Socionics Types of the Primarchs

[echidna1000]

I've been getting into the Horus Heresy novels for the past year, currently on Betrayer, so I still have some way to go.

 

I know there have been attempts in the past to MBTI-type the Primarchs, but thought it would be a good idea to try to do the same using Socionics. It's a much more complex system, and I think sheds better insight into the personalities of each of them. 

 

 

My current best estimations of each Primarch (excluding II and XI):

 

1. Lion El'Jonson - LIE (he struggles with intimacy Fi even more than charisma Fe, and he fights too well to be ILI)
2. ????
3. Fulgrim - EIE (100% sure)
4. Perturabo - LSI (100% sure)
5. Jaghatai Khan - either SEE or else IEE, not too sure yet, but seems very much like one of those.
6. Leman Russ - SEE (if not, then SLE)
7. Rogal Dorn - ESI (slight chance he could be LSI, but I strongly prefer ESI)
8. Konrad Curze - LSI (a really insane one, Perturabo is more realistic, I think)
9. Sanguinius - EIE
10. Ferrus Manus - SLE
11. ????
12. Angron - SLE (that actually seems to work best, even with the Nails, explains relationship with Lorgar well)
13. Roboute Guilliman - LSE (100% sure, definite conflict relation with Lorgar)
14. Mortarion - either ESI or else LSI
15. Magnus the Red - ILE (pretty sure)
16. Horus Lupercal - SLE (pretty sure, unless he's EIE)
17. Lorgar Valerian - IEI (100% sure, perfectly fits the worst fighter of the bunch)
18. Vulkan - SEI perhaps, but not too sure yet. 
19. Corvus Corax - LIE perhaps, he is independently minded, like the Lion, avoids attention but also keeps on moving to the next thing.
20. Alpharius Omegon (could be two different types, not much clue, but a guess would be LIE and LSI, need more info)

 

I also think that the Emperor of Man is probably an LSI too, and Malcador, some Ni type, IEI, ILI or LIE. NOT EIE. 

 

 

Very open to discussing other recurring Horus Heresy characters. Got a few ideas. 

[Brother Tyler]

It might help everyone in the discussion if you posted some basic information about MBTI types and socionics, possibly with links to more in-depth information.

[echidna1000]

It might help everyone in the discussion if you posted some basic information about MBTI types and socionics, possibly with links to more in-depth information.

Thank you for suggesting this. I just wasn't sure about posting links in case people thought I was advertising.

 

Here are all 16 type profiles for the Socionics system.

 

Other helpful links:

 

Notation to convert between Socionics notations in 'low and high gothic'

Information on Ne, Se, Ni and Si.

Information on Te, Fe, Ti and Fi.

Introduction to the theory part 1

Introduction to the theory part 2

Introduction to the theory part 3

 

 

Video stuff

More video stuff

Edited July 23, 2021 by echidna1000

[N1SB]

Hi Brother Echidna, I did the Myer-Briggs personality test, which iirc was this multiple choice affair...which I think I passed (no one told me I had failed it at least).

 

Here's why I mention it.  I didn't recognise your notation at 1st.  They gave me my 4 letters that I remembered (it's ENTJ, but I store it in memory as JENT a.k.a "gent", which I'm totally not, and I remember it as it's funny).  Upon researching more, I found that's like a shorthand for the actual formal name.  Now I know I'm a "LIE".

 

That just made me laugh even harder because now I'm what everything the Inquisition tells people.  But in case people are confused by this, and you did the Myer-Briggs, here's the chart to convert YOUR result to the formal names that Brother Echidna uses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics#The_16_types

 

I'm not an expert on this, but it seems you know what you're talking about.  Here's what I was most interested in reading your thing: Roboute Guilliman (LSE) and Lorgar Aurelian (IEI), their personality types are conflicting ones?  Do the relationships between the others match their types, like Fulgrim (EIE) and Ferrus Manus (SLE) being best friends forever (BFFs) for example?

 

I ask, being curious, but also I don't take this too seriously.  I do treat it as one of those personality test things, which I think is fair.

[lansalt]

It might help everyone in the discussion if you posted some basic information about MBTI types and socionics, possibly with links to more in-depth information.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indicator

 

20th century attempts at psychology that came to dead ends.

Basically, astrology with extra steps and pseudoscientific language.

 

Honestly I don't think this belongs here or even the BL forum, it's not about characterization analysis.

Edited July 23, 2021 by lansalt

[jaxom]

 

It might help everyone in the discussion if you posted some basic information about MBTI types and socionics, possibly with links to more in-depth information.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indicator

 

20th century attempts at psychology that came to dead ends.

Basically, astrology with extra steps and pseudoscientific language.

 

Honestly I don't think this belongs here or even the BL forum, it's not about characterization analysis.

 

 

Personality typing versus scaling; typing is met with a lot of criticism, but they can use the same or similar language for the criteria (this is why Jung is still part of psychology today, his descriptors). That's why most surveys use the Likert scale (1-5 with things like "strongly agree - agree - neutral -  disagree - strongly disagree" or "less than yearly - yearly - monthly - weekly - daily") rather than a binary scale. For example, the Big Five personality model uses a continuum.

 

The validity of the analytical tools is beyond our discussion here, but I think actually looking at some of the traits from the models would make for interesting analysis of primarch.

