• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

YES

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I support it for a different reason--namely, that the function definitions in Socionics are different than in MBTI. Think about slapping MBTI's functions in an image editor and mashing the contrast button. Bam; there's your Socionics function set.

See, but Ne still wants to completely compare and contrast where the *exact* difference is and how *exactly* they are related, how that impacts peoples perceptions etc etc etc. I'm sort of waiting for socionics to really take off - and a critical mass of hopefully knowledgable socioinics enthusiasts - so I can do the fieldwork that goes with this new system :D *salivates*
 

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
So. A room full of my potential duals.




....:ninja:
 

Dr Mobius

Biting Shards
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
873
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
See, but Ne still wants to completely compare and contrast where the *exact* difference is and how *exactly* they are related, how that impacts peoples perceptions etc etc etc. I'm sort of waiting for socionics to really take off - and a critical mass of hopefully knowledgable socioinics enthusiasts - so I can do the fieldwork that goes with this new system :D *salivates*

Honestly it really does get extremely messy when you try to compare MBTI and JCF with socionics. The most important thing to remember is that it is all based on Freudian observation; watching a person and then concluding all sorts of things. This creates a situation where what are considered introverted functions in JCF, don’t exist in socionics. There is no Pi and Ji only J and P because it’s all based on external third person observation.

So while the extroverts tend to crossover with a degree of ease, the same cannot be said of introverts. Case in point Ni Doms in MBTI are driven controlled individuals who know how to get ahead; in socionics they are disorganised and completely removed from reality and very prone to becoming inert. On top of that the functions all look completely different, and each comes with a new set of biases and then that of MBTI.

For instance Ni is not held in even remotely the same reverence as it is in JCF, and is much reduced in function. While Si barely resembles it’s MBTI counterpart at all, the past is now the purview of Ni; it’s associated with body awareness, fine motor control, and aesthetics (feminine); so by extension any artistic expression that requires finesse falls under it wings, the further one is away from it, the less ability and clumsier you are.
 
G

garbage

Guest
Yo, I just moved a bunch of Socionics-related threads to this subforum to jumpstart it. :yesss:

Time to punch every grandma and headbutt every mailbox
 

sulfit

New member
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
495
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
MBTI - How you function
Socionics - Interpersonal relations/How you appear
Socionics is how you think, your cognitive patterns.

Socioncis is a combination of Jung's functions and Antoni Kepinski theory on information metabolism. This later part about "information metabolism" is very important and is what distinguishes Socionics from MBTI (see the intro here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics).

MBTI seems more trait based, Socionics - more cognitive.

I find it somewhat strange how people with seemingly dissonant cognitive styles like Morrissey, Andrei Tarkovsky, Russell Brand and Badger can all fall under the same type (ENFj) based on a few surface quirks. Then you have the INFps, which includes everyone from Ingmar Bergman, Justin Timberlake, Fiona Apple, to Tupac. I don't know...I'm still trying wrap my head around this system.
If you consider that people who think similarly (who are of the same type) may have different occupations, different sets of talents and skills, and different life paths and opportunities opened to them, in addition to being different subtypes, having different enneagram types and stackings, and so on, then it's not that surprising to have all this diversity within the same type.

I think many of those who begin to study socionics think of socionics type as a kind of social role that the person has to fulfill but socionics type doesn't show in this way.
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
271
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Socionics is how you think, your cognitive patterns.

Socioncis is a combination of Jung's functions and Antoni Kepinski theory on information metabolism. This later part about "information metabolism" is very important and is what distinguishes Socionics from MBTI (see the intro here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics).

MBTI seems more trait based, Socionics - more cognitive.


If you consider that people who think similarly (who are of the same type) may have different occupations, different sets of talents and skills, and different life paths and opportunities opened to them, in addition to being different subtypes, having different enneagram types and stackings, and so on, then it's not that surprising to have all this diversity within the same type.

I think many of those who begin to study socionics think of socionics type as a kind of social role that the person has to fulfill but socionics type doesn't show in this way.

