User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 25

  1. #11
    Senior Member guesswho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,983

    Default

    Socionics makes some pretty simple ideas look like some complex math formula. Is it just me who finds it annoying ?!

  2. #12
    Senior Member IndyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEI
    Posts
    2,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Yeah, a quadra is formed by two given types whose base and creative are each other base and creative, plust their two dual types (that's just one definition, you can start where you want, of course). They're not easy to understand on a practical level, because it seems that intra-quadra interactions become smooth with no strong effort from either side, thus it's hard to analytically decompose how each type helps the others.
    well, if my MBTI ENTP, ESFJ and INTJ friends are still socionics ENTp, ESFj, and INTj, then I can understand this, simply due to experience. plus, it matches up with well mbti's novelty, contrast and supplement relationships.

    my personal experience with ENTP's, for instance, is that there definitely is an intriguing sort of lure to these types, and i believe they feel the same towards me. because we're intrigued and see in each other qualities we ourselves wish we had, we leave a comfortable air where we can get along very easily and not offend the other.

    with ESFJ's, we can get along quite smoothly and have quite a comfortable relationship... however, there isn't typically much on a deeper plane. usually a lack of connection. our Fi/Se and Fe/Si compliment, but clash at the same time. i've dated a few of these types, and also my sister is an ESFJ... it's as though their Fe will find a way to not mind our Se, and the ISFP's Fi can be sympathetic towards their Si.

    with INTJ's, we get along... will have spontaneous get togethers... but it's almost as if we enjoy fighting with one another. we try to help the other see our side. and in this way, we sort of supplement, or rather support the other with our own strengths. with the INTJ i knew in real life, we fought a lot (not like angry fighting though), and would have many debates with one another... but we ultimately enjoyed one anothers company... though we could sometimes tire the other out.
    it matches this activation relationship socionics describes:
    Activation
    [top] Partners are good at helping solve each other's real-life problems and are able to be open with one another without causing misunderstandings. Thus, discussing life and solving problems is very rewarding and productive. When doing complex projects together that require lots of planning and commitment, however, partners discover that they have different rhythms and that minor misunderstandings constantly arise. Partners tend to take each other too literally and act on each other's recommendations too quickly, leading to disappointment when the other doesn't follow through or makes changes to his plans. Also, communication tends to be either too intense or too slow. Partners rev each other up mentally and physically and then need to increase the psychological distance to relax and return to a state of equilibrium.
    http://www.socionics.us/relations.shtml#6


    Here are some MBTI relationship descriptions:
    For types that have no difference is called the identify

    * Identity - same types; a typological mirror-image. e.g. INTJ - INTJ



    For types differing by one preference

    * E/I - Pal - work and play well together; minimal natrual type conflict.
    * N/S - Neighbor - arrive at the same place by variant processes.
    * T/F - Compansion - similar modes of expression; bear each other's company well.
    * J/P - Complement - compatible strengths with opposite emphases.



    For types differing by 2 preferences

    * E/I and N/S - Counterpart - perform similar functions in totally different realms.
    * E/I and T/F - Tribesman - share a sense of culture, but with different interests and abilities.
    * E/I and J/P - Contrast - point and counterpoint on each function.
    * N/S and T/F - Enigma - a puzzle; totally foreign in nearly every facet.
    * N/S and J/P - Suitemate - A person one might be comfortable sharing an office. Prefer similar climates, but don't necessarily have much in common as far as goals or world views.
    * T/F and J/P - Advisor - each has an area of insight that the other lacks.



    For types differing by 3 preferences

    * E/I, T/F, and J/P - Pedagogue - each is both the other's mentor and student; has a "parent to child" feel.
    * E/I, N/S, and J/P - Cohort - mutually drawn into experiential escapades.
    * E/I, N/S, and T/F - Novelty - intriguingly different; interestingly so.
    * N/S, T/F, and J/P - Supplement - like Pal, but functions are farther removed; each can add to the other's strengths.



    For types differeing by all 4 preferences:

    * Anima - fits Dr Beebe's description of the anima/anumus; each is the other's inferior (4th) function.
    "I don't know a perfect person.
    I only know flawed people who are still worth loving."
    -John Green

  3. #13
    Senior Member IndyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEI
    Posts
    2,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by guesswho View Post
    Socionics makes some pretty simple ideas look like some complex math formula. Is it just me who finds it annoying ?!
    haha. agreed.
    "I don't know a perfect person.
    I only know flawed people who are still worth loving."
    -John Green

  4. #14
    Senior Member IndyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEI
    Posts
    2,399

    Default

    i thought i might post the socionics relationsips as well.... though i've yet to fully decipher which type of relationships these are describing asides from the Identity (duh) and activation relationships (S/N, F/T, P/J).