 

Big Five/HEXACO (description of high part of continuum)

• Honest-humility (avoid manipulating others, follow rules, uninterested in special treatment and status)
• Emotionality (fear physical harm, anxious from distress, need emotional support from others, feel empathy and sentiment) 
• Extraversion (positive sense of self, confident when leading or talking to groups, experience enthusiasm and energy from social interactions)
• Agreeableness (forgive people who have wronged them, more likely to positively judge people, willing to compromise and cooperate, in control of temper)
• Conscientiousness (well organized schedule and environment, disciplined approach to tasks, aim for accuracy and perfection, careful making decisions)
• Openness to experience (get absorbed in beauty and aesthetics, curious about different types of knowledge, imaginative, interested in unusual ideas)

Myers-Briggs Types (actual types are the 2^4 possibly combinations based on the binary options for each category; socionics shares many descriptors, but focuses on the idea of "information metabolism" - a pre-evidence-based-medicinal approach to neurocognitive psychology - whereas MBTs are purely descriptive)

• Introversion/Extroversion (I: reserved, time for contemplation, think through things mentally, rather observe than be observed; E: talkative, fast-paced environment, work out ideas with others, enjoy attention)
• Sensing/Intuition (S: think on how things are, attention to details, prefer practical knowledge, specific descriptions; I: think on how things could be, attention to connections/big picture, like knowledge for its own sake, figurative descriptions)
• Thinking/Feeling (T: teleogical decision making, value equitable results, find flaws in argument; F: deontological based decision making, value harmonic results, find best in argument)
• Judging/Perceiving (J: settled decisions, rules and agreements should be held to, detailed instructions, wants foreknowledge and makes plans; P: open options, rules and agreements are flexible, enjoys new situations and improvises)

 

Eysenck's Personality Theory (hypothesis based on biological nature of the nervousness system; ancestor of Big Five, he actually plotted the four quadrants of the original two axes as explaining melancholic, choleric, phlegmatic, and sanguine types)

• Extraversion/Introversion (sociable, want excitement, bored easily, impulsive vs shun sensation and stimulation, reserved, reliable)
• Neuroticism/Stability (prone to overreacting to emotional stimuli, quick to worry/fear/anger vs remaining calm and in control)
• Psychoticism/Normality (added later; lacking empathy, aggressive, antisocial vs "balanced behavior")
• Unstable-Introvert: melancholic, Unstable-Extrovert: choleric, Stable-Introvert: phlegmatic, Stable-Extrovert: sanguine.

Fun/interesting note: the Mournival split along unstable-stable lines, with the unstable (Abaddon/choleric and Horus Aximand/melancholic) turning traitor with Horus and the stable (Loken/phlegmatic and Tarik/sanguine) staying loyal to the Emperor.

 

Example:

Mortarion

• HEXACO: could be read as high honest-humility, high extraversion, low agreeableness, high conscientiousness, low openness to experience.
• MBT: could be read as introverted, sensing, thinking, judging
• EPT: could be read as introverted, neurotic, psychotic (this would make him melancholic and that quadrant includes: quiet, unsociable, reserved, pessimistic, sober, rigid, anxious, moody)

[byrd9999]

This kind of box-ticking analysis can be fun, but will ultimately fall short because BL characters are often depicted by several authors, whose characterisation can differ wildly...

[Skywrath]

If I recall correctly, the J/P dichotomy in socionics is reversed. I think socionics are a more credible system than MBTI, however personally, I still prefer the Jungian system. With this in mind, I'll be typing the primarchs through the lens of that. Btw, INTp socionics here, Ni subtype.

 

Lion El'Jonson - ENTJ in MBTI, ENTP socionics 

 

Fulgrim - ISFP in MBTI, ISFJ socionics. 

 

Perturabo - ISTP in MBTI, ISTJ socionics.

 

Jaghatai Khan - ESTP/ISTP in MBTI, not sure what the socionics code is.

 

Leman Russ - ESTP, ESTJ socionics.

 

Rogal Dorn - ESTJ MBTI, ESTP socionics.

 

Konrad Curze - Contrary to popular opinion, his premonitions are actually a tell-tale sign on Ni. With his reasonings firmly grounded in Fi - everything is equal. INTJ MBTI, INTP socionics.

 

Sanguinius - Hard to say, but I'm leaning ENFP MBTI, ENFJ socionics.

 

Ferrus Manus - ISTP MBTI, ESTJ socionics.

 

Angron - Bit of a weird one, but ISFJ in MBTI, ISFP socionics. Reason for this is that, if you take the event of the Emperor taking him from his final battle, everything in that screamed Si-Fe defiance, his attachment to brotherhood, to old gladiatorial values, etc. Then his refusal to adapt to the new - stuck in Si, didn't even see his brothers as his brothers. 

 

Roboute Gulliman - actually Roboute is actually ISTJ in MBTI, rather than ESTJ. Take his "humanity" and his adherence to it, Fi is higher on the stack than Ne. IIRC the 30k iteration of gulliman was also very much all Si-Te, rather than Te-Si, concept > implementation priority. Then there is his outburst when he got ressurected - everything in that screams Si dominant, before he adapted to the events of the century. The new books in Dawn of Fire reinforce that.

 

Mortarion - ISTJ MBTI, ISTP, socionics. Clear Ne inferior. 

 

Magnus the Red - INTP MBTI, INTJ socionics. Could be wrong about that, but I think his Si is higher in his stack than his Fe. 

 

Horus Lupercal - actually, ENTJ in MBTI, ENTP socionics. If you compare the Lion, to Horus, he's essentially his evil counterpart.

 

Vulkan - ESFJ MBTI, ESFP socionics. Fe dominant for sure, could be Ni aux, but doubtful.

