MBTI vs socionics j/p

[Poki]

I found this socionics article and wondering how it applies to MBTI as well in regards to being able to determine J/P.

If you normally decide on someone's type by going - E or I?, S or N?, F or T?, J or P?, then you MUST know this: P types have a misleading habit of showing off their J capabilities to new people. I wonder if this is something P types do without realising they are doing it or they really have a "sinister" plan in mind. In any case there is always a show off period, which fades away gradually as P types become more familiar with you. Of course, lots of what's been said depends on a person, but this pattern keeps popping up persistently.

At the beginning P types do what they say they would and keep their promises and come on time and show that they can be trusted, etc. They do it in incredibly believable way, if you don't know that you've got a P type in front of you, you would never question their trustworthiness.

Then time passes and they slip. First they slip just a bit, tiny little bit just to check how you would react to that. There is always an excuse, ALWAYS! Then they do it a bit more, and a bit more, and gradually as they feel they know you better, they let it go and before you know it all turns into one huge P mess. Endless excuses, poor time management, broken promises, unfulfilled contracts, cancelled jobs - you name it! This is the time when you really should start deciding on J/P bit, unlike the E/I bit that is more obvious at the first contact. So here is the rule:


E/I - the first preference in the type acronym - should be decided upon first, while the impression from the first contact is still fresh.

J/P - the last preference in the type acronym - should be decided upon last, after the first "run into" impression has settled and you begin to see the real McCoy.

I am good at getting myslf into P messes when I start to get stressed. Do not put me into a J position for extended periods unless you are willing to work with me. I will actually really appreciate it if you take the time to work with me in these J areas and maintain a positive attitude when my P starts to rear its head. I really do try to get past my P traits, but I honestly suck at them and need constant reminders and help because I recognize this in me as an area I need work at.

 

[INTP]

lol crap article

 

[sulfit]

I found this socionics article and wondering how it applies to MBTI as well in regards to being able to determine J/P.

That article is misleading because it makes a whole bunch of assumptions about how J/P correlates with personality traits, how likely a person is to make promises or manage their time well, when these letters simply designate functional orientation and don't say much about anything person's character or management skills. It sounds like a Jungian theory speckled rant more than any kind of educational article.

The J/P assignments in both MBTI and Socionics are determined by the order and orientation of functions of your type.

MBTI J/P:

In MBTI the J/P is written in capital letters. Assignment follows the highest order extraverted function of the type. If this function is judging one (F or T) then this type gets J-letter. If this function is perceiving one (N or S) then the type gets P-letter. For a type with first function of Si and second function of Fe the last letter is J - ISFJ - because its highest order extraverted function is a judging one, Fe. In MBTI J/P designations are called Judger/Perceiver where Js are called judging types and Ps are called perceiving types.

Socionics j/p:

In Socionics j/p letters are written in lower-case. Assignment is done according to first function of the type, no matter it's E/I orientation. If the first function of the type is a rational one (F or T) then this type gets a j-letter. If this function is an irrational one (N or S) then this type gets a p-letter. For a type with first function of Si and second function of Fe the last letter is p - ISFp - because its first function is an irrational one, Si. In Socionics j/p designations are called Rational/Irrational where js are called rational types and ps are called irrational type.


MBTI's Judger/Perceiver i.e. J/P assignments are not the same thing as Socionics Rational/Irrational j/p attributions because these typologies use different criteria for assigning these letters in the first place. This is one of the reasons that letter-for-letter translation of MBTI types into Socionics types doesn't work. Introverts especially will find themselves switching the later letter when switching to Socionics.

 

[Such Irony]

At the beginning P types do what they say they would and keep their promises and come on time and show that they can be trusted, etc. They do it in incredibly believable way, if you don't know that you've got a P type in front of you, you would never question their trustworthiness.

Then time passes and they slip. First they slip just a bit, tiny little bit just to check how you would react to that. There is always an excuse, ALWAYS! Then they do it a bit more, and a bit more, and gradually as they feel they know you better, they let it go and before you know it all turns into one huge P mess. Endless excuses, poor time management, broken promises, unfulfilled contracts, cancelled jobs - you name it! This is the time when you really should start deciding on J/P bit, unlike the E/I bit that is more obvious at the first contact. So here is the rule:

Does it work in reverse, J types showing their P traits at first to prove their flexibility and open-endedness and then showing more rigidness later? I'm not sure, maybe some J's but it also seems for the most part, J's appear J when you first meet them maybe because in society, at least in the United States, J seems more prized than P.

 

[garbage]

Wow. This article is astonishingly bad.

The fact is that virtually everyone puts on a veneer to a certain extent, or simply portrays the appropriate aspects of themselves, to match the expectations of a new job, acquaintance, or group. "Slipping" back into oneself is also part of the natural process.

