User Tag List

First 513141516 Last

Results 141 to 150 of 153

  1. #141
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,004

    Default

    Well IS_Ps lead with Si, ES_Ps lead with Se. EPs lead with Pe, IPs lead with Pi in socionics. And there is no J/P switch.

    They pretty much define Se differently. I don't really relate to socionics Se.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  2. #142
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    They pretty much define Se differently. I don't really relate to socionics Se.
    You say this, yet they seem remarkably similar:

    Quote Originally Posted by Socionics Wiki
    Types that value Se are much more comfortable with direct behavior aimed at making an immediate impact. This may at times be perceived as abrasive, particularly by types who do not value Se.There is usually a competitive edge to this style of group interaction, resulting in a more intense atmosphere than that of Si-valuing quadras. They appreciate contemplating possibilities only if they feel like they stand to gain something from it, or it has a perceived potential impact on "the real world".
    Quote Originally Posted by Linda Berens
    Extraverted Sensing occurs when we become aware of what is in the physical world in rich detail. We may be drawn to act on what we experience to get an immediate result. We notice relevant facts and occurrences in a sea of data and experiences, learning all the facts we can about the immediate context or area of focus and what goes on in that context. An active seeking of more and more input to get the whole picture may occur until all sources of input have been exhausted or something else captures our attention. Extraverted Sensing is operating when we freely follow exciting physical impulses or instincts as they come up and enjoy the thrill of action in the present moment. A oneness with the physical world and a total absorption may exist as we move, touch, and sense what is around us. The process involves instantly reading cues to see how far we can go in a situation and still get the impact we want or respond to the situation with presence.
    They're certainly worded differently, but I can sense that they're pointing toward the same thing.

    I think the difference is that those who dabble in MBTI prefer to describe the functions as subjective perspectives, whereas Socionics tries to define the behaviour determined by those perspectives. MBTI aims to be more subjective, whereas Socionics aims to be more objective. Which probably explains why MBTI is far more popular, since people more easily relate to the descriptions.
    Hello

  3. #143
    Senior Member Tiltyred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    468 sx/sp
    Socionics
    EII None
    Posts
    4,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerbell View Post
    I'm a bit gutted no one elaborated on my original if antiquated method below
    Well, you should find a witch's teat on them before you go dunking. It's more reliable when you cross-check, you know ...

  4. #144
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    Well IS_Ps lead with Si, ES_Ps lead with Se. EPs lead with Pe, IPs lead with Pi in socionics. And there is no J/P switch.

    They pretty much define Se differently. I don't really relate to socionics Se.
    I don't really like the idea that ISPs and ESPs are using different forms of Sensing. That's just clearly and obviously not true in my experience with them.

    Unless, of course, by "ISP" you mean the people that MBTI refers to as ISJs, in which case you're just arguing semantics. All you're doing is putting a different label on the same category, not creating a genuine conceptual difference.

    I'd also love to hear an explanation for how Jung's description of Si fits better for SPs than SJs, because that completely contradicts everything I've ever read (including Jung and Lenore) about either.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  5. #145
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sp/sx
    Posts
    1,636

    Default

    hmm... I don't understand all the lingo, but as to SP's...

    It's like the difference between "oh, look! Potatoe chips!" and "oh, this potatoe chip is saltier than the one I had last week."

  6. #146
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Unless, of course, by "ISP" you mean the people that MBTI refers to as ISJs, in which case you're just arguing semantics. All you're doing is putting a different label on the same category, not creating a genuine conceptual difference.
    For the third time you don't switch J/P. And I honestly don't understand why you're dismissing the entire theory without doing any research. Can you explain why? Doesn't seem like the rational thing to do.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  7. #147
    Ruler of the Stars Asterion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    For the third time you don't switch J/P.
    You only seem to do it sometimes... INFPs that are INFjs, INTJs that are INTps and INTPs that are also INTps. which means that people are either misstyping themselves in MBTI or Socionics, or that the systems are totally incompatible.

    I get the impression that this happens because of the mathematics they use to define the types, and that it all starts at ENTP (which explains why ENTP doesn't change between the two, and neither do most of the other extraverts).
    5 3 9

  8. #148
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    For the third time you don't switch J/P. And I honestly don't understand why you're dismissing the entire theory without doing any research. Can you explain why? Doesn't seem like the rational thing to do.
    Once again, I'm not dismissing it. I've read the basic literature and understand the general idea and it seems to work just fine (at least, apart from the relationships part.) Please note that I'm not declaring it inferior to MBTI--just not significantly different enough for it to particularly matter which system you use.

