# Clubs and Secondary Clubs (Just a Theory)



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

So socionics would divide the 16 types into 4 clubs, before or after quadras.

Alpha - Heavy Researchers - xNTP, ILE LII
Alpha - Light Social - xSFJ, ESE SEI

Beta - Heavy Pragmatists - xSTP, SLE LSI
Beta - Light Humanitarians - xNFJ, EIE IEI

Gamma - Heavy Socials - xSFP, SEE ESI
Gamma - Light Researchers - xNTJ, LIE ILI

Delta - Heavy Humanitarians - xNFP, IEE EII
Delta - Light Pragmatists - xSTJ, LSE SLI


I'd like help with describing each so that they're easier to identify with, instead of Heavy or Light. Maybe something like Theorists for xNTP and Empiricists/Scientists for xNTJ. The MBTI versions don't fit very well.


Then there's something I thought of -- secondary clubs. I'd think it's not so hard for people to pursue interests within their super id. Such would be in the form of combining their dominant functions and their mobilizing functions. For example, the LII might use their Ti and Si and basically become an ST, pragmatist for a limited stretch.

If we do this pattern for each of the 16 types, then we could have:



*MBTI/Socionics - 1st+6th - Primary/Secondary Clubs
*
*Alpha*
ENTP/ILE – NF – Heavy Researcher/Humanitarian
INTP/LII – ST – Heavy Researcher/Pragmatist
ESFJ/ESE – NF – Light Social/Humanitarian
ISFJ/SEI – ST – Light Social/Pragmatist

*Beta*
ESTP/SLE – SF – Heavy Pragmatist/Social
ISTP/LSI – NT – Heavy Pragmatist/Researcher
ENFJ/EIE – SF – Light Humanitarian/Social
INFJ/IEI – NT – Light Humanitarian/Researcher

*Gamma*
ESFP/SEE – ST – Heavy Social/Pragmatist
ISFP/ESI – NF – Heavy Social/Humanitarian
ENTJ/LIE – ST – Light Researcher/Pragmatist
INTJ/ILI – NF – Light Researcher/Humanitarian

*Delta*
ENFP/IEE – NT – Heavy Humanitarian/Researcher
INFP/EII – SF – Heavy Humanitarian/Social
ESTJ/LSE – NT – Light Pragmatist/Researcher
ISTJ/SLI – SF – Light Pragmatist/Social

Maybe some could be off, but I believe it's plausible for some of them to end up in the fields above. What do you guys think?


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

Seems unnecessary and confusing.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

@_sinigang_
The "rationality/irrationality" is a very important part of Socionics that must not be distorted, it is far more accurate than the MBTI "J/P" dichotomy when labeling types. Socionics uses a superior term for labeling the "J/P" dichotomy, dynamic and static, and it makes a lot more sense in comparison.

The heavy and light names are metaphors lost in translation:
"свете" has at least 5 different English translations: light, view, world, light of... 
"тяжелого" has heavy, severe, hard, serious... translations in English. 

If you've studied a second language you notice how nuances largely dominate expressions and so many things can be lost in translation. I'm studying Japanese, 日本人, and I've grown to appreciate the differences simply expression can have on the overall meaning of anything. If you toy with Google translate, which doesn't work perfectly in the first place (though still really useful) the problem behind translation become clearer. 

I personally retranslate the term "свете" as worldview/weltanschauung (the german word for an "idiosyncratic worldview"), since the theoretical concept for Ni and Si are that there are perceptions of reality with an individualistic, subjective, flavour. Whilst "тяжелого" is earthly view (so called "serious" or "severe", meaning reality without any influence) as the theoretical concept of Ne and Se is that its a perception of reality without a subjective influence yet its apathetic in crafting any meaning.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

I would not call LSEs "light pragmatists" =P if anything this is one of the most pragmatic types in the socion


----------



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

@*cyamitide*

I just took that from this. Lol. Club of pragmatists - Wikisocion

@*Boolean11*

I just found it easier to derive the 'secondary clubs' with MBTI labels and it was easier to group the mirror types with them. Though later on, I've included the socionic label too anyway.

