These thoughts were prompted by the work of V.L. Talanov, in which he described the values of the “Beta-quadra” in a highly disturbing way, in my opinion. It was unpleasant for me to discover that some people support such a view of “Se-values” and consider it entirely justified. Here are a few quotes to illustrate this:
The Beta-Se is a dangerous psychological function for many people around them.
Extraverted Sensing is primarily responsible for egocentric aggression in the psyche, and the ultimate goal of this function is egocentric expansion of one’s own biological genes. Hence the closest link between Se and the basic instinct, sex. Essentially, Se is the most “animal” and vestigial function of all eight, at least for the circumstances of modern civilization.
If Se is not restrained by civilized consciousness, it is aimed at genocide against the “not ours,” and this is confirmed by numerous modern examples. When Se-types – usually organized ultra-nationalists or football fans – come out on their typical and frequent demonstrations in defense of military criminals persecuted by the court, they are not defending the law, justice, or national or state interests. Another motive is transparently visible. They are simply, consciously or mostly subconsciously, defending their personal and group right to unpunished murder, their innate biological right to genocide against the “not ours”.
Se helps to navigate, move skillfully, and aim accurately in the long-divided sensory world, while keeping its ultimate goal in mind: to take and kill.
That’s why Se, once it reaches the highest level of leadership, unleashes aggression within society itself, dividing its citizens into ‘ours’ and ‘not ours,’ and giving rise to violence, banditry, deception, raiding and corruption. All of this is particularly pronounced on the logical background, i.e., in the Second quadra.
The aggression of Se-type is controlled and limited not by its value system, but by its fear of punishment. Hence, incidentally, comes the completely sincere conviction of beta-sensings that all other people refrain from committing crimes only out of fear of punishment, and therefore, the more fear there is in society, the better it will be for everyone in the end.
It can be unequivocally stated that if in peacetime society elevates a beta-Se-type to the highest post, who will then inevitably try to turn his powers into dictatorial ones (if allowed), and then sow hatred in that society, then such a society has gone mad.
The combination of dominant biological animal values in “Beta” with the normative role of Ti, with the prevailing populist pseudo-democracy of the masses, and the technological capabilities of modern civilization, almost inevitably gives birth to the most vile egocentric totalitarianism.
It is characteristic that a certain well-known socionics center relied on these works, asserting that there cannot be more than two percent of Beta quadras in society. Allegedly, betas are “predators” by nature, directed at the destruction and suppression of other types; accordingly, if there are too many of them, the “ecosystem” will be disrupted.
Although Talanov’s supporters cite “practical experience” and “statistics” as an argument that confirms such typical behavior for betas, this argument is invalid for an obvious reason. When determining people’s types, they already rely on the described definitions of information aspects. That is, a beta who is not focused on destruction and seizing power will not be considered a beta by their definition, while a representative of another quadra will be typed as Zhukov or Gorky due to their excessive aggressiveness and indifference to human life.
This trend is observed throughout the socionics community, not just among Talanov’s followers. While few would agree with such blatantly discriminatory descriptions of beta sensors, most socionics enthusiasts still believe that Zhukov, for example, is a kind of “tank” capable only of breaking through and destroying everything around him. Accordingly, most real Zhukovs are typed as anything but that – as Gabins, Don Quixotes, Hamlets, etc. while aggressive elements with sociopathic tendencies end up in the Zhukov category.
What is the mistake here? First and foremost, it lies in the incorrect understanding of the aspect of extraverted sensing. From a theoretical point of view, Se is information about influence. But most people have an incredibly narrow practical understanding of it. The first thing that comes to mind when hearing the words “extraverted sensing,” “Zhukov,” “aggressor,” or “Beta” is war, destruction, the seizure of new territories, violence… So are Se-types those who are the strongest and best at capturing, destroying, and subduing? Of course not.
It is important to understand that influence can be both destructive and constructive. For example, a tree can be cut down or it can be grown. A house can be built or it can be destroyed. A revolution can be started or economic influence can be expanded on the market. A person can be beaten or protected. One can increase their authority or develop their body to become stronger. All of these are different aspects of the Se-function.
So what does this mean? Is a Se-dominant person the strongest, most authoritative, best defender and leader? Again, no. Socionics does not determine our personality traits, but rather gives us conditions for processing information in a certain way. Regarding “aggressors,” the following can be said:
1. They are very interested in information related to extraverted Sensing (specific topics depend on a person’s preferences, as almost everything can be discussed from the perspective of the Se aspect, if that’s how one sees the world);
2. They notice many nuances and gradations in this information, understand the balance of power, their own and others’ place in the complex circumstances, as well as whether there are enough resources to change it (in other words, a person with strong valued Se understands when confrontation is justified and when it is not, due to an adequate assessment of themselves and others, whereas a Vulnerable Se has poor orientation in this regard, as they overestimate or underestimate their own and others’ abilities).
Understanding one’s own resource does not in itself add strength, authority, influence, wealth or power. To achieve these things, it is necessary to engage other aspects – to build one’s image, establish relationships, change behavior, develop one’s body, study technologies, cultivate self-confidence and so on. And this is within the capabilities not only of an aggressor, but of any other type as well. One can be a very authoritative person and still be like Dostoevsky, or be Napoleon while occupying the lower rungs of the social hierarchy.
Of course, the positions of Se and Fi in the type model also do not influence a person’s moral qualities. For example, Zhukov with Vulnerable Fi and Leading Se can very well be a supporter of freedom and human rights, since he sees better than others whom exactly needs protection, who cannot do it independently. Naturally, there are also other SLEs who assert themselves at the expense of the weak, but any other type is capable of this as well (yes, even Dostoevsky). The difference is only that Zhukov does it more consciously, understanding his motives and the entire situation as a whole.