 

Corvus Corax - Corvus, hmm. Could be either INTP or ISTP in MBTI. Ti dominant for sure, from the little bits of information I read about him.

 

Alpharius Omegon - INTJ in MBTI, INTP socionics. 

[Splog]

The MBTI has some validity, but much less so than the dominant Big 5 models. It is considered useful for certain uses like understanding each other to help with team building. But whereas professional bodies like the American Psychological Association, and the British Psychological Society take the MBTI seriously, the same is not true of socionics. Socionics does not even get mentioned in their dictionaries, or comprehensive compendium of psychological test reviews (the BPS covers more than 160). Heck, it’s not even interesting or prevalent enough to make one of their myth busting articles.

This is a forum about a make-believe setting which we all love, so it’s totally cool and interesting to apply whatever frameworks we want to character analysis, but whether these ‘tools’ are *valid* or not should be “beyond our discussion here” no more so than whether a siege could have been won by applying more phlogiston to the enemy, whether nurgle’s rot can be cured by eating a little bit of rot-scab, or why the mandiville point seems to be centred around stars rather than around the central planet as one might expect.

Edited July 24, 2021 by Slips
Keeping things on-topic.

[Friday]

I have no idea what this thread is even about.

[Closet Skeleton]

This kind of box-ticking analysis can be fun, but will ultimately fall short because BL characters are often depicted by several authors, whose characterisation can differ wildly...

 

Real people aren't that consistent either.

 

 

It might help everyone in the discussion if you posted some basic information about MBTI types and socionics, possibly with links to more in-depth information.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indicator

 

20th century attempts at psychology that came to dead ends.

Basically, astrology with extra steps and pseudoscientific language.

 

Honestly I don't think this belongs here or even the BL forum, it's not about characterization analysis.

 

Astrology is way more complicated than anything in 20th century psychology, its just that the simplified Newspaper horoscope style of modern astrology is also a 20th century attempt at psychology that was created around the same time as Jung's work which later got expanded into MBTI and Socionics. Before the 20th century astrology was only concerned with personality as part of it being bolted onto literally everything back then. The four temperments/humours started in medicine and were no more linked to astrology than taking tinctures was (which was quite a lot).

 

Authors use all sorts of personality study systems you might find 'pseudoscientific' as characterisation aids, depends on the writer. I don't know if any Black Library authors do since I don't follow them in interviews, blogs or twitter so but I wouldn't be surprised at all.

 

 

But whereas professional bodies like the American Psychological Association, and the British Psychological Society take the MBTI seriously, the same is not true of socionics. Socionics does not even get mentioned in their dictionaries, or comprehensive compendium of psychological test reviews (the BPS covers more than 160). Heck, it’s not even interesting or prevalent enough to make one of their myth busting articles.

 

I'd never heard of socionics before this thread but it seems to be Russian so that's probably why its not studied by English language institutions.

Edited July 25, 2021 by Closet Skeleton

[Gorgoff]

I have no idea what this thread is even about.

You know the "Whats your personality" tests in teenage magazines?

Basically the same test exists in pseudo-psychology.

[echidna1000]

Hi Brother Echidna, I did the Myer-Briggs personality test, which iirc was this multiple choice affair...which I think I passed (no one told me I had failed it at least).

 

Here's why I mention it.  I didn't recognise your notation at 1st.  They gave me my 4 letters that I remembered (it's ENTJ, but I store it in memory as JENT a.k.a "gent", which I'm totally not, and I remember it as it's funny).  Upon researching more, I found that's like a shorthand for the actual formal name.  Now I know I'm a "LIE".

 

That just made me laugh even harder because now I'm what everything the Inquisition tells people.  But in case people are confused by this, and you did the Myer-Briggs, here's the chart to convert YOUR result to the formal names that Brother Echidna uses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics#The_16_types

 

I'm not an expert on this, but it seems you know what you're talking about.  Here's what I was most interested in reading your thing: Roboute Guilliman (LSE) and Lorgar Aurelian (IEI), their personality types are conflicting ones?  Do the relationships between the others match their types, like Fulgrim (EIE) and Ferrus Manus (SLE) being best friends forever (BFFs) for example?

 

I ask, being curious, but also I don't take this too seriously.  I do treat it as one of those personality test things, which I think is fair.

 

Brother N1SB! Yes, I was using Socionics 3-letter notation, rather than the 4-letter notation, because I didn't want to invite confusion between the Myers Briggs and Socionics systems. There is significant overlap in terminology, to the point where you could use a chart like the one you included to map between the two systems, although there are important, subtle differences, such that an ENTJ, for instance, is not exactly the same as an LIE. ENTJ has connotations of being very much 'the boss', whereas, LIE is much more about being independent and pragmatic in a strategic way.

 

Some might give Horus 'ENTJ' in Myers Briggs, but he'd be more of an SLE in Socionics. In contrast, some might give the Lion 'INTJ' in Myers Briggs, but I think he's a good fit for LIE in Socionics. 

 

 

As for relationships, YES, so for Ferrus SLE and Fulgrim EIE, their relationships are what is known as 'Activation' where they have shared values (Beta Quadra), and quickly bond and make friends, but there is also some rivalry, they don't QUITE complement, but rather try to lead in a similar area but with different strengths, so that they aren't evenly matched, but rather win some, or lose some to each other. It's a very positive, but intense relationship. They're both Extroverts, so it isn't as sustainable as an Extrovert matched with an Introvert.

 

Ferrus and Fulgrim had this, but I would also say that Horus SLE and Sanguinius EIE probably had this too. A lot of the characters, pretty much all the traitors, seem to be Beta Quadra.