I would go so far as to say that while MBTI is composed of very trait based dichotomies that poorly gel with a very cognitive set of functions, Socionics manages to successfully show how our cognitive attitudes translate into day to day behaviour.

It's interesting that each IM elements each stand for a kind of information, a kind of ability and a kind of philosophy.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I would go so far as to say that while MBTI is composed of very trait based dichotomies that poorly gel with a very cognitive set of functions, Socionics manages to successfully show how our cognitive attitudes translate into day to day behaviour.

How is it successful? By what standards?

Clearly Socionics translates functions into very different behaviours than Jung did. Who was "more" right?
 

sulfit

New member
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
495
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Socionics translates functions into very different behaviours than Jung did. Who was "more" right?
Jung I think is closest to hitting the nail on the head, but even he has misattributed a few traits and mischaracterized functions in some respects. For example for the Fe type he mentions that Fe women choose their husbands in accordance to the norms of the society, which is complete bollocks, as Fe gals join their lives with sorts of druggie artists, ex-convicts, metrosexuals and other alternative kinds of men that don't match society's stereotypes and norms.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Jung I think is closest to hitting the nail on the head, but even he has misattributed a few traits and mischaracterized functions in some respects. For example for the Fe type he mentions that Fe women choose their husbands in accordance to the norms of the society, which is complete bollocks, as Fe gals join their lives with sorts of druggie artists, ex-convicts, metrosexuals and other alternative kinds of men that don't match society's stereotypes and norms.

Oh yeah... What do you think about Se, Jung vs Socionics?
 

sulfit

New member
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
495
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Oh yeah... What do you think about Se, Jung vs Socionics?
Jung offers a more comprehensive description of Se in my opinion. His description of Se is at least consistent with it being an irrational, perceiving element, which cannot be said of socionics Se. In some parts he falters and mistakes Se with Type 7 of enneagram by attributing it with experience and sensation craving: "His aim is concrete enjoyment" which is also the motivation of type 7. This has the effect of confusing ENxPs and ExxJ of type 7, making them consider Se leading types for themselves.

Socionics interpretations of Se as a power-seeking willpower element are completely off. Irrationality doesn't give anyone more willpower or make anyone become more obsessed with power. If anything it makes people more scattered and less focused on their goals. It gets quite comical when some beginner socionists who have subscribed to the traditional socionics definition of Se start making deductions like "Types with vulnerable Se don't ever swear or act aggressively" only to get rebuffed and cursed at by some EII or called an idiot by some LII later in their socionics adventures. Or when some EII who is dissatisfied with the EII descriptions depicting her as a nice, complacent housewife assumes herself to be an ESI and then start acting like a drunk frat boy in order to play into Se stereotypes, saying things like "I wanna punch something if I don't get my smokes" - hilarity ensues.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Jung offers a more comprehensive description of Se in my opinion. His description of Se is at least consistent with it being an irrational, perceiving element, which cannot be said of socionics Se. In some parts he falters and mistakes Se with Type 7 of enneagram by attributing it with experience and sensation craving: "His aim is concrete enjoyment" which is also the motivation of type 7. This has the effect of confusing ENxPs and ExxJ of type 7, making them consider Se leading types for themselves.

Yeah it seems "comprehensive" is a pretty good word for what the jungian description is like... As for craving sensations, that's the part I never managed to relate to. I mean, some enjoyment is cool but I don't see myself as such a slave to all sensations. So quite honestly, because of that I wasn't quite sure what dominant function I'd have going by Jung. Though, I recall it was also mentioned somewhere that the Se type doesn't feel they're really a "slave" to sensations, that would be more Si, a more passive attitude to sensations. Does this make sense?


Socionics interpretations of Se as a power-seeking willpower element are completely off. Irrationality doesn't give anyone more willpower or make anyone become more obsessed with power.

Where do you think that comes from?? I know Augusta didn't care about MBTI and Enneagram so I'm really curious how she got this definition because it seems to overlap with some MBTI Te and enneagram 8 a lot.

Otoh I'm not trying to claim that it absolutely can't have anything to do with willpower but I'll elaborate on this below.

As for myself, I relate to socionics Se pretty well, actually more than to the MBTI or Jungian descriptions because this one is not about a total sensory hedonist stereotype :) but I can't totally make sense of how one-sided the Se definition seems to be in Socionics. Parts of the jungian / MBTI version got included with Si.


If anything it makes people more scattered and less focused on their goals.

Actually this one isn't so clear to me. What do you call a "goal" here? Because if it's an immediate concrete goal, why couldn't Se be focused on getting that?

And I would see some sort of willpower related to that, though it depends on the definition of willpower. Some people seem to associate it with self-discipline which I think is a different thing.


It gets quite comical when some beginner socionists who have subscribed to the traditional socionics definition of Se start making deductions like "Types with vulnerable Se don't ever swear or act aggressively" only to get rebuffed and cursed at by some EII or called an idiot by some LII later in their socionics adventures. Or when some EII who is dissatisfied with the EII descriptions depicting her as a nice, complacent housewife assumes herself to be an ESI and then start acting like a drunk frat boy in order to play into Se stereotypes, saying things like "I wanna punch something if I don't get my smokes" - hilarity ensues.

Lol that. I don't really understand Se PoLR yet but in general I can see the problem with trying to push perceptions of people into such narrow boxes :p.

How do you know though that this EII (I assume this was a real example you've seen) actually just tried to act like ESI? Hmm I often feel like the bolded but I only voice it if I feel like saying it. So it happens but how do you know this EII wasn't actually feeling like saying so?
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
271
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
How is it successful? By what standards?

Clearly Socionics translates functions into very different behaviours than Jung did. Who was "more" right?

By being able to provide a fluid explanation from our thoughts and motivations through to our behaviour.

Well, I wouldn't say that Jung actually covered behaviours sufficiently. He was very much more about the point of view each sort of person had, the position they have towards the object for instance. I wouldn't say that there's a coherent whole that demonstrates the flow that we see in Socionics.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
By being able to provide a fluid explanation from our thoughts and motivations through to our behaviour.

Uhh "fluid" is a bold statement here ;p


Well, I wouldn't say that Jung actually covered behaviours sufficiently. He was very much more about the point of view each sort of person had, the position they have towards the object for instance. I wouldn't say that there's a coherent whole that demonstrates the flow that we see in Socionics.

Or the coherent whole was something else, including more than just the functions.

What do you think about the question in post #32 in this thread?
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
271
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Uhh "fluid" is a bold statement here ;p




Or the coherent whole was something else, including more than just the functions.

What do you think about the question in post #32 in this thread?

Well, I think IM elements are a fluid process from the information to the action on that information.


I've kinda explained Socionics Se a lot in the Socionics Video thread. I think Se in MBTI is sensation-seeking but has a rather narrow idea of what sensation is, leading to just this idea of a hedonist.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Well, I think IM elements are a fluid process from the information to the action on that information.

Well... you know my opinion on this already :p


I've kinda explained Socionics Se a lot in the Socionics Video thread. I think Se in MBTI is sensation-seeking but has a rather narrow idea of what sensation is, leading to just this idea of a hedonist.

I was asking about Jung Se vs Socionics Se, let's leave MBTI out of it :) So what do you think about that?
 