I'm aware of language differences, as English happens to be my second language. Though I haven't dabbled with the original Russian Socionics material at all. I just trust the translated knowledge is enough to work with even though they may not be 100% accurate.

My point in writing this is to basically add a bit of depth to the typical club labels. For example, SLE in the pragmatists club would say nothing about their tendencies to end up in social fields. Or for SEE's to end up in sports(pragmatists). Maybe it doesn't have to be the field itself but a general behavioral pattern for each type. Such as the SLE being the more social of the pragmatists. I could go on, but I think I've made my point. I just want to see how applicable this would be.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

sinigang said:


> @*cyamitide*
> 
> I just took that from this. Lol. Club of pragmatists - Wikisocion
> 
> ...


You're leaning too heavily on the concept of clubs; they're just common themes/interests found among the type groups. Nothing says types cannot have an interest or occupation outside the fields listed, and it isn't really necessary to make even more categories to showcase the exceptions.


----------



## sinigang (May 5, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> You're leaning too heavily on the concept of clubs; they're just common themes/interests found among the type groups. Nothing says types cannot have an interest or occupation outside the fields listed, and it isn't really necessary to make even more categories to showcase the exceptions.


It's more of just figuring out another way to look at it and investigating. Necessity is not really my primary concern here. Me leaning too heavily on it depends on how you wish to see it, maybe I am also trying out other concepts but you can't tell for sure.


----------



## Boolean11 (Jun 11, 2012)

cyamitide said:


> I would not call LSEs "light pragmatists" =P if anything this is one of the most pragmatic types in the socion


LSE and SLE are the quintessential leaders, executives, business leaders in reality as I've not come to see it. The only difference is that ESTj/LSE firmly focus on their goals (Judging T) thus leaving their methods (S) flexible; whilst ESTp/SLE firmly focus on their methods (S) leaving their goals flexible. However either way results are very important for both types in the long run.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Boolean11 said:


> LSE and SLE are the quintessential leaders, executives, business leaders in reality as I've not come to see it. The only difference is that ESTj/LSE firmly focus on their goals (Judging T) thus leaving their methods (S) flexible; whilst ESTp/SLE firmly focus on their methods (S) leaving their goals flexible. However either way results are very important for both types in the long run.


It's the other way around. ESTj/LSE is a tactical type with fixed methods and changeable goals. ESTp/SLE is strategic type that fixes on a goal and manipulates methods (same applies to ENTj/LIEs and ENFj/EIEs).


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

sinigang said:


> I'd like help with describing each so that they're easier to identify with, instead of Heavy or Light. Maybe something like Theorists for xNTP and Empiricists/Scientists for xNTJ. The MBTI versions don't fit very well.


ILIs are given into constructing convoluted paradigms that may seem artificial. This is due to them being Process types. As such ILIs fall into both categories, empiricists and theorists. Full-time empiricists would be LIEs.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/77-On-Waves-of-Aging-and-Renewal


> ESE - natural emotions. EIE - artificial, theatrical emotions.
> LII - natural logic, logic of the laws of nature. LSI - artificial logic, logic of laws and regulations created by people.
> SLE - natural volitional force that subjugates those who are weak. SEE - artificial force that allows for manipulation of those who are in power.
> IEI - natural course of events unfolding into future. ILI - artificial course of events turned into the past.
> ...


I think all dynamic types can be called empiricists (including xEI and ExE) because they prioritize Je which according to this post is epistemically objective.


----------



## vosquoque (Jul 26, 2012)

> *Alpha
> ENTP/ILE – NF – Heavy Researcher/Humanitarian
> INTP/LII – ST – Heavy Researcher/Pragmatist
> ESFJ/ESE – NF – Light Social/Humanitarian
> ...