 

Another relationship, that is meant to be truly complementary, i.e. compatible opposites, is called 'Duality', this is where an Extrovert is paired with an Introvert, while sharing the same values, and having completely different strengths.  It's not often as easy to form friendship, because of the greater difference, but it's meant to be ultimately more rewarding and sustainable. I think some inspired decisions were made by the writers along these lines, which was why Fulgrim EIE was paired with Perturabo LSI in Angel Exterminatus, while Lorgar IEI was paired with Angron SLE in Betrayer. It's kind of teased in AE that if Fulgrim and Perturabo weren't so mucked up in their different ways, they'd actually be much much closer. A 'missed opportunity'. They are much more susceptible to one another despite being different, where in contrast, Guilliman LSE (he's of the Delta Quadra, not Beta) and Lorgar IEI have no shared understanding and are baffled by each other until they have reasons to loathe one another.

[echidna1000]

The MBTI has some validity, but much less so than the dominant Big 5 models. It is considered useful for certain uses like understanding each other to help with team building. But whereas professional bodies like the American Psychological Association, and the British Psychological Society take the MBTI seriously, the same is not true of socionics. Socionics does not even get mentioned in their dictionaries, or comprehensive compendium of psychological test reviews (the BPS covers more than 160). Heck, it’s not even interesting or prevalent enough to make one of their myth busting articles.

 

This is a forum about a make-believe setting which we all love, so it’s totally cool and interesting to apply whatever frameworks we want to character analysis, but whether these ‘tools’ are *valid* or not should be “beyond our discussion here” no more so than whether a siege could have been won by applying more phlogiston to the enemy, whether nurgle’s rot can be cured by eating a little bit of rot-scab, or why the mandiville point seems to be centred around stars rather than around the central planet as one might expect.

 

Yes, Socionics is simply not known enough to be properly evaluated by the BPS. I'm a member of the BPS and it's quite uncanny how something talked about in English almost exclusively on the internet has not permeated professional circles. 

 

At the end of the day, it's a framework, useful for post-hoc analysis, but I wouldn't advise predictive analyses with it. Luckily, all discussion of lore is post-hoc :D

[echidna1000]

 

If I recall correctly, the J/P dichotomy in socionics is reversed. I think socionics are a more credible system than MBTI, however personally, I still prefer the Jungian system. With this in mind, I'll be typing the primarchs through the lens of that. Btw, INTp socionics here, Ni subtype.

 

Lion El'Jonson - ENTJ in MBTI, ENTP socionics 

 

Fulgrim - ISFP in MBTI, ISFJ socionics. 

 

Perturabo - ISTP in MBTI, ISTJ socionics.

 

Jaghatai Khan - ESTP/ISTP in MBTI, not sure what the socionics code is.

 

Leman Russ - ESTP, ESTJ socionics.

 

Rogal Dorn - ESTJ MBTI, ESTP socionics.

 

Konrad Curze - Contrary to popular opinion, his premonitions are actually a tell-tale sign on Ni. With his reasonings firmly grounded in Fi - everything is equal. INTJ MBTI, INTP socionics.

 

Sanguinius - Hard to say, but I'm leaning ENFP MBTI, ENFJ socionics.

 

Ferrus Manus - ISTP MBTI, ESTJ socionics.

 

Angron - Bit of a weird one, but ISFJ in MBTI, ISFP socionics. Reason for this is that, if you take the event of the Emperor taking him from his final battle, everything in that screamed Si-Fe defiance, his attachment to brotherhood, to old gladiatorial values, etc. Then his refusal to adapt to the new - stuck in Si, didn't even see his brothers as his brothers. 

 

Roboute Gulliman - actually Roboute is actually ISTJ in MBTI, rather than ESTJ. Take his "humanity" and his adherence to it, Fi is higher on the stack than Ne. IIRC the 30k iteration of gulliman was also very much all Si-Te, rather than Te-Si, concept > implementation priority. Then there is his outburst when he got ressurected - everything in that screams Si dominant, before he adapted to the events of the century. The new books in Dawn of Fire reinforce that.

 

Mortarion - ISTJ MBTI, ISTP, socionics. Clear Ne inferior. 

 

Magnus the Red - INTP MBTI, INTJ socionics. Could be wrong about that, but I think his Si is higher in his stack than his Fe. 

 

Horus Lupercal - actually, ENTJ in MBTI, ENTP socionics. If you compare the Lion, to Horus, he's essentially his evil counterpart.

 

Vulkan - ESFJ MBTI, ESFP socionics. Fe dominant for sure, could be Ni aux, but doubtful.

 

Corvus Corax - Corvus, hmm. Could be either INTP or ISTP in MBTI. Ti dominant for sure, from the little bits of information I read about him.

 

Alpharius Omegon - INTJ in MBTI, INTP socionics. 

 

Thank you for offering your thoughts, great to find some people already know about this.

 

The p/j is reversed for Introverts, but kept the same for Extroverts. However, I would add that there are differences between the types that aren't captured by the j/p switch, so I would treat it more as a very loose guide, rather than a reliable way to map. It works very well for, say ENTP or INTP to ILE and LII, but I think it becomes very unreliable for say, ISFP. Rogal Dorn makes a great ESI (ISFj) in Socionics, but there's no way he's an P-anything in Myers Briggs. 

 

I don't think I can argue so effectively for Roboute's type in Myers Briggs (or for any of the primarchs), but I will make the case for LSE in Socionics and see if any of that bleeds out to Myers Briggs understandings....

