User Tag List

First 123412 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 125

  1. #11
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity- View Post
    What is ambiguous about those titles in your opinion?




    Actually, Socionics also defines functions according to how the individual processes information.

    As for your assuming a direct correlation in such a fashion, it requires also the assumption that ways of thinking will determine behaviour and mannerism and abilities in such a direct way. I think this is too much to ask for, unless there is some evidence for it.
    The ambiguity lies in its broad interpretation and lack of specificity, what is the field of internal dynamics exactly? Of course, the easiest translation would be the charting of events and predicting outcomes, but anyone can predict the outcome of some easy tasks, what is it that makes Ni in its predictions different than other functions? Of course there is an answer to this, but it is not conveyed with the jargon presented above.

    Of course it requires evidence, hence me labeling it personal opinion rather than objective truth. Truth be told, the function mechanisms that work in our psyche do impact our mannerisms and abilities already. Do INTPs, for instance, generally lack the ability to express their emotions and comfort others in a controllable, neat, manner due to extroverted feeling's presence in the inferior slot? Yes, and some adapt to work around extroverting their feeling by engaging solely their introverted thinking. Thus they also are extremely adept at detachment and observation due to their powerful use of Ti, meaning that they come off as unemotional, theoretical, and methodical. To illustrate this even further, I would go on to say that Socionics's descriptions of the functions is an externalized, surface look at the functions in operation. With Ni, for instance, INTJs are seen as people who can predict where an event will be going by others, but do others see the other blades in the swiss army knife of Ni? Do they see the hyper-analysis of concepts and past events, the personalized integration with ideas, theories, and understandings, and the clearing picture of a scenario where too little information reveals more than one might expect? No. For these lie beneath the surface and are not actively present and conveyable to others, thus others see INTJs as people of the future, people who know where things are going and how to plan, leading to Socionics to adopt the definition of Ni as the function of time rather than the swiss army knife that it actually is to people who use Ni as the dominant function (swiss army knife, by the way, is applicable to any function that is in the dominant position and possibly the tertiary position, part of something I've been digesting and formulating). It would actually appear that the way we think do control our mannerisms and abilities, but without any empirical evidence, this is all speculation.

  2. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    12

    Default

    How I personally resolve this issue:

    -Both MBTI functions and Socionics functions are attempting to describe the exact same archetypes (ie. the 8 cognitive processes as delineated by Jung)

    -Any differences in functions between the 2 systems can be reconciled. Either

    a. One is describing an aspect of the function that the other one failed to address...in this case, I simply combine the two depictions to obtain a greater, more comprehensive synthesized view or
    b. One is erroneously describing an aspect of the function that the other one (correctly) didn't....some examples:
    -I find that Socionics erroneously confuses Se traits with Enneagram Type 8....Extraverted Sensation is really about the objective perception of the physical-sensory features of the external world and though it may facilitate taking action, it does not necessarily mean that Se-ego types are this uber willful/power-seeking "conqueror" that socionics depicts the function as (Unless you're a correctly typed enneagram type 8)...I know plenty of non-Type 8 Se-doms who are nowhere near the willful/confrontational depictions described by Socionics (in fact most of them are more 7-ish or 6w7-ish than 8-ish...and plenty of Se-auxs are a bunch of 9s...Moreover Socionics Se descriptions could easily apply to Type 8s who don't even value Se, eg. ESTJ 8s
    -Socionics further confuses Si traits with the Self-Preservation instinct. Plenty of non-SP dom/aux Si-Ego types are not going to relate to the whole comfort-seeking, "food-loving" aspect of Si that socionics is portraying it as...
    In this case I simply get rid of the erroneous aspect of the archetype and only focus on the valid ones......


    -After the 2 discrepancies above are reconciled, you get an uber powerful model that combines both MBTI-JCF and Socionics with intertype relations, forms of cognitions, reinin dichotomies etc - which is UBER powerful (especially when combined with the enneagram tritypes/instinctual variations etc) when it comes to explaining, predicting, and controlling other people's personal dispositions....

