User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 62

  1. #21
    Senior Member snegledmaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Socionics
    SLI
    Posts
    145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greed View Post
    Right. You're saying should/shouldn't, not is/isn't. That's exactly what I meant, too.

    As it stands, many questions boil down to "Do you hate people? If yes.. congratulations, you're Logical! If not.. congratulations, you're Ethical!"
    Give examples. Because I disagree with that.

    And also in you results you got ILE as an option as well. So the test does not necessarily think you are an ethical type.

    In this and many other tests, it also seems that j/p is treated as a tested dichotomy, rather than allowing the functions to line up as they do. In a system like Socionics where functions are especially important, functions should be tested rather than dichotomies.
    To my knowledge the test focuses on testing the IME-s, not the dichotomies. Well other then one part where reinin's dichotomies are taken into account. That is, what are you taking about, this test, to the best of my knowledge, does not do that. What makes you say/think otherwise?

  2. #22
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca View Post
    Give examples. Because I disagree with that.

    And also in you results you got ILE as an option as well. So the test does not necessarily think you are an ethical type.
    It should be noted that I was exaggerating, and also generalizing about the nature of MBTI and Socionics tests. This particular test is much better than most others I've come across.

    I can't remember specific questions that were red flags to me on this one, but there were a few about appreciating understanding your relationships, sizing up new people, being surprised by others' emotional reactions.. they just seem to ask if one has a lack of general interest in people to any degree.

    To my knowledge the test focuses on testing the IME-s, not the dichotomies. Well other then one part where reinin's dichotomies are taken into account. That is, what are you taking about, this test, to the best of my knowledge, does not do that. What makes you say/think otherwise?
    Maybe it does focus on the IMs. But types that differ only between j/p are pretty close, and that points to overemphasis on the dichotomies. If there is a part of this test that takes dichotomies into account, it is certainly possible that it does do what I describe. I have no idea; all I have to work with are the questions and the results.


    And, look, you asked for our opinions on the validity of the test. I gave mine. You can disagree with it all you want, and I don't particularly have a vested interest in how valid this test is.

  3. #23
    Senior Member snegledmaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Socionics
    SLI
    Posts
    145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greed View Post
    I can't remember specific questions that were red flags to me on this one, but there were a few about appreciating understanding your relationships, sizing up new people, being surprised by others' emotional reactions.. they just seem to ask if one has a lack of general interest in people to any degree.
    Well yes. As ethical IME-s have to do with a general interest in people, understanding relationships, sizing up new people and so on. How would you propose one asks about the usage of ethical IME-s without addressing those things? You objection doesn't make much sense to me.

    Maybe it does focus on the IMs.
    IME - Informational Metabolism Element.

    IM - Informational Metabolism.

    But types that differ only between j/p are pretty close, and that points to overemphasis on the dichotomies.
    That might be the case for you, on your specific test result, but it doesn't have to be that way for everybody. And why would it point to an overemphasis on the dichotomies?

    If there is a part of this test that takes dichotomies into account, it is certainly possible that it does do what I describe. I have no idea; all I have to work with are the questions and the results.
    The dichotomies it does take into account do not exist in MBTI. Stuff like merry-serious, strategist-tactician and so on.

    And, look, you asked for our opinions on the validity of the test. I gave mine. You can disagree with it all you want, and I don't particularly have a vested interest in how valid this test is.
    I'm not disagreeing with you opinion, I'm disagreeing with you objections. I find some of the invalid. I would like to comprehend how it is that you find what you are saying valid.

  4. #24
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    I'm.. not entirely sure how to make this any clearer. I'll try my best. If you're going to pay attention to anything I say, pay attention to this:

    You have told us to evaluate "whether we would call the result accurate or not," and why we would or would not. This test gave me fairly accurate results, but I am answering why they may have deviated to the degree that they have. I am stating that it would give me a more accurate result if it threw away any questions that had to do with j/p dichotomy and if it refined its ethics questions to be more clear and less "humanly universal." It may skew others' results if these changes were made, but that's not what you have asked me to consider.

    If you don't understand what I'm trying to say in that paragraph, then this discussion is absolutely pointless.

    The rest of this post is just gravy, and I'm pretty much done discussing the gravy. It's delving into the sort of detail that we haven't been asked for, that I just plain don't have answers to.

    As it stands, I don't know exactly how to refine the test so that it produces more accurate results for everybody in the world.

    That said, I don't know how to improve the test. Thankfully, the burden isn't on me to propose anything to improve the test.


    Quote Originally Posted by snegledmaca View Post
    Well yes. As ethical IME-s have to do with a general interest in people, understanding relationships, sizing up new people and so on
    Yes, they do. However, they also take on responsibilities for valuing subjective worth, notions of fairness, and other elements that are less universal.

    How would you propose one asks about the usage of ethical IME-s without addressing those things?
    Verbatim from what I said above: I don't know how to improve the test. Thankfully, the burden isn't on me to propose anything to improve the test.

    That might be the case for you, on your specific test result, but it doesn't have to be that way for everybody.
    I didn't say that it had to be that way for everyone, nor that it was.

    I'm talking about my results, and my opinion on them, and my opinion on why they might have come out as they have, which is exactly what you asked us to do. So the fact that this is the case for me on my specific result is the only aspect of this test that I've been asked to be concerned with, and that's the standpoint I've been coming from.

    And why would it point to an overemphasis on the dichotomies?
    Because a j/p switch is a very likely explanation for those types being so close together in the list. An ENFj's strong and valued functions are a ENFp's strong and ignored functions.