Imagine this:
Light Social/Humanitarian -> Light Pragmatist/Social -> Light Researcher/Pragmatist -> Light Humanitarian/Researcher -> Light Social/Humanitarian
Heavy Researcher/Humanitarian -> Light Humanitarian/Social -> Heavy Social/Pragmatist -> Light Pragmatist/Researcher -> Heavy Researcher/Humanitarian

Now supervision and benefit rings feel a lot more intuitive! If I label every type as A B/C corresponding to these type descriptions, here's how some inter type relations will turn out (where A' is the exact opposite of A and so on for B and C):

Identity: A B/C
Mirror: A B/C'
Activity: A' B'/C
Dual: A' B'/C'

Business: A C'/B'
Supervisee: A C'/B
Beneficiary: A' C/B'
Illusionary: A' C/B

Superego: A B'/C'
Conflict: A B'/C
Quasi-identical: A' B/C'
Extinguishment: A' B/C

Kindred: A C/B
Supervisor: A C/B'
Benefactor: A' C'/B
Semi-dual: A' C'/B'

Now to extract the main dichotomies…
N/S and T/F are easy. N would be those that have Researcher or Humanitarian in the B slot, T would be Researcher or Pragmatist, etc.
I guess I have to find the others later.


----------



## liminalthought (Feb 25, 2012)

vosquoque said:


> Imagine this:
> Light Social/Humanitarian -> Light Pragmatist/Social -> Light Researcher/Pragmatist -> Light Humanitarian/Researcher -> Light Social/Humanitarian
> Heavy Researcher/Humanitarian -> Light Humanitarian/Social -> Heavy Social/Pragmatist -> Light Pragmatist/Researcher -> Heavy Researcher/Humanitarian
> 
> ...


more


----------



## vosquoque (Jul 26, 2012)

liminalthought said:


> more


For all rational types, the T/F values of the club and the secondary club match. For example, LSE has ST/NT and therefore is rational.
All heavy types are static and all light types are dynamic.
Extroversion is a bit tackier because it is arrived implicitly from those two. Extroverts are heavy and irrational or light and rational.
For Reinin dichotomies, the ones that can be explained in the least words are these:
Tacticals have S (SF or ST) secondary clubs, and strategics N.
Constructivists likewise have F secondary clubs.
Democratics have aristocratic secondary clubs.
Merry types are either heavy and T or light and F.
Judicious types are either heavy and N or light and S.

Now, as a more theoretical addition to this model, an addition that probably will serve no purpose, how about e.g. Light Researcher/Pragmatist to actually imply Light Researcher/Heavy Pragmatist? This can make sense because, if the LIE is also using Se in conjunction with Te and thereby leans towards being a pragmatist, that Se is a static function and as such a leaning toward Se would also imply a leaning toward heaviness when one uses Se. 

Of course, this is merely a tautological property and does not add a bit to the actual dichotomies of types. Though perhaps it might contribute to duality and similar intertype dynamics, because the mobilizing function (in the LIE's case, Se) that is used to derive these secondary clubs also matters foremost in duality, activity and benefit relations. Then, if A is coupled with B implies that C is coupled with A', this might, at a glance, suggest something about beneficiary and illusionary relations. This might also explain the process dichotomy and the intertype relations that use it: since, say, an EIE would have not just SF but heavy SF leanings, an EIE would also have Gamma leanings, hence would go by the regular quadra progression of Alpha-Beta-Gamma-Delta. It seems similar in mechanism to the syn-flow/contra-flow thing in Enneagram. _What was I thinking? I'm stepping on a goldmine!_


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

sinigang said:


> So socionics would divide the 16 types into 4 clubs, before or after quadras.
> 
> Alpha - Heavy Researchers - xNTP, ILE LII
> Alpha - Light Social - xSFJ, ESE SEI
> ...


This reminds me of Brave New World. Are you going to pass around the soma next?

I'm an ISFP and not social at all and never have been. Completely avoidant and antisocial really and from what I've read that isn't uncommon among ISFPs. Haha.


