ENFP/INFP and socionics confusion

[Santosha]

I am really interested in understanding how the NFP pans out in socionics. I read, at some point, that Extoverts in mbti REMAIN extroverts in socionics... and that Introverts in mbti can vary in the p/j. It is infact this info, that has caused MUCH of my own E/I typing confusion. Yes i understand the systems are very different, apples and oranges some might say, yet I am still extremely curious on this topic.

I type as an IEI in socionics (INFP) AND I've come across a few other ENFP's on this forum that also indicate a socionics INFP typing. How is this so? Are we perhaps mistyped introverts? Perhaps we are so close in preference that we can go either way?

So I dug a little further into socionics.. read the IEE (socionics ENFP) description..MOST of it seemed to describe me. THen i read the IEI (socionics INFP) description, and found that MOST of it, also, seemed to describe me. So here is what I'm (kindly) asking of you;

After reading the type descriptions below.. if you could post what type you identify with the most.. and how sure you are of your Introversion/Extroversion preference. This is not an attempt to invalidate anyones mbti type.. I am simply looking for hard data that might shed some light in the transition of theories.

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=IEE
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=IEI
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=EII

Also, if you have ANY additional insight on this.. I will ADORE you for sharing!.

 

[Thalassa]

The difference is primarily between the introverts. INFj in Socionics is Fi/Ne/Si/Te like MBTI INFP. I've been told by some that I'm Socionics INFj, and I do relate to the description. You must remember that Socionics is an entirely different system than MBTI.

In Socionics an MBTI ENFP could become INFj or stay ENFp, or even become ESFp.

Going from ENFP to INFp is a bit strange in my opinion, because by Socionics ENFP would be more similar to INFj because of the way they organize functions. Again - mostly introverts change to the opposite J/P while extroverts usually maintain the J/P because the functions stay the same. They did this in Socionics because they didn't think it made sense for a judging function (like Fi, for example) to be the first function of a perceiver (INFP) and it made more sense for the Fi judging function to be J...hence Socionics INFj.

Just remember it's a different system.

Another thing, too, is social introversion or extroversion vs. functional E/I.

I'm a functional ENFP by Jungian analysis. I am externally oriented, Ne dominant, focusing out and very expressive. On the other hand, I'm actually quite socially introverted, so much that on basic "four dichotemy" tests I'm often INFP (or actually PFNI or PNFI...Perceiving is my strongest preference, and my Introversion preference the most mild, which makes sense with being a functional extrovert).

SO yeah...I'm borderline E/I, which isn't uncommon in ENFPs, and some people would argue I'm INFP because they don't believe in function theory. One person even insisted INFJ, but I think he's making the Socionics association with Fi use being a "judging" function without realizing. He doesn't seem to understand function theory enough to realize that it's actually FPs who are the most internally morally unshakable while appearing very flexible and drifty and unscheduled and procrastinating on the outside, while FJs have the most outer rigidity and planful or scheduled natures, they actually have more internal moral flexibility pending on external circumstances.

In short, Fi users make a MUCH bigger deal out of crossing their sense of right and wrong. I know I do. I *know* some things just are right, and other things just are wrong, and perceive these things as being Universal Human Truths (like, for example, slavery and human trafficking is wrong, or any behavior where one human being harms or exploits another human being significantly for their own gain, and of course the big crimes like rape and murder, et al).

Of course, not all Fi ethics are universal human truths, some are just very individualized personal preferences for strong like or dislike, love or hate, etc.

Off topic now! I read this thing yesterday that there are 24 different types of INFPs depending on the scoring of their strengths (for example, being a PFNI rather than FPIN in terms of percentages)...I was a "Stevie Nicks"...a more self-promoting, extroverted INFP...doesn't that sound like an ENFP? And I thought Stevie Nicks was an ENFP anyway...so here again, is the difference between Jungian function theory and four dichotomy preferences. Percentages of letter strength has nothing to do with Jungian cognitive function theory.

And by the same token, Socionics is NOT MBTI, and it is its own little system. I'm actually not a fan of Socionics, which I only dislike marginally less than Keirsey - I think the Keirsey system is the worst, too simplistic and full of damaging stereotypes.

/babbling

 

[sleuthiness]

Have you looked into the subtypes for each type advertised on Wikisocion?

Search out socionics-specific forums; they're always experimenting with new constructs.