  3. #13
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by childofprodigy View Post
    How I personally resolve this issue:

    -Both MBTI functions and Socionics functions are attempting to describe the exact same archetypes (ie. the 8 cognitive processes as delineated by Jung)

    -Any differences in functions between the 2 systems can be reconciled. Either

    a. One is describing an aspect of the function that the other one failed to address...in this case, I simply combine the two depictions to obtain a greater, more comprehensive synthesized view or
    b. One is erroneously describing an aspect of the function that the other one (correctly) didn't....some examples:
    -I find that Socionics erroneously confuses Se traits with Enneagram Type 8....Extraverted Sensation is really about the objective perception of the physical-sensory features of the external world and though it may facilitate taking action, it does not necessarily mean that Se-ego types are this uber willful/power-seeking "conqueror" that socionics depicts the function as (Unless you're a correctly typed enneagram type 8)...I know plenty of non-Type 8 Se-doms who are nowhere near the willful/confrontational depictions described by Socionics (in fact most of them are more 7-ish or 6w7-ish than 8-ish...and plenty of Se-auxs are a bunch of 9s...Moreover Socionics Se descriptions could easily apply to Type 8s who don't even value Se, eg. ESTJ 8s
    -Socionics further confuses Si traits with the Self-Preservation instinct. Plenty of non-SP dom/aux Si-Ego types are not going to relate to the whole comfort-seeking, "food-loving" aspect of Si that socionics is portraying it as...
    In this case I simply get rid of the erroneous aspect of the archetype and only focus on the valid ones......


    -After the 2 discrepancies above are reconciled, you get an uber powerful model that combines both MBTI-JCF and Socionics with intertype relations, forms of cognitions, reinin dichotomies etc - which is UBER powerful (especially when combined with the enneagram tritypes/instinctual variations etc) when it comes to explaining, predicting, and controlling other people's personal dispositions....
    Essentially, though the Enneagram will probably never truly align much less unify with JCF + Socionics.

    I do see where you find Se to be highly similar to Enneagram 8 and that is probably due to the fact that Extroverted Sensation is often assigned to Enneagram 8 (Though Riso-Hudson I believe assigned Ne to 8) with Jung -> Enneagram correlations.

    Socionics I believe does hit the mark when they claim that Se is self-assertion and allows individuals to see "the power" in objects, but I find the interesting dichotomy between sensing to be more applicable to this assertion:

    • Si types see the power, potential, and limitations of themselves psychologically and perhaps physically, whether or not they can realistically do something. (Focus on own ability)
    • Se types see the power, potential, and limitations of their environment, whether or not the resources they possess will allow them to achieve what they want to accomplish realistically. (Focus on own resources)


    Of course, this is one aspect of these two functions, as I have begun to learn that functions act sort of like swiss army knives, with many uses for many things. I do think that Si presents a focus on Sp related needs, but not to the absurd degree that Socionics presents it as.

    Well written.

  4. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    I do see where you find Se to be highly similar to Enneagram 8 and that is probably due to the fact that Extroverted Sensation is often assigned to Enneagram 8 (Though Riso-Hudson I believe assigned Ne to 8) with Jung -> Enneagram correlations.
    Which is not realistic. Most Se doms are Enneagram 7, not 8. Yes there are plenty of 8 Se-doms but they're not the majority and those who are not 8 do not possess the 8 traits that Socionics ascribe to Se - eg. perceiving the world as an obstacle course to overcome/conquer which is specifically a symptom of type 8's Vengeance fixation not of extraverted sensation as a cognitive process.

