) Most confident; used in most areas regardless of relevance; prone to overuse: source of purpose; indifferent to praise
“I know I can.” (“I know I can. I want to.”)
Zone of confidence, expertise, willfulness, and self-actualization. What you think about when things go right.
Block 2 (Super-Ego) Lack confidence; sensitive to criticism; prone to overreaction; source of stress and anxiety: appreciates praise
“I know I can’t.” (“I’m not good enough. I must work on that.”)
Zone of self-criticism, self-doubt, guilt, and self-perfection. What you think about when things go wrong.
RING 2 (Unconscious, Vital) Tend to manifest themselves without words in the process of doing things or inadvertently in the loan of spontaneous sentiments.
Block 3 (Super-Id) Poorly developed; seen as chores best left to others; prone to being desired; source of recreation; appreciates help
“I don’t know I can’t.” (“Why doesn’t anyone help me?”)
Zone of dependency, childishness, and suggestibility. What you feel and do as a result of others’ care or lack of care for you. Block 4 (Id) Well developed; seen as boring and meaningless; prone to being ignored; source of skill growth; indifferent to help
“I don’t know I can.” (“How is it I do that?”) What one does automatically when one is being oneself
If they placed “Id” before “Super-Id”, it would be the same as Lenore’s order. We see these “rings” and “traits” (below) are what set the order.
Accepting (independent): focus on obtaining a picture of reality Producing (dependent): create some sort of new product model to that part of reality
Here we see the clear analogue to the “spine” and “arms”; one being about the ego itself, and thus “independent”, and the other “dependent” on others.
Adapted from:
https://erictb.wordpress.com/2016/10/19/socionicsbeebe-correlation/