 

1) I would say that there is a lot of Socionics Ne being pushed by Guilliman. He's not closed to things, but decidedly open to whatever data is out there that CAN be used. He pushes his Astartes to grow and develop their potential, not simply as soldiers, but as statesmen, politicians, thinkers, etc. New possibilities and alternative conceptions are very important to him, but ALWAYS beneath the prime motivator of what is most practical, effective and efficient, i.e. Te. 

 

2) At least in Socionics, I would say that there isn't so much Socionics Fi with Guilliman. He is not a social outcast like Perturabo or Curze and is a capable 'politician', i.e. his Fe is passable (which you would expect from a Te dom), however, he maintains a rather professional and practical distance with a lot of his brothers and even his astartes. He doesn't seem to foster or depend on much close intimacy in the 1-to-1 relationships. There is a certain 'detached' quality there which you also see in the Lion. There IS some Socionics Fi however, as seen in Guilliman's categorisation of the 'Dauntless Few'. That required some relationship-building or character assessment, although even then, it was oriented around the question "Who has a consistent approach to battle that I can predict and align my tactics to in a way that is compatible?" It just doesn't seem as developed compared to his Ne. I certainly think it's valued (so 'in the stack in Myers Briggs terms), as seen with his shock and horror regarding the true intentions of Lorgar, but also weaker because he kind of needed Lorgar to openly state he was betraying Guilliman. He was actually a bit obtuse about it, and he seemed to default to giving Lorgar a 'chance', and suspend judgement, which again is Ne > Fi. 

 

3) The main broad-brush thing is this: Guilliman is about quantity above all. He does quality too, but that's within and part of his pursuit of quantity. In contrast, Perturabo and Rogal Dorn are definitely quality > quantity. Roboute is the primarch that maximises effectiveness across the greatest variety of things that can be helpful. This is very Extroverted over Introverted, and specifically Socionics Te. He does the most, and is constantly active. Constantly thinking and doing things that are relevant and useful, and tries to teach this to his Astartes. Si is there, but it doesn't seem to be the great lens through which all his other actions are decided. It seems to be supporting his Te pursuit, making his efficiency focus also detail-supported, rather than about broad themes or general strategies. In Socionics, it's the LSE that is the work horse for this reason. In contrast, the SLI is meant to be quite laid back. SLIs, with Si in the dominant position, are going to be more about conserving than improving. They will make small tweaks and refine, but they lack that initiative to go out and add more stuff. SLIs are the best at finding a reason for why something would be a waste of energy, and so less is more. 

 

 

ALSO, regarding the contrast of Horus with the Lion, I'd say that there is a crucial difference between the two of them. Horus desires admiration from others. He wants to be impressive, he wants to be looked upon with reverence. He does not want to be forgotten. That is why he was able to be converted to chaos. This motivation makes total sense for someone who is Fe Mobilising, a bit like the Tertiary. It's the 'Hidden Agenda', not strong, but pushed and developed, and valued. He craves and wants to be in Socionics Fe what someone like Sanguinius is naturally. 

 

In contrast, the Lion does not care about this. He is very independently minded. His thing, if anything, is not being controlled or overseen by others, while being a highly pragmatic general. He's fierce in protecting his independent, pragmatic approach. So, I don't think Fe is valued by him. I think he's very much a Gamma Quadra type. 

 

An interesting comparison is Perturabo. I think his Socionics Fe is actually similar to Horus' in terms of being valued, but it's even weaker. Right at the bottom, rather than the third position. That's why he doesn't even try to be charismatic. He wants to be accepted and revered, but has no idea how to even start. 

 

 

Does that make sense?

 

 

With Magnus, I will say this - there is no caution with him. He sees new possibilities and he wants to go after them. Won't be told that this is going to be a bad idea. He thinks he can possibly make it better, and so disaster ensues. This is very Ne > Ni. Makes total sense for an ILE or IEE (even LSE or ESE), but with an LII, I'd expect Ne and Ni to be more in balance. 

 

Additionally, I do see Socionics Fe with Magnus more than Socionics Si. He isn't exactly a relaxing, or down-to-earth primarch. He can be unnerving, but he does put a lot of thought into his image, and how he comes across, hence he's always playing with his appearance. 

 

 

I probably see the most Socionics Si in Vulkan, hence why he is the most 'down-to-earth', the most human. I think that a primarch who is Ni second, so literally no Si is definitely Fulgrim. There's nothing down-to-earth about him, and every desire to float beyond the normal to the sublime, even as he is entirely unnerving and even grotesque. 

[jaxom]

 

SNIP

 

2) At least in Socionics, I would say that there isn't so much Socionics Fi with Guilliman. He is not a social outcast like Perturabo or Curze and is a capable 'politician', i.e. his Fe is passable (which you would expect from a Te dom), however, he maintains a rather professional and practical distance with a lot of his brothers and even his astartes. He doesn't seem to foster or depend on much close intimacy in the 1-to-1 relationships. There is a certain 'detached' quality there which you also see in the Lion. 

 

SNIP

 

An interesting comparison is Perturabo. I think his Socionics Fe is actually similar to Horus' in terms of being valued, but it's even weaker. Right at the bottom, rather than the third position. That's why he doesn't even try to be charismatic. He wants to be accepted and revered, but has no idea how to even start. 

 

 

Does that make sense?

 

 

The HH series is unfortunate in that the closest relationship Guilliman had was with Ferrus Manus, but the two primarchs only think on it and we never see it directly. I don't know if that impacts your analysis, but wanted to bring it up as an example of Guilliman in an intimate relationship. The other example would be with his adopted mother, Tarasha Euten, which got attention in the Unremembered Empire trilogy.

 

Perturabo wanted to be acknowledged by others for his strengths; but, he was terribly at conveying that to others. Horus's recognition of this trait was invaluable in bringing him over to the traitor cause and Magnus's inability to recognize this trait was part of what led to their relationship degrading so badly. I think Perturabo has Fe as vulnerable (lack of public displays of emotion) and suggestive functions (buries self in work and does not compensate except in specific circumstances), but not the others (aware of emotional states, wants to match prevailing emotional states, striving for states of emotional freedom).

 

 

 

Yes, Socionics is simply not known enough to be properly evaluated by the BPS. I'm a member of the BPS and it's quite uncanny how something talked about in English almost exclusively on the internet has not permeated professional circles. 

 

At the end of the day, it's a framework, useful for post-hoc analysis, but I wouldn't advise predictive analyses with it. Luckily, all discussion of lore is post-hoc 

My psych department offered its own stats class because they really stressed that the predictive capabilities of psychology were part of what made it a science. They stressed that the lack of predictive strength was exactly why personality-based systems don't get a lot of attention from professional psychological circles, especially once medical techniques caught up with the "information metabolism" concept (personality arises from how a person processes/metabolizes information and that metabolism has a biological basis) at the core of socionics. For our fellow frater not as familiar with modern psychology: cognitive psychology (the science of mental processes and processing), specifically, acknowledges that behavioral patterns are based on neurochemistry, but those can be shifted using outside stimulation. The prevailing theory is everyone exists on the various behavioral spectra and shift their exact position in response to stimuli (major disorders being the extremes of these spectra). The research focus these days is on neurocognitive analysis. For example, using analytical systems like EEG or MRI to identify what cues up the brain-chemistry associated with specific stimuli. Thus, the prevailing academic thought regarding personality models is that they can't be predictive for an average brain unless axes are introduced to the models for stimulation.

 

Socionics also suffers from the Iron Curtain's impact on scientific development; hence, it's most use in former Soviet or Soviet-sphere-of-influence areas (not to say that impacts validity, just geographic impact from a time without the internet and reliance on physical transmission of ideas).

[echidna1000]

 

The HH series is unfortunate in that the closest relationship Guilliman had was with Ferrus Manus, but the two primarchs only think on it and we never see it directly. I don't know if that impacts your analysis, but wanted to bring it up as an example of Guilliman in an intimate relationship. The other example would be with his adopted mother, Tarasha Euten, which got attention in the Unremembered Empire trilogy.

Perturabo wanted to be acknowledged by others for his strengths; but, he was terribly at conveying that to others. Horus's recognition of this trait was invaluable in bringing him over to the traitor cause and Magnus's inability to recognize this trait was part of what led to their relationship degrading so badly. I think Perturabo has Fe as vulnerable (lack of public displays of emotion) and suggestive functions (buries self in work and does not compensate except in specific circumstances), but not the others (aware of emotional states, wants to match prevailing emotional states, striving for states of emotional freedom).

 

I didn't know that! I don't think it spoils the analysis though.

 

Unless I am slightly off about Vulkan or the Khan, I think Guilliman is the only Delta primarch, which is also perhaps why he's seen as the most vanilla. 

 

Now, within that Delta Quadra, there is variation, so Guilliman, as an LSE would emphasis Socionics Se and Te a lot in terms of strengths, i.e. being an especially practical, tactical, proactive kind of person. 

 

In the Beta Quadra, which has opposing values, Ferrus' type, the SLE, also emphasises Se and Te as strengths. It's not uncommon therefore for these types to be friends, and get on, but may grow apart as they develop in different directions with different values. They are meant to be outwardly quite similar, even as they are different inside. 

 

If you put it in MBTI-style 4-letter terms, it's the difference between ESTp and ESTj. 

 

In addition, I have said that Ferrus and Horus are likely the same type, but I think there is more nuance here. I think that Ferrus is much less developed in his personality than Horus. Over time, SLEs are meant to grow from Te, which they are great at, but don't value so much, to Fe, which they are not great at, but covet greatness in. They become less practical and process-oriented, to become more charismatic and admired by others. Horus is much more towards Fe, while Ferrus seems still stuck in Te.

 

In a parallel, Guilliman and other LSEs are supposed to grow from Se to Ne. That's why Guilliman tries to promote the open-minded, growing in new areas approach, but when things get dark for him, he can become terrifyingly action-oriented, e.g. in Know No Fear. It's not who he wants to be, but he can do that very effectively, while the likes of Russ, Angron, Horus and Ferrus seem much more aggressively-minded.

 

This would mean more opportunity for Guilliman to bond with Ferrus, than say, Horus.  

 

 

I would say though that using someone's adopted mother as an example of an intimate relationship is sort of the exception that proves the rule, especially for a primarch who had a happy childhood.

 

 

 

 

My psych department offered its own stats class because they really stressed that the predictive capabilities of psychology were part of what made it a science. They stressed that the lack of predictive strength was exactly why personality-based systems don't get a lot of attention from professional psychological circles, especially once medical techniques caught up with the "information metabolism" concept (personality arises from how a person processes/metabolizes information and that metabolism has a biological basis) at the core of socionics. For our fellow frater not as familiar with modern psychology: cognitive psychology (the science of mental processes and processing), specifically, acknowledges that behavioral patterns are based on neurochemistry, but those can be shifted using outside stimulation. The prevailing theory is everyone exists on the various behavioral spectra and shift their exact position in response to stimuli (major disorders being the extremes of these spectra). The research focus these days is on neurocognitive analysis. For example, using analytical systems like EEG or MRI to identify what cues up the brain-chemistry associated with specific stimuli. Thus, the prevailing academic thought regarding personality models is that they can't be predictive for an average brain unless axes are introduced to the models for stimulation.

Socionics also suffers from the Iron Curtain's impact on scientific development; hence, it's most use in former Soviet or Soviet-sphere-of-influence areas (not to say that impacts validity, just geographic impact from a time without the internet and reliance on physical transmission of ideas).

 

Yes, I think there is a lot of potential there for models like Socionics to be wired up to stimulation models, largely because it looks at both 'fixed' and 'dynamic' attributes, such as how someone switches function focus, depending on the situation. 

 

Definitely, I would add that when you talk to many Russian and Ukrainian socionists, their understanding of how to use the theory in a scientifically responsible way leaves much to be desired.

[echidna1000]

 

The validity of the analytical tools is beyond our discussion here, but I think actually looking at some of the traits from the models would make for interesting analysis of primarch.

 

 

Fun/interesting note: the Mournival split along unstable-stable lines, with the unstable (Abaddon/choleric and Horus Aximand/melancholic) turning traitor with Horus and the stable (Loken/phlegmatic and Tarik/sanguine) staying loyal to the Emperor.

 

Example:

Mortarion

• HEXACO: could be read as high honest-humility, high extraversion, low agreeableness, high conscientiousness, low openness to experience.
• MBT: could be read as introverted, sensing, thinking, judging
• EPT: could be read as introverted, neurotic, psychotic (this would make him melancholic and that quadrant includes: quiet, unsociable, reserved, pessimistic, sober, rigid, anxious, moody)

 

 

I definitely agree with this. The more models the better. 

 

I appreciate that everyone identifies that key stubbornness trait with Mortarion. That's also why I think he's either LSI or ESI, by process of deduction. Both of these types have Ne as not just a weak function but a total blind-spot. The idea of opening up to new ideas and possibilities once decided is beyond them. They do not tolerate ambiguity. I see Rogal, Perturabo and Curze as all sharing in this. It's also common in other figures throughout the lore, such as Kor Phaeron or your standard Inquisitor stereotype. I also think the Emperor himself might have this issue. 

 

What I still puzzle myself over with Mortarion is what his main driver is. With Perturabo and Curze, it seems to be logical clarity and consistency. Both think in terms of axioms with no room for deviation. That would be the Ti Leading. With Dorn, it seems much more to do with personal attitudes, character, and conscience, resisting those he deems to be 'evil,' fighting failings of character within himself, and calling out others for their failings, while being incredibly loyal and trustworthy, and expecting the same. That would be the Fi Leading. 

 

I kind of have a feeling that Mortarion is also in the latter, but I am unsure of this. It makes it harder because he is a traitor primarch, and that's not typically very loyal, but then again, he NEVER liked the Emperor in the first place, and he did eventually go to chaos in order to save his sons, rather than out of any logical principle. His stubbornness over psykers seems to also be very personal attitude-driven, rather than a general principle, which is perhaps why he is criticised so much now for being a hypocrite in becoming exactly what he claimed to hate. 

 

 

 

As for the Mournival, I think Abaddon is probably SLE like Horus,Lupercal which suits choleric. Torgaddon may be the only example of an ESE in the series I have seen so far, which is very sanguine. 

 

Horus Aximand is a tricky one. He's a very conflicted character. I wonder about ESI and LSI, or even if LII or EII might work, which would be odd for an Astartes. He seems to be very driven by loyalty to Horus, so I lean ESI, which is of course a very melancholic type.

 

Garviel Loken is also tricky, but I am quite sure he is an Fi-valuing introvert. Perhaps SLI or ESI would work for him. I think SLI is definitely a phlegmatic type, and more accurately describes him prior to Istvaan. He was almost always calm, didn't talk much, but was interested in personal learning and development like other Deltas. 

 

 

 

Typing them SLE, ESE, ESI and SLI is also pretty handy because it means you have all four Quadra values being represented, not just temperament.

[MegaVolt87]

Birds of a feather flock together so they say. Maybe look at which primarchs also had a close bond with for this kind of test. eg-

 

RG- Corax, Ferrus

Perty- Magnus

Ferrus- Fulgrim, RG

Khan- Horus

 

And so on. 

[echidna1000]

Birds of a feather flock together so they say. Maybe look at which primarchs also had a close bond with for this kind of test. eg-

 

RG- Corax, Ferrus

Perty- Magnus

Ferrus- Fulgrim, RG

Khan- Horus

 

And so on. 

 

 

I didn't know that Corax and RG were particularly close, but it shouldn't be surprising. They were both pragmatic fighters with a mind for solving problems and without an overly cynical or harsh view of things. I'm still not really sure of Corax's type, but my instinct is LIE like the Lion. Not a Beta type. Deliverance Lost didn't make too much clear for me in terms of his weaker points, except perhaps his restlessness .