    Socionics I believe does hit the mark when they claim that Se is self-assertion
    Then explain the existence of Type 9 Se-Aux ISFPs who are incapable of asserting themselves. Is their auxiliary function malfunctioning? Any extraverted function would contribute to self assertion, granted some more than others...Te in and of itself without Se is also a fairly assertive function

    and allows individuals to see "the power" in objects, but I find the interesting dichotomy between sensing to be more applicable to this assertion:

    • Si types see the power, potential, and limitations of themselves psychologically and perhaps physically, whether or not they can realistically do something. (Focus on own ability)
    • Se types see the power, potential, and limitations of their environment, whether or not the resources they possess will allow them to achieve what they want to accomplish realistically. (Focus on own resources)
    Plenty of other functions can do the above as well - Te, Ne, Ni, Fe to name some - It's just that the the sensing functions operate on the physical, tangible aspect of reality whereas other functions focus on other domains such as the logical aspect of reality or the intangible-archetypical aspect of reality

    I do think that Si presents a focus on Sp related needs, but not to the absurd degree that Socionics presents it as.
    I'd say an SO/SX Si-ego type would focus their Si mostly on the social/sexual realm....It will still be a subjective internal response triggered by the sensory object but it's not related to the SP realm that socionics keeps on hammering on

  5. #15
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by childofprodigy View Post
    Which is not realistic. Most Se doms are Enneagram 7, not 8. Yes there are plenty of 8 Se-doms but they're not the majority and those who are not 8 do not possess the 8 traits that Socionics ascribe to Se - eg. perceiving the world as an obstacle course to overcome/conquer which is specifically a symptom of type 8's Vengeance fixation not of extraverted sensation as a cognitive process.



    Then explain the existence of Type 9 Se-Aux ISFPs who are incapable of asserting themselves. Is their auxiliary function malfunctioning?



    Plenty of other functions can do the above as well - Te, Ne, Ni, Fe to name some - It's just that the the sensing functions operate on the physical, tangible aspect of reality whereas other functions focus on other domains such as the logical aspect of reality or the intangible-archetypical aspect of reality



    I'd say an SO/SX Si-ego type would focus their Si mostly on the social/sexual realm....It will still be a subjective internal response triggered by the sensory object but it's not related to the SP realm that socionics keeps on hammering on
    Yes, Type Seven does embody extroverted sensation; more realistically, it embodies both extroverted perception functions.

    As I said, Type Eight is often correlated to Se by many Enneagram scholars, though I would more realistically pin Te on type 8 more than Se.

    While I am definitely not an expert in the Enneagram, I do recall someone explaining to me the situation of Type 9 through its neighboring enneatypes. The 9 is the paradoxical combination of the self-oriented, domineering, and controlling nature of Type 8 with its vice of lust while at the same time having traits of the just, super-ego oriented, restrained nature of Type 1. This creates a problem for Type 9, as the opposing attitudes of Type 1 and Type 8 cause Type 9 to be ambivalent about what they should do. To provide a much better outlook and one of more expertise, would @Sanjuro (who I believe posted the initial explanation of why Type 9 is so ambivalent and withdrawn next to two action-oriented types) please care to explain it?

    Te, Fe, and Ni, in Socionics, however, are dynamic functions, whereas Se is a static function. Se sees the power of things specifically and in a way that isn't affected by how powerful something will be over time, unlike what Te, Ni, or Fe might provide due to their dynamic perspective. Ne, of course, embodies much of Se's characteristics, as it is of the same orientation (Pe) and is a static function as well, and the difference lies in the resources available at the present time to achieve something feasible (Se) and the possible resources that could be used to create something theoretically under ideal circumstances (Ne).

    As for instinctual variants and cognitive functions are concerned, there is really no empirical data that can show us what Si-ego types would focus their Si on, so all we can do is speculate, meaning that all speculations are theoretically plausible though needing of evidence at some point.

  6. #16
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity- View Post
    Standard MBTI doesn't really do that. Some authors like Lenore Thomson do talk about function position too.
    I was implying that it's subtle in MBTI within the type descriptions, but yes that is true about Lenore.

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity- View Post
    Actually, on wikisocion, they're explained in terms of position too. So, I don't see the difference...
    Well yeah they are, but that's on wikisocion. Those are really broad and someones don't apply to certain people, so I think it's best left up to the individual to apply the position + actual function definition.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    I was implying that it's subtle in MBTI within the type descriptions, but yes that is true about Lenore.