    Identity
    [top] Two like-minded partners who strive to occupy similar social niches. Understand each others motives and goals and easily become jealous of each other's successes, especially if partners have the same social status. Good for occasionally touching base and sharing experiences, and for teaching purposes — if one partner is older and more experienced. Difficult for doing multi-faceted tasks together; partners quickly tire of each other, and cooperation tends to break down if they have the same status. Partners tend to talk only on subjects related to their mutual strengths and avoid other topics. They are not able to help solve each others' real problems and can only offer general advice and relate personal experience. In group settings identity partners who are already personally acquainted tend to avoid one other.
    Kindred
    [top] Like-minded partners with similar views and thinking styles but with different emphases within their common spheres of interest. Generally enjoy discussing their views, but rarely are able to arrive at a complete consensus or make decisions jointly. Less competition and avoidance of each other in groups than identity partners, but also less teaching potential. Partners tire of each other after a couple hours of contact. Cooperation is possible if formalized and if partners are able to maintain their autonomy.
    Business
    [top] Partners are interested in many of the same areas, but approach them in completely different ways. Partners are generally impressed with and value one another's strengths at a distance, but find it difficult to get any practical benefit for themselves from these strengths. Partners cannot form anything more than a superficial relationship with each other.
    Super-ego
    [top] Each partner is the embodiment of many qualities the other wishes he had and tries unsuccessfully to develop in himself. Talking about these respective strengths can be enthralling if partners find interest in each other. If partners have a common mission, they cover each others' weak areas, making for a powerful team. However, close cooperation and ironing out details is difficult, as partners can't agree on principles. Conflicts and disagreements between super-ego partners are out in the open and are usually discussed very vocally, at times causing heated arguments without a clear winner.

    Duality
    [top]
    Generally very enjoyable and rewarding relationship, especially if partners share common values and interests. Partners strive to shorten the psychological distance and enjoy simply being around each other and doing a wide range of activities together. Effective cooperation takes place automatically, with each partner taking on what he is best at. If partners share common interests, they also have productive discussions where they help each other see things from different complementary viewpoints. Partners relax each other and help release pent-up thoughts and emotions, but seldom feel like straining themselves and doing hard work together. Duality is by far the best relationship for restoring emotional equilibrium, developing spontaneity and natural personality traits, and overcoming fears and complexes.
    More on duality and dual relations
    Partial duality
    [top]

    Similar to duality in providing meaningful psychological support and important insight along with an element of mutual fascination. However, complete unity and balance are unattainable. Partners are drawn to different groups of people and internally are not as committed or devoted to each other as might be implied during their moments of resonance and self-disclosure. Partners tend to talk much and do little, as if avoiding a common area of weakness.
    Mirage
    [top] Partners are able to provide meaningful assistance in each other's areas of weakness, often making for fruitful cooperation in getting things done. Partners find each other useful, but almost never fascinating (i.e. someone who you would want to get to know deeply). Thus, partners tend to do more and talk less.
    Extinguishment
    [top] Partners feel a strange draw to each other that seems to promise much but never delivers. Partners seem to be interested in the same fields and have similar yearnings, but they describe things in a strange and fascinating, but ultimately unfathomable way. Expectations that go beyond having an interesting conversation are almost never met.
    Activation
    [top] Partners are good at helping solve each other's real-life problems and are able to be open with one another without causing misunderstandings. Thus, discussing life and solving problems is very rewarding and productive. When doing complex projects together that require lots of planning and commitment, however, partners discover that they have different rhythms and that minor misunderstandings constantly arise. Partners tend to take each other too literally and act on each other's recommendations too quickly, leading to disappointment when the other doesn't follow through or makes changes to his plans. Also, communication tends to be either too intense or too slow. Partners rev each other up mentally and physically and then need to increase the psychological distance to relax and return to a state of equilibrium.
    Request (+/-)
    [top] Asymmetric relationship. One partner (the recipient) finds he is constantly trying to solve the other person's (the transmitter's) problems and is overly emotionally involved in the other partner's life — always waiting for a reward from the transmitter. The transmitter, on the other hand, is largely unaware of this and wonders why the recipient is so dependent and so sensitive to the things he (the transmitter) says.
    Quasi-identity
    [top] Partners seem to share broad areas of interest in a way that is similar to identity or kindred partners. However, the language they formulate their thoughts in is hopelessly different and hard to digest at a close psychological distance. Moreover, partners are drawn to opposing social groups where the other partner does not feel comfortable. Partners are unable to provide meaningful support and have to strain to reach a mutual understanding.
    Mirror
    [top]

