User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 39

  1. #11
    Senior Member Little_Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,370

    Default

    They might be defined differently, but they are derived directly from Jung. Consider perhaps that MBTI and Socionics are different perspectives on Jung. It doesn't however change the fact that the same Jungian functions underlie both. Therefore, if someone finds they have different functions in each one, there's an implied ignorance of the Jungian theory they are based off of. Functions are functions after-all.

  2. #12
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    They can, not match. Whoever directly correlates the two has no understanding of the other system if they're accustomed to one. I have been writing this many times before but the majority fail to demagnetise the connections based on the similar labels used.

    1. The definitions of the functions in each system differ and do not directly correlate. There are mild similarities.
    2. Socionics forms attitude towards each of the 8 functions and MBTI forms a psychological model. They define different aspects of an individual where one is conclusive attitude and one is psychological processes.
    3. Some types may correlate more with a certain socionics type then others but it is not directly set.
    4. Although both are directly from the workings of Jung they've taken different facets and understandings of his works.

  3. #13
    Senior Member Little_Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oaky View Post
    4. Although both are directly from the workings of Jung they've taken different facets and understandings of his works.
    That's like saying that if say an ENTP decides Fi is about values and creates ENTPMBTI and says you should have a different type in ENTPMBTI over Jung, that you have two different types; but all the ENTP really did was draw false conclusions about a cognitive function, in this case Fi. The cognitive function is still the same function regardless of what someone wants to falsely conclude about it. It's kind of silly that people think this is helpful to do, obfuscating the unbiased Jungian Psychological Types that explains philosophical orientations we each can have with the world, rather than an interpretation/opinion about them, such as with MBTI and Socionics. This can give the illusion of different functions in each, but it also misses what the functions are and is only superficially helpful in understanding ourselves and elucidating our natures, at best.
    Likes PocketFullOf liked this post

  4. #14
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Solution: MBTI JCF is inferior. Either stick with the Anarchic System or move onto Socionics. Attempting to straddle the lines will only cause more problems than just operating in one strictly.
    Likes PocketFullOf liked this post

  5. #15
    literally your mother PocketFullOf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    NeTi
    Enneagram
    pot
    Posts
    494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oaky View Post
    2. Socionics forms attitude towards each of the 8 functions and MBTI forms a psychological model. They define different aspects of an individual where one is conclusive attitude and one is psychological processes.
    This made a lot of sense to me conceptually. Since they are both just guidelines I see how it would be possible to deal with the functions on two different levels, one is what you show the world and how you interact with it, the other is how you are wired. At least that's how I understood it, correct my if I am wrong. It also explains why I would have very different results for each, considering how I come off to others is not reflective of the cognitive functions I use.


    Taking a concept to it's logical end is rarely logical or relevant to the subject at hand.
    Johari Nohari
    7w6-3w2-1w9 / sCUA|I| / SER SEI
    Neutral Good
    bagfullofclocks | type me if you can


  6. #16
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Sticks View Post
    That's like saying that if say an ENTP decides Fi is about values and creates ENTPMBTI and says you should have a different type in ENTPMBTI over Jung, that you have two different types; but all the ENTP really did was draw false conclusions about a cognitive function, in this case Fi. The cognitive function is still the same function regardless of what someone wants to falsely conclude about it. It's kind of silly that people think this is helpful to do, obfuscating the unbiased Jungian Psychological Types that explains philosophical orientations we each can have with the world, rather than an interpretation/opinion about them, such as with MBTI and Socionics. This can give the illusion of different functions in each, but it also misses what the functions are and is only superficially helpful in understanding ourselves and elucidating our natures, at best.
    MBTI has different interpretations based on different researchers who formulated their particular understandings of the functions. Keirsey didn't even acknowledge the functions. If we were to derive the definitions of the functions based on chapter 10 of the psychological types by Jung, we'd find that MBTI has a closer correlation to each of the functions definitions as it was set more to psychoanalytical perceptions and judgements of people. Socionics use the same labels but have altered the definitions to suit descriptions of our characteristic attitudes in thought, or rather, patterns of thought.
    Likes Alea_iacta_est, OrangeAppled liked this post

