Model A?

[Badlands]

I just found out about the "Model A" cognitive function system most commonly used in Socionics, and it seems to be a lot better than Beebe's system.

It divides the functions up into four groups, the ego, superego, superid, and id. The ego is made of conscious functions while id is made of the unconscious. The "super"s are just the weakest two from each side.

And go by your first two functions when picking out your Socionics equivalent. For some weird combination of reasons (socionists' general aversion to the MBTI among others), an equivalent system hasn't been much looked into.

 

[Ezra]

There are a few people at the16types.info who think types are the same in both systems. I won't go into their details for saying so here, but that is what they believe. It's understandable; one's ego in socionics is represented in MBTT by one's dominant and auxiliary functions, and their 6th and 5th function in socionics; one's super-id - 6th and 5th function - are equivalent to one's tertiary and inferior function respectively. The idea is basically that we don't just use four functions; that is not our complete psychological makeup; in fact, we use all eight possible functions. Obviously not at any one time, because you can use Te and Ti at exactly the same moment; they're both related to the same thing (T) but are different manifestations of it (Introverted Thinking and Extraverted Thinking).

 

[Badlands]

Do you know why LII (which is Ti-Ne) is supposedly the equivalent of INTJ, even though that function order is INTP? Doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[MerkW]

Do you know why LII (which is Ti-Ne) is supposedly the equivalent of INTJ, even though that function order is INTP? Doesn't make any sense to me.

Because in Socionics, an LII is classified as a rational type (as opposed to irrational)--a dichotomous preference that is described as sharing certain traits and characteristics akin to the MBTI "J" preference.

Also, another reason why many are against converting MBTI type to socionic type via functional setup is due to differences in function descriptions. For example, Si dominance in MBTI hardly sounds anything like Si base function in Socionics, which instead, sounds a little bit more like what would be described in MBTI as Se auxiliary. Similarly, there are aspects of Te in MBTI that sound more like the socionic Ti, and others that sounds like the socionic Se. Etc.

I, personally, have rather mixed opinions about the correlation between MBTI and Socionic type. In all honesty, I do not think it is as clear-cut as "MBTI type = socionic type" or "MBTI type = socionic type IF extroverted, but one must flip the J/P preference if one is introverted" (which are the most common arguments I hear).

 

[Ezra]

Because in Socionics, an LII is classified as a rational type (as opposed to irrational)--a dichotomous preference that is described as sharing certain traits and characteristics akin to the MBTI "J" preference.

Also, another reason why many are against converting MBTI type to socionic type via functional setup is due to differences in function descriptions. For example, Si dominance in MBTI hardly sounds anything like Si base function in Socionics, which instead, sounds a little bit more like what would be described in MBTI as Se auxiliary. Similarly, there are aspects of Te in MBTI that sound more like the socionic Ti, and others that sounds like the socionic Se. Etc.

I, personally, have rather mixed opinions about the correlation between MBTI and Socionic type. In all honesty, I do not think it is as clear-cut as "MBTI type = socionic type" or "MBTI type = socionic type IF extroverted, but one must flip the J/P preference if one is introverted" (which are the most common arguments I hear).

I'm inclined to agree.

I just want to add that those individuals who believe that "MBTI type = socionic type" or "MBTI type = socionic type IF extroverted, but one must flip the J/P preference if one is introverted" either haven't really looked properly at the essence of the functions, or have a view which is difficult to put across to others; a view that may well be illogical. N.B. Phaedrus' at the16types, who believes fervently that ABCD = ABCd.

 

[MerkW]

N.B. Phaedrus' at the16types, who believes fervently that ABCD = ABCd.

Ah, old Phaedrus. The Beta introvert who is under the self-perpetuated delusion that he is an ILI. The alleged certainty he has about things truly baffles me. How could one be so dogmatic?

 

[Domino]

Model A - I thought this was about a Ford. I actually know something about THAT Model A.

 

[Athenian200]

I just found out about the "Model A" cognitive function system most commonly used in Socionics, and it seems to be a lot better than Beebe's system.

It divides the functions up into four groups, the ego, superego, superid, and id. The ego is made of conscious functions while id is made of the unconscious. The "super"s are just the weakest two from each side.

And go by your first two functions when picking out your Socionics equivalent. For some weird combination of reasons (socionists' general aversion to the MBTI among others), an equivalent system hasn't been much looked into.

You can't consider this equivalent to MBTI, because it's based on a different theoretical basis, and all the functions are at least slightly different from their MBTI equivalents. It's a very interesting system to study in its own right, however. The problem is that most of the information about it is in Russian. I've been considering writing out some information about Socionics here, but I never have enough time to explain it, and have a bad habit of explaining everything verbally when a graphic would be more useful, as I'm not good at creating/understanding graphics personally.

 

[Ezra]

Ah, old Phaedrus. The Beta introvert who is under the self-perpetuated delusion that he is an ILI. The alleged certainty he has about things truly baffles me. How could one be so dogmatic?

Ti (valuing or ego) + unhealthy obsession with it = Phaedrus' mindframe.

You can't consider this equivalent to MBTI, because it's based on a different theoretical basis, and all the functions are at least slightly different from their MBTI equivalents.

You'd get on well with most people at the16types. Save Phaedrus.

 

[sciski]

I found Wikisocion - Socionics Wiki to be very helpful for understanding socionics. That site, and Socionics in the West.