• 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.

The area of confidence socionics test

Dr Mobius

Biting Shards
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
873
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
C -2, continuing my long running trend of testing as Gamma. This is hardly surprising given my enneagram and instinctual variants. Hmmm as there seems to be a side discussion pertaining to the MBTI socionics crossover, I will add my two cents under a spoiler tag.


 

Evo

Unapologetic being
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
3,160
MBTI Type
XNTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Ti Ne

I don't even understand Ti..

So no.

Edit: I reread part 2. I am not reflective or closed off. So nvm.

TeNi approved
 
0

011235813

Guest
Considering that this test only looks at "clubs" (NF - humanitarians, NT - researchers, SF - socials, ST - pragmatists) and temperaments (EP, IP, EJ, IJ), it's not surprising that people who are in between, at least in the second category might have issues with the test.

The interesting thing is that the first question seems to peg clubs fairly well, without necessarily being so unsubtle that you feel like you're being forced to your destination.

As a J-ish P (in MBTI), the uncertainty of the second set of choices didn't bother me much. I know that I'm superficially adaptive and accommodating and internally stern but that might be a difficult distinction to make or figure out, I guess.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Considering that this test only looks at "clubs" (NF - humanitarians, NT - researchers, SF - socials, ST - pragmatists) and temperaments (EP, IP, EJ, IJ), it's not surprising that people who are in between, at least in the second category might have issues with the test.

The interesting thing is that the first question seems to peg clubs fairly well, without necessarily being so unsubtle that you feel like you're being forced to your destination.

As a J-ish P (in MBTI), the uncertainty of the second set of choices didn't bother me much. I know that I'm superficially adaptive and accommodating and internally stern but that might be a difficult distinction to make or figure out, I guess.

Senza: as an ISFP, how are you so smart?
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Considering that this test only looks at "clubs" (NF - humanitarians, NT - researchers, SF - socials, ST - pragmatists) and temperaments (EP, IP, EJ, IJ), it's not surprising that people who are in between, at least in the second category might have issues with the test.

The interesting thing is that the first question seems to peg clubs fairly well, without necessarily being so unsubtle that you feel like you're being forced to your destination.

As a J-ish P (in MBTI), the uncertainty of the second set of choices didn't bother me much. I know that I'm superficially adaptive and accommodating and internally stern but that might be a difficult distinction to make or figure out, I guess.

Or, more seriously: somebody gets it!

Loved the bolded.

You're such a smarty pants.
 

infinite

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
565
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
~8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Got stuck between A and C and between 2 and 4.
 

Lexicon

Temporal Mechanic
Staff member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
12,342
MBTI Type
JINX
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx

infinite

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
565
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
~8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Showing, once again, as I have said all along, that the only reason some introverts get the wrong Socionics type, relative to their MBTI type, is because Socionics considers the dominant function as the determining factor in whether someone is "Jish" ("orderly, structured, stable") or "Pish" ("disorganized, adaptive, depends on mood"), whereas MBTI considers the first extroverted function as the determining factor on this matter.

(...)

Notice: the bolded is the only part that's different, and it all pertains to Jish vs Pish qualities.

Now, people can have their opinion on whether being FiNe causes you to be Jish or Pish and NiFe causes you to be Jish or Pish -- frankly, I think it's somewhere in the middle (i.e., that the introverts might be either one, or kinda both, just one way in certain ways, but the other way in other ways) -- but there is no questioning that this test shows exactly what I have been saying all along: that one should have the same cognitive functions in both systems, but one system simply emphasizes Jish qualities for individuals whose dominant function is a Judging function and Pish qualities for introverts whose dominant function is a Perceiving function (Socionics), while the other emphasizes Jish qualities for individuals whose first extroverted function is a judging function and Pish qualities for individuals whose first extroverted function is a Perceiving function (MBTI).

There is no debate. This is fact.

No. The cognitive functions are not the same in these systems. This test here isn't even testing for functions, just dichotomy stuff, so how does it prove anything about functions. Your conclusion is not fact. What's fact here is not new: that socionics assigns j/p based on leading function.

And that thing about people having opinions on how much J or P FiNe is etc, opinion seriously? Measure it, don't waste time on mental masturbation.

PS. I did not have time to read the other posts yet so apologies if someone else already pointed out all this.
 
0

011235813

Guest
No. The cognitive functions are not the same in these systems. This test here isn't even testing for functions, just dichotomy stuff, so how does it prove anything about functions. Your conclusion is not fact. What's fact here is not new: that socionics assigns j/p based on leading function.

And that thing about people having opinions on how much J or P FiNe is etc, opinion seriously? Measure it, don't waste time on mental masturbation.

PS. I did not have time to read the other posts yet so apologies if someone else already pointed out all this.

Actually, dichotomies and functions aren't as separate as you seem to suggest. In this test, the first question measures the dichotomies in terms of F/T and N/S, and the second the orientation of those dichotomies.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
No. The cognitive functions are not the same in these systems. This test here isn't even testing for functions, just dichotomy stuff, so how does it prove anything about functions. Your conclusion is not fact. What's fact here is not new: that socionics assigns j/p based on leading function.

And that thing about people having opinions on how much J or P FiNe is etc, opinion seriously? Measure it, don't waste time on mental masturbation.

PS. I did not have time to read the other posts yet so apologies if someone else already pointed out all this.

You clearly didn't understand my post, and don't know what you're talking about.
 

á´…eparted

passages
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,265
It's extremely close between C1 and D1. Which means TeNi or FeNi, so effectively, JeNi.

Not surprised.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
D or C 2 - NiFe or NiTe
:thumbdown:

Choosing a letter group was hard. Feeling was sounding like Fe, as usual... Perhaps replace tactful with sensitive & get rid of knowing how people feel about you.

Showing, once again, as I have said all along, that the only reason some introverts get the wrong Socionics type, relative to their MBTI type, is because Socionics considers the dominant function as the determining factor in whether someone is "Jish" ("orderly, structured, stable") or "Pish" ("disorganized, adaptive, depends on mood"), whereas MBTI considers the first extroverted function as the determining factor on this matter.



Notice: the bolded is the only part that's different, and it all pertains to Jish vs Pish qualities.

Now, people can have their opinion on whether being FiNe causes you to be Jish or Pish and NiFe causes you to be Jish or Pish -- frankly, I think it's somewhere in the middle (i.e., that the introverts might be either one, or kinda both, just one way in certain ways, but the other way in other ways) -- but there is no questioning that this test shows exactly what I have been saying all along: that one should have the same cognitive functions in both systems, but one system simply emphasizes Jish qualities for individuals whose dominant function is a Judging function and Pish qualities for individuals whose dominant function is a Perceiving function (Socionics), while the other emphasizes Jish qualities for individuals whose first extroverted function is a judging function and Pish qualities for individuals whose first extroverted function is a Perceiving function (MBTI).

There is no debate. This is fact.

That's a big problem though! This is a personality/psychology theory after all....
MBTI gets it right because J/P behavior is as much about the introverted function as the extroverted function, IMO. J/P behavior is the result of a whole mindset. The inferior, opposing function for a Ji-dom is Je, so to make Ji sound like Je is bizarre.

The Fi description is such utter crap, I can't even begin to identify it. It taints every other aspect of the theory for me, which is a shame because it goes into intertype dynamics which MBTI hardly touches.

I should be EII, but unfortunately, they decided to make Fi sound like Fe in an ISFJ, so that EII descriptions read like ISFJ e9w1. This leads socionics "experts" to type me as a slightly misanthropic ENFp or INFp, as it sounds the most e4.

The concept of socionics is interesting, but its framework is filled with crap. Well-organized crap is still crap.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
As a J-ish P (in MBTI), the uncertainty of the second set of choices didn't bother me much. I know that I'm superficially adaptive and accommodating and internally stern but that might be a difficult distinction to make or figure out, I guess.

Why don't they word it that way? Or rather, I'd prefer "consistency in thought/feeling" or JH Van Der Hoop's much more insightful comment on Ji-dom:
Just as with the introvert of thinking-type, we find [in the Fi type], too, a marked contrast between inner security on the one hand, and uncertainty in external behavior on the other.

Instead they talk about being organized & following rules & being sequential.... I'm not any of that internally either. Rational doesn't mean sequential or linear.
 
0

011235813

Guest
D or C 2 - NiFe or NiTe
:thumbdown:

Choosing a letter group was hard. Feeling was sounding like Fe, as usual... Perhaps replace tactful with sensitive & get rid of knowing how people feel about you.



That's a big problem though! This is a personality/psychology theory after all....
MBTI gets it right because J/P behavior is as much about the introverted function as the extroverted function, IMO. J/P behavior is the result of a whole mindset. The inferior, opposing function for a Ji-dom is Je, so to make Ji sound like Je is bizarre.

The Fi description is such utter crap, I can't even begin to identify it. It taints every other aspect of the theory for me, which is a shame because it goes into intertype dynamics which MBTI hardly touches.

I should be EII, but unfortunately, they decided to make Fi sound like Fe in an ISFJ, so that EII descriptions read like ISFJ e9w1. This leads socionics "experts" to type me as a slightly misanthropic ENFp or INFp, as it sounds the most e4.

The concept of socionics is interesting, but its framework is filled with crap. Well-organized crap is still crap.

Well, it bears repeating that socionics in its most well known form was developed by an ENTp, whose vulnerable function is Fi (followed by Se). So it's not all that surprising that the descriptions of those functions specifically are a little off.

They aren't all crap though, I would say. A lot of socionics Fi makes sense to me and doesn't feel like Fe, to be honest. A large part of my people skills lies in knowing how I feel about people, having a decent idea of how they feel about me and the confidence (if not necessarily the inclination) that I can manipulate the strength of the bond, either to bring them closer to me or push them away (I'm not discounting their own role in it by any means or saying it's always predictable, but I'm confident of being able to control things from my end).

It's not an awareness of the other person in and of themselves but an idea of the relationship with that person, which is largely wrought by me and therefore more internal.

Regarding EII and the "ISFJ doormat" thing, yeah, I think it's way overstated (especially in the Wikisocion descriptions) but I do think that a lot INFPs have a kind of unconscious urge towards comfort and nostalgia and tend to mirror behaviours they like and want to show love in the ways they appreciate. So there's a bit of an anxious people pleaser element in them, which likes to attend to people's physical comfort but isn't necessarily so great at it (or as great as a real ISFJ would be).

Not saying this is true of all INFPs or of you in particular but I've noticed the tendency in quite a few.
 

Forever_Jung

Active member
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
2,644
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Socionics information is often written in a confusing manner. It's like the guy who writes the descriptions has to clip out words he finds in a psychology magazine, and can never quite find the right ones.
 
0

011235813

Guest
Why don't they word it that way? Or rather, I'd prefer "consistency in thought/feeling" or JH Van Der Hoop's much more insightful comment on Ji-dom:
Just as with the introvert of thinking-type, we find [in the Fi type], too, a marked contrast between inner security on the one hand, and uncertainty in external behavior on the other.

Instead they talk about being organized & following rules & being sequential.... I'm not any of that internally either. Rational doesn't mean sequential or linear.

I agree that the words they've chosen are less than ideal, yeah. But at the same time, I figured I got what they meant so I'm not too fussed about it. :shrug:
 
Top