    You only switch J/P for introverts, and only because socionics' "rational" dimension obviously = EJ/IP, and its "irrational" one obviously = EP/IJ. Yes, that requires phrasing and labeling things a little bit differently, but try to look at the bigger picture here. What real advantage does Socionics have over MBTI? There just really aren't any new concepts in Socionics if you're already familiar with Jung. It really doesn't matter that Socionics has a different definition of Si or Se or changes which types of people are rational/irrational or any of that stuff. These are all just differences in semantics and labeling of the same fundamental cognitive processes and attitudes.

    This is the same reason I haven't looked into the Enneagram; I just don't care because all it offers is another possible way of categorizing the same ideas. You're focusing on really trivial details and ignoring the overall conceptual similarity and usage between all typological systems.

    I read all of the links you've sent on the topic and several other overviews and I'm sorry but I really don't see what's conceptually different besides rearranging a few labels (and of course, the whole utterly ridiculous "duality" system of compatibility.)

    The supposed "huge differences" in functional definitions that you cite really don't seem that different to me at all. Consider this--I'm an Ne dominant and (at least in Jung's terms) Ne is about noting conceptual similarities between different external world systems. I may be seeing something you're not.

    Yeah, I get that not every IxxP MBTI type lines up precisely with an IxxJ Socionics type, but that's insignificant in the broader picture because MBTI and Socionics still categorize people according to fundamentally similar critera, even if a couple of minor categorical details are different. You keep pointing out that not every MBTI type lines up exactly word-for-word with a Socionics type, but I can't really figure why you think that matters in the first place. Even if you take some characteristics from this type group and swap them with some from that type group, you haven't changed the basis of the system.

    I think Socionics works fine, aside from the relationships part. It's just a different language that describes the exact same ideas in remarkably conceptually similar terms. Yes, I get it; some people "test" into Socionics types that don't line up precisely with every MBTI type; I just don't think you understand how truly insignificant this is. Remember how irrelevant "testing" of psychological type is, anyway--unverifiable and dependent upon self-report.

    I'm not arguing that you can call it a "manzana" too; I'm just tired of hearing why "apple" is an inferior term when both work equally well despite being spelled and pronounced differently.

    Both systems are oversimplifications of Jung, anyway. The only part of MBTI I even use is its labels; beyond that I'm operating entirely on Jungian functional ideas, not MBTI profiles. MBTI's idea of P/J is garbage to me --I thought you knew that about me.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  9. #149
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerbell View Post
    And so it goes... each layer adds something to my experiences... I watch I guess until I stop getting stuff out of it....
    That's impressive. For me seeing something twice is boring. And trick myself into thinking I got it all at once. At least what's relevant for me.

  10. #150
    Senior Member tinkerbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sleepy View Post
    That's impressive. For me seeing something twice is boring. And trick myself into thinking I got it all at once. At least what's relevant for me.
    theres nothing wrogn with that, most films/books I wont look at twice, so it's not an every day occurance. I have a book I've been reading since I was a teen, I read it every once in a while to see if it makes more sense to me and it nevre does (the Owl Service)... ooooh Wiki has a bit on it, I may just reach figure out some more about it....
    The Owl Service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    > What do you know, that book is one of the top books written in the last 70 years... the wiki link explains the most complex plot... No wonder I read it so many times.

    I watched Once Upon a Time in America several time too.

    I have been watching some rubbish film this evening I wont see it again...

Similar Threads

  1. How do you tell sensors from intuitors?
    By ChrisC99 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 12-22-2015, 10:30 PM
  2. [Ne] xNTPs, how do you tell your own kind from an xSTP?
    By Ribonuke in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-03-2015, 09:19 AM
  3. How do you keep birds from flying into windows?
    By cafe in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-28-2008, 02:41 PM
  4. [INFJ] INFJs how do you control yourself from jumping to conclusions?
    By Desert Flower in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-17-2008, 06:35 PM
  5. [NT] How Do you Tell an INTP from an ENTP prof?
    By Usehername in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-08-2007, 01:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO