User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 44

  1. #21
    deleted
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Socionics is more complicated, but its also more organized. I think MBTI is for basic understanding. They are both different but there is close correlation to types, not exact correlation, maybe one or two letters off. The functions/positions, relations, and terminology are what is really amazing about this Socionics theory. I love it a lot.

    Basically there is a more effective way to estimate J/P types. A J type response is a direct reaction towards another while a P type response depends on the state of mind that had been influenced by others. Js also usually possess calm but long lasting moods while Ps usually possess shorter/stronger moods more impulsively. Js work toward their own view of the world, one that is growing closer to expectation, while Ps except aspects of the world and try to understand as much as they can. Each of these three divisions are logically connected to the idea of rationality and irrationality.

  2. #22
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SforzaRS View Post
    it's too late I'm already tearing apart whether I'm INTp or INTj, I tested strong INT, weak p. I read both descriptions and sound a little more INTp (I find it funny that it says many INTps type themselves INTj or INTx).

    I'm pretty much accepting INTp... now to figure out how the hell I'm NiTe in socionics..
    I'm F--ed
    Yeah I'm torn between the INT Socionics types. I relate slightly more to INTj, but test as INTp.

    Quote Originally Posted by greed View Post
    The worst thing anyone ever did was assign MBTI-like lettering to Socionics types. Way to conflate differing definitions of everything, assholes
    Agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by lemons View Post
    Socionics is more complicated, but its also more organized. I think MBTI is for basic understanding. They are both different but there is close correlation to types, not exact correlation, maybe one or two letters off. The functions/positions, relations, and terminology are what is really amazing about this Socionics theory. I love it a lot.
    Yeah there's some good insights and interesting perspectives in there.

    Basically there is a more effective way to estimate J/P types. A J type response is a direct reaction towards another while a P type response depends on the state of mind that had been influenced by others. Js also usually possess calm but long lasting moods while Ps usually possess shorter/stronger moods more impulsively. Js work toward their own view of the world, one that is growing closer to expectation, while Ps except aspects of the world and try to understand as much as they can. Each of these three divisions are logically connected to the idea of rationality and irrationality.
    Intrestin'. I'm still torn, though.
    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

  3. #23
    deleted
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Great indicator for type are the relations. If you can try to figure out everyone elses type by all the rules and terms, you can more easily figure out your type by looking at the 16 relations to the other peoples' type.

    Another is the quadra characteristics and relations.

  4. #24
    deleted
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    INTJ = ESTp


  5. #25
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemons View Post
    INTJ = ESTp
    INTJ is kind of like ENTj, ENTj/ENTP is kind of like ESTp/ESTP. Kind of makes sense.

    But it's still jacked up.

  6. #26
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    The biggest issue I have with INTp function order is I can't get over Ni as a dominant function. And Te as a secondary function. I just don't think it works. Everything else, the other 6, are fine. Ni always comes off as way too mystical a description, and Te... I just don't really see it. I do find that the description of how the Ni+Te functions apply to an INTP behavior is accurate, however half of the Ni description for INTPs could be attributed to Ti instead.

    Also, I cannot, ever get over this statement:
    However, they tend to be very skeptical of extensively systematic explanations of real-world phenomena. While they readily acknowledge the usefulness of many proven systematic, mathematical, and symmetrical systems in science, they tend to be disdainful of theoretical and practical models that describe an absolute reality or that do not have some empirical basis. The ILI vision of reality, scientific, philosophical, or otherwise, is that of one self-contained universe of too many processes and mysteries to count.

    ILIs often reject absolutist explanations, and often fall into a constant cycle of dynamically reevaluating their informational outlook (ie "this may change, but at the moment i sort of am inclined to think the facts suggest that droog is better than blinth, despite these plausible alternative interpretations").
    That is not me. At all. I find absolutist explanations beautiful. String theory is gorgeous. Evolutionary theory is gorgeous. That's why I lean towards an INTj type in socionics, simply because the 2 dominant functions fit better, except the rest do not.



  7. #27
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trinity View Post
    No, they don't switch but don't use your MBTI type to work out your Socionics one, they are defined differently as Costrin said so it's best to start with a blank slate. That said they'll prolly be the same.
    Exactly. If you are a Ti-Ne type, then regardless of system you will remain that type since both systems have the commonality of deriving from Jung's definitions. Therefore I am Ti-Se which makes me ISTP in MBTI and ISTj in Socionics. Now that they are moving further from cognitive functions, I may be something completely different. I am curious as to whether anyone has compared the quadras to Keirsey's temperament? Most likely the comparison is futile since the types falling into the four groups are not the same.

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

    Default

    Half of INTPs are INTjs! Just to let you know. Socionics and MBTI don't correlate perfectly as already noted.

    Functions, functions, functions. Socionics has great functions.

    The introverted functions are Stability-driven

    The extroverted functions are Initiative-driven

    (primary = constant, secondary = situational and changing)

    And socionics dichotomies actually make sense with the functions. Where as in MBTI there is more confusion (like how is that extroverted?). Just read around wikisoc some more. You'll get what connections I'm talking about.

    This page is cool... Functions - Wikisocion

  9. #29
    deleted
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    I'm one of the INTJs who aren't like ESTps. I agree that most INTJs are like ESTps though. I definitely have a few of those characteristics, like firm and decided logic. However it is constant not situational. TP logic is more intense anyway. I definietly like exploring different possibilties (Ne) rather than getting the job done (Se). I find possibilities too interesting. I'm definitely stability-driven and INTj relations match up well with people I've typed. Definite INTj here.

    My uncle is an INTp. Ni with maturity is the same thing as planning and looking forward or backward in time for connections. Knowing what will happen, but not necessarily solving it because of the need for constancy. INTps believe the actual process is too interesting, that they'd learn more by just letting it naturally happen. However they need to make sure that they are secure. A lot like our friend Doctor Manhattan. My uncle happens to be an INTP in MBTI.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INxJ
    Posts
    3,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemons View Post
    Socionics is more complicated, but its also more organized. I think MBTI is for basic understanding.

    Succinct. I prefer this system.

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] Cognitive Functions vs. MBTI lettering type + Socionics
    By Melodrama in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-20-2016, 12:22 PM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-24-2015, 12:04 PM
  3. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 09-16-2013, 05:53 PM
  4. Type of learner vs. MBTI Type
    By NewEra in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 04-22-2009, 01:00 AM
  5. Is it reasonable to compare Socionics with MBTI?
    By Athenian200 in forum Socionics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-15-2007, 09:41 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