----------



## vosquoque (Jul 26, 2012)

Scruzz said:


> This reminds me of Brave New World. Are you going to pass around the soma next?
> 
> I'm an ISFP and not social at all and never have been. Completely avoidant and antisocial really and from what I've read that isn't uncommon among ISFPs. Haha.


'Social' is just a label for SF in Socionics. It means as much as those handy type names like 'The Mastermind' or 'The Pioneer', namely, nothing.


----------



## Kanerou (Oct 8, 2009)

@Scruzz



vosquoque said:


> 'Social' is just a label for SF in Socionics. It means as much as those handy type names like 'The Mastermind' or 'The Pioneer', namely, nothing.


"When a group consists of members of this club, but without either of the two quadras having greater weight, its interactions are likely to be based on enjoying conversations over their families and personal relationships, artistic and sensorial interests such as cooking, gossip, and group social activities such as parties, dancing, travels and sportive activities. It's the stereotypical "women's group", although obviously such clubs formed only of men also exist, with common activities and interests usually focused around sports or, depending on the age structure, partying, clubbing and the like."

^ That is why it's called the Social club. It has nothing to do with being outgoing or enjoying being around lots of people. I'm a ESI and social (in the colloquial sense) purely on my own terms, usually being quite reclusive.

Also, you can't translate MBTI type over to Socionics type, regardless of the attempt in this thread; ISFP in MBTI doesn't mean much when you're looking at Socionics concepts.


----------



## vosquoque (Jul 26, 2012)

Kanerou said:


> @_Scruzz_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Very well then. One may even liken this to that 'extrovert = outgoing' stereotype. Though, of course, extroversion is of a different class of attitudes from clubs. I think of the dichotomies extroversion/introversion and rationality/irrationality as external attitudes or approaches to one's environment (hence temperaments evolve from them), and intuition/sensation and logic/ethics as internal attitudes or interests and fields of knowledge (hence clubs), because the 'inner essence' of an information element lies in its N/S/T/F quality, and it is only reflected externally or internally by its extroversion dichotomy. Quadras are formed of their combination. This may not be very intuitive when one defines dichotomies on the type level, but it becomes clearer for functions. As accepting and producing functions form independent axes, the Alpha quadra can be reduced to the independent axial choices of Ne-Si and Ti-Fe. For Ne, Ne-Se would correlate with temperaments, Ne-Ni with clubs, and Ne-Si with quadras. If you apply these three pairings not just to this axis of Ne-Ni-Se-Si but to the rational axis as well, you get the small groups of types that are temperaments, clubs and quadras.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

vosquoque said:


> For all rational types, the T/F values of the club and the secondary club match. For example, LSE has ST/NT and therefore is rational.
> All heavy types are static and all light types are dynamic.
> Extroversion is a bit tackier because it is arrived implicitly from those two. Extroverts are heavy and irrational or light and rational.
> For Reinin dichotomies, the ones that can be explained in the least words are these:
> ...


I find this very interesting since I relate to NT Alphas and Researchers, and NF Betas and Humanitarians the most; ST Betas and Pragmatists, and Delta NF Humanitarians, third and SF Gammas and Socials, last.


----------



## GreenCoyote (Nov 2, 2009)

sinigang said:


> So socionics would divide the 16 types into 4 clubs, before or after quadras.
> 
> Alpha - Heavy Researchers - xNTP, ILE LII
> Alpha - Light Social - xSFJ, ESE SEI
> ...



Wow. this is petty accurate as far as the types in my life. The LII is very pragmatic. I am always on the computer and my friend ESI is always talking about humanitarian stuff.
very cool. didn't think of it like this before but accurate non-the-less. good job.


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

What do you do if you relate to all of them? I research humanitarian issues, then socially relate to and work extensively with other people with whom I share values in order to pragmatically implement my solutions.


----------



## He's a Superhero! (May 1, 2013)

I wonder if the Moderators would consider stickying this thread? It's a side to Socionics that I'm trying to study lately, and it doesn't seem to be discussed much elsewhere. @Figure
@sinigang, thank you for posting this thread!


----------