sulfit

New member
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
495
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Yeah it seems "comprehensive" is a pretty good word for what the jungian description is like... As for craving sensations, that's the part I never managed to relate to. I mean, some enjoyment is cool but I don't see myself as such a slave to all sensations. So quite honestly, because of that I wasn't quite sure what dominant function I'd have going by Jung. Though, I recall it was also mentioned somewhere that the Se type doesn't feel they're really a "slave" to sensations, that would be more Si, a more passive attitude to sensations. Does this make sense?
Yes it does :) I was going to add that the "craving for sensations" can also be attributed to Si, and to the self-preservation instinct (sp) which is strongly body-based. I've seen sp firsts become gluttonous when they were under stress and pressure. It can also be due to a weakness of sensing instead of having strong sensing, as was desribed in this relationship article: "Both of them (EII and LIE) will try to counter this and to greedy satisfy their "sensory hunger" at each other's or at someone else's expense. To compensate for these deficits both EII and LIE require an "excess" in sensing functions – a sensory abundance, a full "storehouse" of experiences, provisions, care, pleasures and entertainment, from which they can draw by full handful for themselves. Feeling this deficiency, each will try to "intercept" and "overtake" a maximum of conveniences for himself."

So I don't think that "craving for sensory experiences", like trying out new food, experimenting with drugs, or having many sexual partners is a hallmark of Se. In my opinion both Jung and MBTI and Socionics have gotten this wrong.

Where do you think that comes from?? I know Augusta didn't care about MBTI and Enneagram so I'm really curious how she got this definition because it seems to overlap with some MBTI Te and enneagram 8 a lot.
Like any MBTI or socionics writer she must have based it on characteristics of somebody she personally knew. It does mix in some 8-ness and Te-ness. May be that person was an LIE 8 so she has intermixed the traits. Back in those times when she came up with socionics there was nothing like enneagram or instincts known to her.

Another explanation is that Se was Aushra's Role function, so she herself experienced Se as "offensive" and infringing on her own Ne interests. This is how she described it. May be this description makes sense from point of view of ILE but other types won't see it in this way.

As for myself, I relate to socionics Se pretty well, actually more than to the MBTI or Jungian descriptions because this one is not about a total sensory hedonist stereotype :) but I can't totally make sense of how one-sided the Se definition seems to be in Socionics. Parts of the jungian / MBTI version got included with Si.
How do you experience Se?

Actually this one isn't so clear to me. What do you call a "goal" here? Because if it's an immediate concrete goal, why couldn't Se be focused on getting that?

And I would see some sort of willpower related to that, though it depends on the definition of willpower. Some people seem to associate it with self-discipline which I think is a different thing.
"Goal" is one specific event, action, or achievement that is evaluated (judged) to be so. Judgement is needed to give direction and motivation. However, in the EGO block the judging and perceiving functions are contrary to one another. For Se-SxE it's more difficult to stay focused than for Ti-SxE, which means that Se-SxE would also have more difficulty with following through with intentions.

How do you know though that this EII (I assume this was a real example you've seen) actually just tried to act like ESI? Hmm I often feel like the bolded but I only voice it if I feel like saying it. So it happens but how do you know this EII wasn't actually feeling like saying so?
Because it only happens in words with her. She paints an image with words, but there was no real basis for it which later becomes evident. There is a disconnect between self-presentation and the actual person. She tries to present herself as tough and rowdy but when time comes to act decisively or make a quick decision she becomes anxious, stalls and postpones, tries to talk things over again, because she is actually judicious type not decisive type. That she tries to fake Se in words become evident. It's not unusual for EIIs to try to type themselves into Se types because their profiles depict them as overly sweet, kind, all accepting and all forgiving, which they feel doesn't describe them accurately.
 

valaki

New member
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
940
MBTI Type
SeNi
Enneagram
8+7
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yes it does :)

How would you put it into words better?


I was going to add that the "craving for sensations" can also be attributed to Si, and to the self-preservation instinct (sp) which is strongly body-based. I've seen sp firsts become gluttonous when they were under stress and pressure. It can also be due to a weakness of sensing instead of having strong sensing, as was desribed in this relationship article: "Both of them (EII and LIE) will try to counter this and to greedy satisfy their "sensory hunger" at each other's or at someone else's expense. To compensate for these deficits both EII and LIE require an "excess" in sensing functions – a sensory abundance, a full "storehouse" of experiences, provisions, care, pleasures and entertainment, from which they can draw by full handful for themselves. Feeling this deficiency, each will try to "intercept" and "overtake" a maximum of conveniences for himself."