    Well yeah they are, but that's on wikisocion. Those are really broad and someones don't apply to certain people, so I think it's best left up to the individual to apply the position + actual function definition.
    OK, I just found your stance interesting as mine's the exact opposite :P I see MBTI functions as described independently of position and socionics functions as dependent on position. Maybe we were reading very different sources or something :p

  8. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Yes, Type Seven does embody extroverted sensation; more realistically, it embodies both extroverted perception functions.
    I agree.

    As I said, Type Eight is often correlated to Se by many Enneagram scholars, though I would more realistically pin Te on type 8 more than Se.
    I'd correlate Type 8 on both Te and Se. If I were to rank all the 8 functions in terms of assertivity, Te and Se would definitely both be at the top 2. Though I would clearly separate what traits are caused by the JCF vs which traits are caused by enneagram since once again, extraverted thinking is not enneagram type 8 and Te is in its purest form is simply logic derived/applied to the external world and not a set of enneagram traits and moreover there's plenty of non-8 Te types just like there are plenty of non-8 Se types. I find that socionics in its current form are intermingling enneagram type 8 and extraverted sensation way too much beyond what I consider to be realistic.

    Te, Fe, and Ni, in Socionics, however, are dynamic functions, whereas Se is a static function. Se sees the power of things specifically and in a way that isn't affected by how powerful something will be over time, unlike what Te, Ni, or Fe might provide due to their dynamic perspective. Ne, of course, embodies much of Se's characteristics, as it is of the same orientation (Pe) and is a static function as well, and the difference lies in the resources available at the present time to achieve something feasible (Se) and the possible resources that could be used to create something theoretically under ideal circumstances (Ne).
    That does not imply that Se is more powerful than other functions. It only implies that Se supplies you with a set of possible actions to take in the present moment unadulterated by the passage of time. Acquiring power takes more than raw Se data. It requires other functions (especially a judging function).

    As for instinctual variants and cognitive functions are concerned, there is really no empirical data that can show us what Si-ego types would focus their Si on, so all we can do is speculate, meaning that all speculations are theoretically plausible though needing of evidence at some point.
    Yes, though I find some speculations to be more plausible than others.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Socionics I believe does hit the mark when they claim that Se is self-assertion and allows individuals to see "the power" in objects, but I find the interesting dichotomy between sensing to be more applicable to this assertion
    Why do you think this is better than the MBTI Se definition?

    I relate to Se as defined in socionics more than in MBTI but I attribute that to having high scores both on Se and Te in MBTI. (About equally high.) And yeah, my enneagram type..

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by childofprodigy View Post
    I'd correlate Type 8 on both Te and Se. If I were to rank all the 8 functions in terms of assertivity, Te and Se would definitely both be at the top 2. Though I would clearly separate what traits are caused by the JCF vs which traits are caused by enneagram since once again, extraverted thinking is not enneagram type 8 and Te is in its purest form is simply logic derived/applied to the external world and not a set of enneagram traits. I find that socionics in its current form are intermingling enneagram type 8 and extraverted sensation way too much beyond what I consider to be realistic.
    Or it's just that socionics has different concepts that aren't necessarily worse than the concepts in other typology systems.


    That does not imply that Se is more powerful than other functions. It only implies that Se supplies you with a set of possible actions to take in the present moment unadulterated by the passage of time. Acquiring power takes more than raw Se data. It requires other functions (especially a judging function).
    What kind of power (to be acquired) are we talking about here?

Similar Threads

  1. MBTI vs socionics j/p
    By Poki in forum Socionics
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-10-2014, 06:33 PM
  2. MBTI vs Socionics
    By Amargith in forum Socionics
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 03-27-2013, 07:57 PM
  3. MBTI vs. Socionics: Which one is better?
    By Idontcare in forum Socionics
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-05-2012, 02:13 PM
  4. MBTI vs Socionics
    By Athenian200 in forum Socionics
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 12-25-2008, 12:56 PM
  5. MBTI vs Socionics
    By Urchin in forum Socionics
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-21-2007, 07:19 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