 

[Poki]

Wow. This article is astonishingly bad.

The fact is that virtually everyone puts on a veneer to a certain extent, or simply portrays the appropriate aspects of themselves, to match the expectations of a new job, acquaintance, or group. "Slipping" back into oneself is also part of the natural process.

yes...to a certain extent. Some do it ALOT and other almost non-existant. But if you wanna label it as "always" go right ahead. I actual dumb myself down when it comes to image because I dont want to be in the spot light. Yes, its only a matter of time before people see me for my true colors

 

[prplchknz]

Wow. This article is astonishingly bad.

The fact is that virtually everyone puts on a veneer to a certain extent, or simply portrays the appropriate aspects of themselves, to match the expectations of a new job, acquaintance, or group. "Slipping" back into oneself is also part of the natural process.

I usually don't. I'm sure there's exceptions but I can't think of them

 

[Retmeishka]

This isn't exactly the same thing, but, I have read elsewhere that when people meet new people and are getting to know them, everybody (not just a P type) will tend to use their superego functions, their weaker functions, feeling that it's their social duty or it's expected of them. I don't know if that's true, because the last time I met a bunch of new people, I was preoccupied with other things besides paying attention to whether I was using my superego or not (I was in a new job, and I had to focus on learning the skills). But gradually as they become more comfortable and safe, they start using their ego functions.

When I read the article quoted above, that's what it reminded me of. I don't necessarily see P types as being 'unreliable, can't show up on time, whatever.' But just trying to fit in to whatever context they are in, temporarily, and then gradually loosening up and being themselves, regardless of what type they are, P or J or anything.

I've learned from experience not to call off sick from work too often. I lost jobs in the past due to long lasting recurring illnesses. I'm 'being reliable' and 'showing up on time' nowadays because I've fixed a lot of my health problems that I used to have, and because I'm older and I've learned what's expected of me at work, and how many calloffs are acceptable. But I'm not sure how I would behave if I were truly free - I have 'unwanted mental phenomena' that strongly affect my behavior, and those 'phenomena' are partly the reason why I go to work every day without questioning my life and without questioning what I really want. If I were truly free to do what I want and think what I want, then I'd probably wake up one day and say, 'I don't feel like going to work today. I feel like going on a trip to (random location). Goodbye job!' and then, of course, get fired, and start a new life in another random town for no reason other than because I had a whim. I used to do those kinds of things more when I was younger and when I didn't have the 'mental phenomena' that I have nowadays. (I really need a good euphemism to use when talking about these things, but I don't have one - it isn't mental illness, it's more complicated than that.)

 

[Retmeishka]

But yeah, I got hired at this new job after filling out a questionnaire asking me whether I was a 'Customer Maniac.' The answer is, absolutely not, but I answered every question with 'yes' just because I have to in order to get a job. The 'Customer Mania' that they expect is very much a +Fe thing, very unnatural for me. But in the beginning I had to pretend that Customer Mania actually mattered to me and that I was, indeed, going to be their next Maniac. Now that they've gotten used to me, they tolerate my 'Customer Robotic Politeness.' But I'm still showing up on time and not calling off sick. In my experience, when I got in the habit of coming in late for work, all that I needed was one person to communicate with me and tell me strongly that it wasn't acceptable. They were just sort of overlooking it and tolerating it for a while, and no one confronted me, and after I was confronted, I stopped doing it instantly and easily. I knew that it mattered to that particular person, and it mattered enough that they were willing to talk to me about it.

Using clocks to tell time, and being someplace at a particular time, is not natural human behavior. It's something we do because of the Industrial Revolution and factories. At a factory, if one 'piece' of the 'machine' is missing, the whole machine fails. So, everybody has to be there at the same time, and they all have to start working at the same time, and cooperating in the factory. If you work someplace where your presence makes little or no difference to the functioning of the machine, then it doesn't matter what time you get there. I worked at non-cooperative jobs where I was still expected to show up at an exact hour, and I got in the habit of showing up, like, 45 minutes late, every day. I was having major problems in my life back then, but even so, it made no difference when I did my work, and I really wanted to 'telecommute' to that job - all I had to do was type data into a computer all day long. But eventually they fired me for lateness.

 

[hjgbujhghg]

The MBTI and socionics J/P differences are very simple. The socionics doesn't work with J and P as the determination of organization vs. chaotic personality how it in a shortcut works in MBTI.
The J and P in socionics simply say wether the type uses percving function as his dominant, or judging function as his dominant. For example ENFj - uses judging function first- Fe, ENFp using perceving function first Ne.
No need for articles like that.

 

[Doomkid]

The J and P in socionics simply say wether the type uses percving function as his dominant, or judging function as his dominant. For example ENFj - uses judging function first- Fe, ENFp using perceving function first Ne.

yes! thank god someone got it