Yeah well, I saw some MBTI descriptions on inferior functions and inferior Se was like that. :p


So I don't think that "craving for sensory experiences", like trying out new food, experimenting with drugs, or having many sexual partners is a hallmark of Se. In my opinion both Jung and MBTI and Socionics have gotten this wrong.

So instead of craving for sensations, what would you say is the hallmark of Se?


Like any MBTI or socionics writer she must have based it on characteristics of somebody she personally knew. It does mix in some 8-ness and Te-ness. May be that person was an LIE 8 so she has intermixed the traits. Back in those times when she came up with socionics there was nothing like enneagram or instincts known to her.

Another explanation is that Se was Aushra's Role function, so she herself experienced Se as "offensive" and infringing on her own Ne interests. This is how she described it. May be this description makes sense from point of view of ILE but other types won't see it in this way.

It's not actually offensive to me just seems exaggerated :p

It sounds weird that she'd define Se based on some person who only has it in superid.


How do you experience Se?

In the socionics version, I relate to this essence of it worded as "achieving an object of desire" really well. Guess this strongly resembles enneagram Id type which I am as well ;)

Also the stuff about how Se is focused on this instead of just enjoying the situation, makes sense to me. In MBTI the SP stuff seems to be a bit more focused on just enjoying...

I'm not trying to say that I don't enjoy stuff, I actually enjoy the above. I just don't often sit munching my food and passively enjoying that or lie down in the shadow on the beach or whatever. :p I prefer interaction in general just for the interaction itself as it is. Staying with the example, I still like the beach but not in that passive way. :p

Or another example, I actually saw this on a socionics site, the Se runner vs the Si runner, the Si runner enjoys the jogging, takes in the environment and whatnot, and the Se runner enjoys this instead: "While the Se runner is likely to notice his surroundings and bodily experiences, they are less inclined to focus on how these sensations affect them internally; they may notice but place little importance on the beauty of their physical surroundings during the race, for instance. Instead, they are likely to be more attuned towards the energy and competitive aspect of the race itself, and also more inclined to physically push themselves towards the goal of victory, seeing their physical experience as less important than the goal or surrounding circumstances."

I think that puts it into words much better than I could.

Well so when I said the socionics Se definition is so one-sided I was actually surprised at how it "got" me. Even though it really just seems one part of Sensation and of Se (?). And actually the part about "seeing physical experience as less important", is almost not like S at all, right? So the other thing is this, I see it as not being totally "sensory" in the original sense of the word.

The other main thing I strongly relate to is taking the world "as is". Jung (and MBTI) talks about that in detail. I just don't fit the resulting stereotype in his book. Or maybe I just feel it's painted too negative lol. And again, this isn't hedonistic "sensory" as much, the taking the world objectively in an "as is" fashion.

Hm well and impulsivity, that too. OK, that's it for now :p


"Goal" is one specific event, action, or achievement that is evaluated (judged) to be so. Judgement is needed to give direction and motivation. However, in the EGO block the judging and perceiving functions are contrary to one another. For Se-SxE it's more difficult to stay focused than for Ti-SxE, which means that Se-SxE would also have more difficulty with following through with intentions.

OK say I want to take this seat here (and I go do it), is that a goal or something else? Do you think it involves Judging?


Because it only happens in words with her. She paints an image with words, but there was no real basis for it which later becomes evident. There is a disconnect between self-presentation and the actual person. She tries to present herself as tough and rowdy but when time comes to act decisively or make a quick decision she becomes anxious, stalls and postpones, tries to talk things over again, because she is actually judicious type not decisive type. That she tries to fake Se in words become evident. It's not unusual for EIIs to try to type themselves into Se types because their profiles depict them as overly sweet, kind, all accepting and all forgiving, which they feel doesn't describe them accurately.

So this about being a Decisive type (Se/Ni), it's not to do with Judgement functions?
 
Top