  7. #17
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PocketFullOf View Post
    This made a lot of sense to me conceptually. Since they are both just guidelines I see how it would be possible to deal with the functions on two different levels, one is what you show the world and how you interact with it, the other is how you are wired. At least that's how I understood it, correct my if I am wrong. It also explains why I would have very different results for each, considering how I come off to others is not reflective of the cognitive functions I use.
    Although this tends to be the general direction of better understanding the two systems, the functions are defined differently. For example. In socionics Fi is defined by the connection one has with another individual, whereas in MBTI, or mainly with Jung, it is defined more as the value constructs one holds as defined by their being.
    Likes PocketFullOf, OrangeAppled liked this post

  8. #18
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oaky View Post
    For example. In socionics Fi is defined by the connection one has with another individual, whereas in MBTI, or mainly with Jung, it is defined more as the value constructs one holds as defined by their being.
    That's more along the lines of as an information aspect rather than an information element.

    As an information element, is the internal judgement of the external environment. Uses of often include assessing Right/Wrong, Good/Evil, Attraction/Repulsion, Kind/Mean, Loyal/Unfaithful. The environment, thus, is mentally organized into these categorical absolutes. These objects over here are "Good", these over here are "Bad". It's adding ethical structure and hierarchy to the environment, much like how the directive is to organize and classify the environment logically.

  9. #19
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    That's more along the lines of as an information aspect rather than an information element.

    As an information element, is the internal judgement of the external environment. Uses of often include assessing Right/Wrong, Good/Evil, Attraction/Repulsion, Kind/Mean, Loyal/Unfaithful. The environment, thus, is mentally organized into these categorical absolutes. These objects over here are "Good", these over here are "Bad". It's adding ethical structure and hierarchy to the environment, much like how the directive is to organize and classify the environment logically.
    Here it is. That's just it. it... That's the point in the conveyance of socionics in difference to MBTI as what I've described before. You're just using different terminology. You say element, I say processing, you say aspect, I say attitude, the understanding plays the same but that's the thing about it, socionics as a system is not about the psychological processing, it's about the conclusive attitudes.
    Likes OrangeAppled liked this post

  10. #20
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oaky View Post
    Here it is. That's just it. it... That's the point in the conveyance of socionics in difference to MBTI as what I've described before. You're just using different terminology. You say element, I say processing, you say aspect, I say attitude, the understanding plays the same but that's the thing about it, socionics as a system is not about the psychological processing, it's about the conclusive attitudes.
    I do agree that the terminology is a huge barrier, but an information aspect and information element are entirely different things.

    Information aspects are sort of where Cybernetics enters Socionics, where information in the environment separate from the individual is categorized and related to by the masses (or by smaller groups or even by individuals using parameters of experience) as pertaining to a specific element.

    For instance, as sports, as interpersonal relationships, as astrology or religion. [information aspects]

    The information elements are the actual psychological processes that occur within the individual. So Socionics does include psychological processing, but it's main emphasis is ultimately on inter-type relations and how information aspects stimulate the individual sociotype.

    The difference between Socionics and MBTI JCF isn't so much the difference between psychological processing and reactions to stimuli, as both systems cover both to varying degrees. It just so happens that MBTI JCF is emphasizing psychological processing for the most part over reactions to stimuli and that Socionics is emphasizing the reactions to stimuli over the psychological processing (for the time being anyways). Both are still present in both systems.

Similar Threads

  1. [NF] Socionics and mbti
    By chado in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-27-2015, 07:09 PM
  2. Socionics and MBTI
    By Fay in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-27-2013, 06:27 PM
  3. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 09-16-2013, 05:53 PM
  4. Are Socionics and MBTI compatible?
    By RaptorWizard in forum Socionics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-12-2012, 05:06 PM
  5. Socionics and MBTI
    By IndyGhost in forum Socionics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-14-2011, 12:13 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