I've found it to be nothing but beneficial, from the subtypes to relations grid to redefined terms to other perspectives from writers and posters and whoever else, so when others tell you socionics is nothing like mbti, they're right in a strictly concrete sort of sense, but in actuality they're really just different languages; you'll realize how complimentary they are with time.

Nicks is a sp/so e45 infj/EII. Buckingham sp/sx e91 infj/EII?

Out of all of them, the IEI-Ni description comes closest to describing my thinking. If you're an infp, you can't be EII, nor can infjs be IEI. That's an imaginary switcheroo.

 

[Thalassa]

It's not imaginary. There are other people much more into socionics than me who would argue with you on that point. It's an entirely different system.

 

[InvisibleJim]

If you're an infp, you can't be EII, nor can infjs be IEI. That's an imaginary switcheroo.

Technically: Yes
Realistically: People put too much faith in goofball MBTI functional 'behavioural' descriptions to understand that the systems are equivalent.

 

[Thalassa]

Technically: Yes
Realistically: People put too much faith in goofball MBTI functional 'behavioural' descriptions to understand that the systems are equivalent.

That's weird, since you're the one who pointed out recently that some MBTI ENFPs are ENFp, and others are ESFp, and you apparently were getting along with Socionics ESFps better...

 

[sleuthiness]

It's not imaginary. There are other people much more into socionics than me who would argue with you on that point. It's an entirely different system.

I'm trying to figure out if you're simply trying to distinguish socionics from mbti, dispute its existence, or whatever.

Unconscious quadra boundaries and relations that thread them all together are actually quite palpable and most importantly, verifiable, so long as you're certain of how the rest of their grid fills out. Like I've already said, integration of discussed systems is far from difficult with some practice.

Anyway, I get the feeling that most people who're deeply into character typing without knowing any aspects of their arrangement might be among the first to tell me "no you wrong," but it's cool. LIFE N LEARN RIGHT.

 

[Thalassa]

I'm not into character typing, I actually follow Jung, which is one of the reasons I don't follow Socionics.

Also, ENFp is in the same quadra as INFj, so I'm pretty sure it's possible.

I don't trust all of these quadras and interaction styles, quite frankly, that's part of the reason I don't *do* Socionics or Keirsey.

 

[Santosha]

THanks Marmie, that was some good info.

http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/test.html

When I look at this chart, I know exactly where I get hung up on testing...

Step 3: You estimate well people's hidden talents, can understand and regulate their relations Vs. You forsee problems in relations, actively demonstrate both your positive and negative emotions.

The above is extremely, EXTREMELY difficut for me to decipher between, because I do both. So if I look at the last outcomes..
a) Interest towards people, events; easiness of communication, search for compromise, Yes.
b) Sympathy fo others, yes.. strive to help, yes.. reserved emotions.. sometimes.
c) introspection, sometimes.. rich imagination, sometimes.. melancholy.. not so much
d) Capability to impress, yes.. to flash with artistic habits, yes.. a broad spectrum of emotions.. yes.

I'm going to say that according to this chart... if I am undertanding it correctly.. I should actually type as an ENFj!

Meh, I'm still lost. I just wanted to understand if an mbti ENFp can type as other than socionics ENFp. =/

But i agree, the systems seem to be fairly different.

 

[sleuthiness]

I've learned so much from this thread! Yay!

 

[Chiharu]

I hate socionics with a raging passion. Hate, hate, hate, hate, hate.

I actually quite like Kiersey though. I think that system is perfect for someone starting out in Temperament theory, and that it helped me understand the basics enough for Jung/MBTI to become useful. It can be a tad simplistic, but it gives the basics and made me a lot better at typing people. I'm only just starting to understand how the functions operate, but I have a general view of all the types, which make it easier.

Socionics doesn't have a purpose in my opinion.

Rant aside

I relate most to the EEI description.

 

[skylights]

i know technically i'm supposed to be IEE/ENFp in socionics, but i sound more like an SEE/ESFp than anything.

 

[chachamaru]

IEE = <3

I got bored reading the other ones. Wons? Wuns. Ouns. Yes.

I am most def an ENFP in MB and Soc. Sometimes type as an ENTP depending on the moon, the month, the period, etc.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

 

[sulfit]

you can tell difference between socionics INFp and ENFp by their cognitive styles

INFp is vortical-synergetic while ENFp is holographical-panoramic
descriptions: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/51-Forms-of-Cognition-by-Victor-Gulenko