    Partners can be themselves around each other without causing misunderstandings. Partners have a correct intuitive understanding of each other and are rarely surprised by anything the other does or says. Arguments are very rare. They always have things to say on the same topics and easily come to a consensus, but at the same time put opposite emphasis on things, creating a revisionary effect. These relations are highly verbally oriented, with partners discussing their hobby topics (and avoiding most others) and revising and adding to each other's views. Partners tire from the discussionary nature of the relationship and try to separate for work and rest. Partners immediately liven up when someone else shows up who is the dual of one and the activator of the other partner.
    Supervision (+/-)
    [top] Asymmetric relationship. One partner (the recipient) feels like he is being watched closely by the other (the transmitter) and becomes overly self-conscious and defensive or apologetic. The transmitter doesn't appreciate most of what the recipient does and underestimates his abilities and personal qualities, which hurts the recipient's self-esteem and can lead to long-lasting scars. The transmitter is surprised by the recipient's sensitivity and doesn't know what to do about it. The recipient feels like he can't take any initiative when he is around the transmitter, who wonders why the recipient doesn't do anything on his own. Difficult relations for a close or medium psychological distance.
    Conflict
    [top] Both partners seem to monitor each other's weak areas. This prevents conflicts from coming out into the open, since both partners feel too unsure of themselves to discuss their relationship effectively. As a result, conflicts stew beneath the surface — causing pain and long-lasting offense (if partners expect anything of each other) — without any hope of resolution. Initially partners may attract each other from a distance because they are such opposites, but their language and thought patterns are hopelessly difficult to digest at a close psychological distance. At best partners may have occasional rare moments of resonance when both are in a strange mood and begin to talk about life without focusing attention on one another.
    "I don't know a perfect person.
    I only know flawed people who are still worth loving."
    -John Green

  5. #15
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IndyAnnaJoan View Post
    you lost me here... i don't understand this chart above.
    Is it that list you don't understand; or did you mean the card suits?
    This list seems pretty clear. Those are the four three-letter groups in MBTI that correspond to the four quadras.
    SFJ and NTP have in common Fe, Si, Ne and Ti; though in different orders.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  6. #16
    Senior Member IndyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEI
    Posts
    2,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Is it that list you don't understand; or did you mean the card suits?
    This list seems pretty clear. Those are the four three-letter groups in MBTI that correspond to the four quadras.
    SFJ and NTP have in common Fe, Si, Ne and Ti; though in different orders.
    no, the card suits i understood...

    i'm not an SFJ though... and INTJ's aren't NTP's... so i'm lost on that translation.
    "I don't know a perfect person.
    I only know flawed people who are still worth loving."
    -John Green

  7. #17
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IndyAnnaJoan View Post
    no, the card suits i understood...

    i'm not an SFJ though... and INTJ's aren't NTP's... so i'm lost on that translation.
    Alpha NTs are ENTp and INTj

    ENTp is Ne Ti and INTj is their introverted counterpart.

    INTj functions are Ti Ne, and they are Ti and Ne in just about the same way they're defined in MBTI. INTjs are only called "j" because their first function is a judging function (Ti). It has no relation with the MBTI assignment of "J-ness".


    Extroverted Intuition
    Ne is generally associated with the ability to recognize possibilities, create new opportunities and new beginnings, recognize talent and natural propensities in others, reconcile differing perspectives and viewpoints, rapidly generate ideas, and be led by one's intellectual curiosity and stimulate curiosity in others. They enjoy discussing unusual insights into the nature of the world and crazy out-there ideas, like space elevators (lol). Typical Ne quadra humor juxtaposes seemingly unrelated phenomena.

    Introverted Logic
    Ti is generally associated with the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity, symmetry, and even beauty. It is like common sense, in that it builds on one's expectations of reality, through a somewhat personal, though explicable, understanding of general truths and how they are manifested.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Introverted Logic
    Ti is generally associated with the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity, symmetry, and even beauty. It is like common sense, in that it builds on one's expectations of reality, through a somewhat personal, though explicable, understanding of general truths and how they are manifested.
    I have never seen this part of me as common sense strangely enough. The most confusing part is "correctness" because most of this world is opinion. So for every situation there is a huge multitude of correctness based on opinion. I huge logical structure based on opinion because the outcome changes. So it really has to be general truths so it can be adaptable as things change.