    The dichotomies it does take into account do not exist in MBTI. Stuff like merry-serious, strategist-tactician and so on.
    MBTI's J/P and Socionics' j/p are analogous. Not exactly the same, but analogous. That is the same dichotomy that I am taking issue with, insofar as it could have had the capacity to affect my results.
    Last edited by garbage; 06-26-2009 at 08:48 AM.

  5. #25
    Supreme Allied Commander Take Five's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Test results
    LSI Your result
    LII These types might also be considered
    SLI
    ILI
    ESI These types are not very likely
    EII
    LSE
    SEI
    LIE These types are quite unlikely
    IEI
    SLE
    ILE
    ESE these types are extremely unlikely
    EIE
    SEE
    IEE
    Johari Nohari

    "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared. "--Niccolo Machiavelli

  6. #26
    Junior Member look.to.the.sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    2w3
    Socionics
    NeFi
    Posts
    11

    Default

    I agree that I don't like the test that much, not many people who are in the English Socionics community will advise you to take a test to find out your type. I hope you don't mind me responding to the last bits of your post, I just wanted to clear something up about Socionics.

    Quote Originally Posted by greed View Post
    Because a j/p switch is a very likely explanation for those types being so close together in the list. An ENFj's strong and valued functions are a ENFp's strong and ignored functions.

    MBTI's J/P and Socionics' j/p are analogous. Not exactly the same, but analogous. That is the same dichotomy that I am taking issue with, insofar as it could have had the capacity to affect my results.
    While this test is reminiscent of an MBTI test, the J/P dichotomy is not analogous to Socionic's rational/irrational dichotomy. J/P, and actually all of MBTI, bases their tests and dichotomies on behaviors more than your way of thinking. Socionics is more about your way of thinking, which could affect your behaviors (which is why it's so hard to test). Rational/irrational simply tells you what is the type's leading function, and while there are similarities between rational types and irrational types, you don't really decide rational/irrational like how MBTI practitioners decide whether someone is J/P. There is also the fact that MBTI functions and Socionics information elements (IEs) are not the same (at least, from what I remember, the functions seemed kinda vague to me when I learned them in MBTI a while ago) as well as the placement (Model A) makes all the types completely different. There are some ENFPs who go over as ENFps, and some who don't.

    There is a hang up on this J/P thing of the similarities of the origin and names of the types. In MBTI, ENFJ and ENFP are very similar to one another, what the MBTI community would see is that they only have a one letter difference, and they are both in the same (MBTI) temperament, so therefore are very similar. In Socionics, ENFj and ENFp are VERY different, they are actually in opposing quadras because they value the exact opposite IEs. Quadra values are very important for typing and intertype relations overall. In MBTI, ENFJs and ENFPs would get along a lot more than ENFjs and ENFps in Socionics. Actually, they would have a tense time together because of the IEs they value and seek are very different. And even though they are skilled in similar functions, it doesn't work like MBTI, where you are "skilled" with Extraversion, iNtuition, and Feeling, as in MBTI, you would say those are their common strengths.

    Started to notice that I was rambling, but I hope this was a good post anyway
    pursuing my true self

  7. #27
    beyondaurora
    Guest

    Default

    Your result: SLI (ISTp)

    These types might also be considered: SEI (ISFp), ILI (INTp), IEI (INFp)

    These types are not very likely: SLE (ESTp), SEE (ESFp), ILE (ENTp), IEE (ENFp)

    These types are quite unlikely: LSI (ISTj), ESI (ISFj), LII (INTj), EII (INFj)

    These types are extremely unlikely: LSE (ESTj), ESE (ESFj), LIE (ENTj), EIE (ENFj)

    EDITED TO ADD: I think this test is very well put together. I liked that much of the time when I was giving my answers I was not thinking about how obvious the questions are linked with a certain dichotomy as I have found with nearly all MBTI tests.


  8. #28
    deleted
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Socionics tests don't really work all too well.

    I recommend tallying up which dichotomies you fit into, along with analysis of the information elements. That system personally works for me, and you don't have to fit all of them perfectly. Dichotomies - Wikisocion

    The assumption is that a type actually does fit its dichotomies perfectly, as reinin disected the four traditional dichotomies into more observable counterparts. One person will only think they don't fit into that dichotomy because of the definition given or subjective example thought up is more or less vague, evasive, or faulty or the person himself is disoriented.

    All this being said, socionics is time spent, like anything else. You most likely won't grasp it or your type until you continually seek to understand its means. You don't get to be that contradiction, you're not special enough.

  9. #29
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,406

    Default

    I think I failed.

    :/

  10. #30
    Magical BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,002

    Default

    LMAO. WOW.

    Those types are RANDOM. WHAT?

    You have two Se leads, an Ni lead and an Ne lead. That test fails, you aren't the one that failed.

    I got MY type, ESI, as 2nd to last. That test fails don't worry. It recommended the ILE (ENTp), my OPPOSITE, as my type, then IEE, then EII, then IEI.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

Similar Threads

  1. socionics test
    By jixmixfix in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 10-31-2011, 07:04 AM
  2. Check out my Socionics test
    By 527468 in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 02-05-2010, 11:01 AM
  3. More Accurate OK Cupid Socionics Test
    By Thalassa in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-12-2009, 09:53 PM
  4. Lemon's Socionics Test
    By 527468 in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 06-22-2009, 10:32 AM
  5. Hugo's Socionics Test
    By 527468 in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 02-15-2009, 11:17 AM

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