I always notice my duals by instinctual, sexual, baby-making compatibility. Do they always act like ESTj? Nope. Often, they're all over the board. Which tells me that MY vision of their behaviors and such are not the "real" them, and I must attempt to reframe my views of them or myself until I get closer to the objective reality of our existences.
07-04-2016, 09:34 AM #161
- Join Date
- May 2016
- 925 so/sx
- EII None
07-07-2016, 09:03 AM #162
No, it's hard to identify people's types IRL. It is possible to absolutely dislike a person of your dual type, and obviously no one will like a person just because they are the compatible type, like when opinions clash somehow. But on the contrary, discovering that you don't get along with a person of your dual type, does not mean that duality is a sham or something lol. I probably have met LSEs, but I am not entirely sure as no one I know well is one.
10-09-2016, 07:53 AM #163
Now that I know socionics I almost always notice them, but before I did too, only that it was subconcious.
03-27-2017, 12:03 PM #164
- Join Date
- Mar 2017
Did anyone stop to think that maybe one system is wrong? And that is the reason for all this confusion.
When you look at how the functions are ordered in mbti it became apparent to me that mbti is the weaker theory.
Look at the mbti function order for ISTJ Si, Te, Fi,Ne. Look at Te and Fi right next to each other in the functional stack. 2nd and 3rd preference. This is actually impossible since Te as a conscious function will always push Fi into the unconscious. Jung was specific about this. So this proves mbti wrong in this regard.
Also note the fact that the conscious functions in both systems are not actually the same. Again using ISTJ as an example mbti ISTJ = Si, Te, Fi, Ne. If you look at any ISTJ forums you will see a recurring theme where ISTJ'S talk about Ne being their weakest function. They are not comfortable with change. It is their greatest weakness. In Socionics an ISTj's conscious functions are Ti, Se, Fi, Ne. As in mbti, Ne is the most problematic function for the ISTJ. The type descriptions for ISTJ are practically the same in both systems. They both describe a logical person who respects the rules.
How mbti defines the functions is also wrong. Si is defined as being about tradition yet Jung never defined it that way. So mbti Si is not the same as Socionics Si. So it isn't fair to say that if you use Si in mbti, you will automatically use Si in Socionics. Like it or not functions are too abstract a concept for most people to grasp. It takes time to truly understand what these concepts mean. But anyone taking the test and reading the type descriptions will easily recognise themselves if they have a good grasp of who they are and are honest with themselves. So on the mbti forums the majority of ISTJ's are in fact ISTj's.
The same is true for ISTP's. Fe is their weakest function. They really struggle with expressing their emotions and since their Fi is unconscious they have a hard time figuring out what they feel. And again if you look at any ISTP forums you will see the most common theme is to do with their inferior Fe. Which is also true for Socionics ISTp's. It became apparent to me that the majority of ISTP'S hanging out in mbti forums are ISTp's.
Remember the mbti tests don't test for specific functions, only dichotomies of TvsF and so on. So you can't assume that an mbti test will tell you what functions you use. It takes time and skill to figure that out.
Socionics experts actually say that mbti ISTJ = Socionics ISTj. That is the sole reason Socionics adopted mbti lettering. But some mbti "experts" put out the rumour that you switch the j and p around for the introverts and suddenly your dual becomes your conflictor. Which is actually a dangerous statement to make and will lead a lot of vulnerable people to suffer trying to make a conflicting relationship work,thinking it is their dual and they need to try harder. As I pointed out in the beginning, mbti is the weaker theory and they couldn't even get a simple thing right like arranging the functions in a logical order. So mbti "experts" aren't really an authority worth listening to.
03-31-2017, 03:43 PM #165
ILIs aren't all that common, so I cannot evaluate a trend, but I know of four altogether in real life, and I dated two of them, because we clicked immediately. Rather subconsciously, and it only became apparent over several interactions, that instead of staying platonic, each interaction is more intense than the last, but there was a pull for sure. The other two I work, or worked with. One I had great professional admiration for, the other I do too, but with neither do we interact too intensely, because the team setup isn't made that way. They are also both in serious relationships, so better for me to keep a distance.
By Pushbeat in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)Replies: 4Last Post: 02-01-2013, 05:13 PM
By Esoteric Wench in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)Replies: 181Last Post: 03-22-2010, 04:11 PM
By ygolo in forum The BonfireReplies: 20Last Post: 11-06-2009, 10:31 AM
By FDG in forum The BonfireReplies: 17Last Post: 10-12-2007, 06:49 PM