    Duality
    [top]
    Generally very enjoyable and rewarding relationship, especially if partners share common values and interests. Partners strive to shorten the psychological distance and enjoy simply being around each other and doing a wide range of activities together. Effective cooperation takes place automatically, with each partner taking on what he is best at. If partners share common interests, they also have productive discussions where they help each other see things from different complementary viewpoints. Partners relax each other and help release pent-up thoughts and emotions, but seldom feel like straining themselves and doing hard work together. Duality is by far the best relationship for restoring emotional equilibrium, developing spontaneity and natural personality traits, and overcoming fears and complexes.
    I like this description of duality. Especially the bolded part.

  9. #19
    Senior Member IndyGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEI
    Posts
    2,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    Alpha NTs are ENTp and INTj

    ENTp is Ne Ti and INTj is their introverted counterpart.

    INTj functions are Ti Ne, and they are Ti and Ne in just about the same way they're defined in MBTI. INTjs are only called "j" because their first function is a judging function (Ti). It has no relation with the MBTI assignment of "J-ness".


    Extroverted Intuition
    Ne is generally associated with the ability to recognize possibilities, create new opportunities and new beginnings, recognize talent and natural propensities in others, reconcile differing perspectives and viewpoints, rapidly generate ideas, and be led by one's intellectual curiosity and stimulate curiosity in others. They enjoy discussing unusual insights into the nature of the world and crazy out-there ideas, like space elevators (lol). Typical Ne quadra humor juxtaposes seemingly unrelated phenomena.

    Introverted Logic
    Ti is generally associated with the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity, symmetry, and even beauty. It is like common sense, in that it builds on one's expectations of reality, through a somewhat personal, though explicable, understanding of general truths and how they are manifested.
    so in this case, the socionics INTj is an mbti INTP?

    is a socionics ENTp and mbti ENTJ?

    Quote Originally Posted by _Poki_ View Post
    I have never seen this part of me as common sense strangely enough. The most confusing part is "correctness" because most of this world is opinion. So for every situation there is a huge multitude of correctness based on opinion. I huge logical structure based on opinion because the outcome changes. So it really has to be general truths so it can be adaptable as things change.
    well, i suppose socionics Ti is more like mbti Te...

    i really don't know if i can devote more energy to socionics. got too much mbti in my brain.
    "I don't know a perfect person.
    I only know flawed people who are still worth loving."
    -John Green

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IndyAnnaJoan View Post
    well, i suppose socionics Ti is more like mbti Te...

    i really don't know if i can devote more energy to socionics. got too much mbti in my brain.
    They are similiar, to me Te is more about truths, which is different then correctness. Te also seems stuck on a single logical view point of a system as it is more external goal oriented. Lets take efficiency and Te. When you get into different people, expending more energy may be more efficient then expending less energy. Since we are on the subject of duals I have had a dual pretty much "give" me energy by expending it, where as a Te would have looked at my problem from a logical standpoint and tried to figure out how to do it without spending much energy. Took the ENFP about an hour and I was so charged up I couldnt sleep that night and the problems I was having due to my energy being drained went away. Te would have actually tried to analyze, provide a solution, blah, blah, blah.

    For me I would have listened, gave my opinion or point of view. Soem things I would possibly try, but at the end of the day I am not set on providing a solution. Not providing a solution to Te is "wasted" energy. But at the end of the day I didnt expend much personally as understanding internal thinking takes no energy, and most of the time people just want to be heard and understood.

    I havent spent much time on socionics. It seems like a mixed bag compared to what I naturally see which makes some of it match up and some of it not. MBTI seems more complete with what I see and understand. I prefer to stick with MBTI functions, and learn to recognize people on my own using a loosely based type description. More focusing on how they interact with others.

Similar Threads

  1. Socionics and hidden agendas
    By Poser in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-23-2016, 07:26 PM
  2. Socionics and physical characteristics
    By Giggly in forum Socionics
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 04-01-2016, 12:32 AM
  3. Can anyone distinguish the Alpha Beta Gamma Delta archetypes for me...
    By Zangetshumody in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 10-26-2013, 01:15 PM
  4. Socionics and MBTI
    By IndyGhost in forum Socionics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-14-2011, 12:13 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