 

 

Magnus, Lorgar and Perturabo did all get along, although I think they bonded over a shared desire to understand the underlying structures of the universe, with Lorgar taking a more theological approach and Perturabo, a more mathematical/aesthetic leaning. Basically, the three of them all had intellectual leanings and connected on a Ti approach that could be divorced from hard pragmatism Te or violence martial activity Se. Beyond this intellectual interest though, they seem to not see eye to eye. For instance, Lorgar is evidently not satisfied by Magnus' non-committal nature and wants him to jump in, show some Se and join the Forces of Chaos (basically an Alpha vs. Beta clash, where Alphas would rather explore ideas than commit and fight on a side). The intellectual way Magnus uses Ti very complements Lorgar, but not the way he uses Ne.  This is to be expected from IEI with ILE combinations. I'm not sure yet how it played out between Magnus and Perturabo, although it seemed very much rooted in Leonardo DaVinci, who himself was an ILE like Magnus. I have yet to read of them interacting outside of memory or flashback though. I would expect though that similar to Lorgar, Perturabo wouldn't appreciate Magnus' Ne exploratory nature and would be looking for iron clarity rather than ambiguity.

 

 

Discussed Ferrus and Fulgrim further up. I think it makes sense to say that, to some degree, Ferrus being an underdeveloped version of the same type as Horus meant that he still could get on well with the Te/Fi oriented types that would have not liked Horus as much, e.g. Corax. the Lion, Guilliman and Dorn. While Horus had reached the point where he was pushing the envelope of his Fe and becoming more grandiose, Ferrus was yet to reach that stage of his development. 

 

I had no clue that Khan and Horus especially got on. 

[jaxom]

 

What I still puzzle myself over with Mortarion is what his main driver is. With Perturabo and Curze, it seems to be logical clarity and consistency. Both think in terms of axioms with no room for deviation. That would be the Ti Leading. With Dorn, it seems much more to do with personal attitudes, character, and conscience, resisting those he deems to be 'evil,' fighting failings of character within himself, and calling out others for their failings, while being incredibly loyal and trustworthy, and expecting the same. That would be the Fi Leading. 

 

I kind of have a feeling that Mortarion is also in the latter, but I am unsure of this. It makes it harder because he is a traitor primarch, and that's not typically very loyal, but then again, he NEVER liked the Emperor in the first place, and he did eventually go to chaos in order to save his sons, rather than out of any logical principle. His stubbornness over psykers seems to also be very personal attitude-driven, rather than a general principle, which is perhaps why he is criticised so much now for being a hypocrite in becoming exactly what he claimed to hate. 

 

Oddly enough, Mortarion's main drive (from my perspective) is freedom. His actions seem oriented around creating the greatest amount of choices for himself and humanity. The trouble is that he isn't very self-aware and is easily manipulated/tricked. Xenos overlord, psyker mind control, the Emperor's overbearing nature... everything he hates tends to be a controlling-nature. It's part of what makes him an excellent foil to the Khan. They're both driven by the same concept, but their view on what "freedom" means (the Khan having truly been a ruler, while Mortarion only ever being under someone else or manipulated while he thought he was in charge).

[echidna1000]

 

 

What I still puzzle myself over with Mortarion is what his main driver is. With Perturabo and Curze, it seems to be logical clarity and consistency. Both think in terms of axioms with no room for deviation. That would be the Ti Leading. With Dorn, it seems much more to do with personal attitudes, character, and conscience, resisting those he deems to be 'evil,' fighting failings of character within himself, and calling out others for their failings, while being incredibly loyal and trustworthy, and expecting the same. That would be the Fi Leading. 

 

I kind of have a feeling that Mortarion is also in the latter, but I am unsure of this. It makes it harder because he is a traitor primarch, and that's not typically very loyal, but then again, he NEVER liked the Emperor in the first place, and he did eventually go to chaos in order to save his sons, rather than out of any logical principle. His stubbornness over psykers seems to also be very personal attitude-driven, rather than a general principle, which is perhaps why he is criticised so much now for being a hypocrite in becoming exactly what he claimed to hate. 

 

Oddly enough, Mortarion's main drive (from my perspective) is freedom. His actions seem oriented around creating the greatest amount of choices for himself and humanity. The trouble is that he isn't very self-aware and is easily manipulated/tricked. Xenos overlord, psyker mind control, the Emperor's overbearing nature... everything he hates tends to be a controlling-nature. It's part of what makes him an excellent foil to the Khan. They're both driven by the same concept, but their view on what "freedom" means (the Khan having truly been a ruler, while Mortarion only ever being under someone else or manipulated while he thought he was in charge).

 

 

 

Very insightful, and a VERY STRONG argument in favour of ESI > LSI, I'd say. 

 

It places figures like Mortarion, the Khan and Corax (and probably Alpharius) together under Gamma values. All potentially harsh and austere types, but independence-minded, not driven by a philosophy or code, but rather a need to control their own destinies and not answer to an authority above themselves.

 

I think Rogal Dorn and Leman Russ also fit here, but the difference is that they both didn't have to fight for independence in their homeworlds and managed to each form a unique bond of trust and respect for the Emperor, so that they are personally loyal, not just answering to an 'authority'. That is why, I think, Rogal is the praetorian of Terra, while Leman is the executioner. 

 

The Lion kind of transcends both of these groups. Appears almost rebellious, but also has that close personal loyalty. 

 

 

I'm really pleased about this. Mortarion is a much more interesting character as an ESI who has gone traitor, rather than just another traitor LSI alongside Perturabo and Curze.

 

 

 

Another thought: Having both Leman Russ and Mortarion as Gamma Socialites creates a very clear personality divide with Magnus, the only Alpha Researcher among the primarchs. At the Council of Nikea, we then see that harsh, unreasoned personal judgement of the former, weighed against the theoretical and intellectual exploration of the latter. I know they took it so that Leman Russ became more the arch-enemy of Magnus, but it seems Magnus was just as much at odds with Mortarion. 

Edited July 28, 2021 by echidna1000