User Tag List

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 94

Thread: is it normal to have a different MBTI/ socionic type?

  1. #21
    Junior Member Array
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    749 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Ne
    Posts
    7

    Default

    I refuse to accept that Ti-Ne in Socionics (INTj) is different from Ti-Ne in MBTI (INTP). I've heard all the arguments about why the systems should be differentiated, but I just don't care. None of them make sense. The concept of the functions are crucial to understanding what Jung was talking about, and interpreting them differently between systems is really senseless. Differences between the functions in MBTI and Socionics are based solely on descriptions from various sites or specific interpretations from specific writers but that does not change the fundamental meaning of the function, which isn't gonna change just because you're talking about one system and not the other. Ti is Ti, Ne is Ne, Fi is Fi, whether you're reading Socionics or MBTI or whatever.
    Likes Entropic, Cygnus, Doomkid liked this post

  2. #22
    Senior Member Array Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Tbh I type people specifically based on their Jungian type and I have never run into a person whose type differs between the MBTI and socionics in a very pure cognitive sense. I have never run into a person who is clearly Fi dom in one system and Ni the other; I find that the more I learn and understand the more I see how they both build upon the Jungian reality that was initially observed and how both systems ultimately correlate due to this reality.

    I find that people who think that the systems are different do so because they hold on to a purist ideal where the descriptions of the types, or conversely the functions, are described to appear different so therefore they must be different. I find that this misses out on that the actual functional reality is that they merely emphasize different aspects but that the main idea that underlies them is actually the same.

    People's cognition doesn't change, but how people describe that phenomenon does. Therein lies the problem and people think that definition > reality. No, reality > definition.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!
    Likes absyrd, Little_Sticks liked this post

  3. #23
    Junior Member Array
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    749 sx/so
    Socionics
    IEE Ne
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Entropic View Post
    I have never run into a person who is clearly Fi dom in one system and Ni the other
    That's a breath of fresh air then. Bye PerC.

  4. #24
    Biting Shards Array Dr Mobius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    STYX
    Enneagram
    7w8 sp/sx
    Posts
    705

    Default

    The difference between MBTI and Socionics isn't so much functions as it is methodology.

    Both are products of their respective time and environment; serving as exemplars of how psychology has changed so much since it began.

    MBTI is the quintessential child of soft science psychology as we all know it. The heart of which is statistical modelling. This gives MBTI its nature of broad, (some would say useless) statements in an effort to contain multitudes. Its also why concepts such as relationship dynamics are infeasible; far to many variables to be properly tested.

    Socionics is the child of psychoanalysis before the advent of modern psychology. It's basis is inductive logic; I have observed this trait in a particular person, This conforms to my understand of the Pi function, therefore all Pi users share this trait. The result of which is a lattice of logic. Unfortunately the issue with logic is its lack of variability; hence the often told joke: Socionics is a fine theory, until it meets reality that is. Its holistic nature serves to highlight this vulnerability; having anything other then an extremely positive relationship with your dual is impossible. To do so is to put into question the entirety of the Socionics system. Fragile very very fragile.

    As for whether to be or not to be? As someone who has seen a ludicrous amount of these threads, the only conclusion I have come to is that those who actually care are long-winded and tedious. Do what you want to do, lest one day you become one of those zombies.
    Even when the sun is shining, I can't avoid the lightning Oh, where did the blue skies go? And why is it raining so?

  5. #25
    Senior Member Array Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by absyrd View Post
    That's a breath of fresh air then. Bye PerC.
    I am a prominent poster at perc as well and most share my view there, unless you mean something else?

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

  6. #26
    Junior Member Array
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5 sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    25

    Default

    I usually am typed as INTP on the Myers-Briggs test, but I scored LII-Ti on the Socionics test. It claims my function stacking goes Ti-Ne-Fi-Se, which, as you should know, involves putting the dominant and auxiliary functions of INTP with the tertiary and inferior functions of INTJ, which does not make a whole lot of sense because Ti and Fi do not go together in any of the Jungian function pairings for MBTI.

  7. #27
    Listening Array Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,139

    Default

    I'm a socionics SLI ISTp and MBTI INTJ.

    Quote Originally Posted by absyrd View Post
    I refuse to accept that Ti-Ne in Socionics (INTj) is different from Ti-Ne in MBTI (INTP). I've heard all the arguments about why the systems should be differentiated, but I just don't care. None of them make sense. The concept of the functions are crucial to understanding what Jung was talking about, and interpreting them differently between systems is really senseless. Differences between the functions in MBTI and Socionics are based solely on descriptions from various sites or specific interpretations from specific writers but that does not change the fundamental meaning of the function, which isn't gonna change just because you're talking about one system and not the other. Ti is Ti, Ne is Ne, Fi is Fi, whether you're reading Socionics or MBTI or whatever.
    If you think this you've misunderstood the system of socionics as it works differently. Socionics is about attitudes towards the different functions and MBTI is about... well what function you use more than others. Socionics' interpretations of jung works is altered. As in it is not the same by definition. With some general similarities, they're not in essence the same formulation of the mental faculties Jung explained and it's a thing for itself. Of course they've adopted the same labelling but it's alterations make it different in essence.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Array riva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    estp
    Enneagram
    7w? so/sp
    Posts
    1,882

    Default

    Yet there is an order isn't it, in socionics?

    Even if it is the attitude towards functions and especially because of it.
    .

  9. #29
    Senior Member Array
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,637

    Default

    You can type as anything in MBTI because it's so widespread, there are so many tests, and you can wrongly type by letters (Keirsey) instead of Functions.


    Socionics gives you one possible type, and one possible type alone. If you want to be sure in your typing, start with Socionics, then carry the Information Elements over into JCF for MBTI and you'll have your definite MBTI type.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Array Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oaky View Post
    I'm a socionics SLI ISTp and MBTI INTJ.

    If you think this you've misunderstood the system of socionics as it works differently. Socionics is about attitudes towards the different functions and MBTI is about... well what function you use more than others. Socionics' interpretations of jung works is altered. As in it is not the same by definition. With some general similarities, they're not in essence the same formulation of the mental faculties Jung explained and it's a thing for itself. Of course they've adopted the same labelling but it's alterations make it different in essence.
    MBTI isn't about what you use more though, per se, but it's about ego identity. This logic is absolutely carried over to socionics, which is why it has blocks organized based on the tripartite model. Socionics for example recognizes that one can use a function a lot but it may not be the ego function and the MBTI does the same in that there not just a point in looking at what people use but how good they are at using it. MBTI, just like socionics, also separates between conscious and unconscious.

    How did you arrive at being an SLI? Do you fully understand what socionics Si really is?

    Quote Originally Posted by CDH15 View Post
    I usually am typed as INTP on the Myers-Briggs test, but I scored LII-Ti on the Socionics test. It claims my function stacking goes Ti-Ne-Fi-Se, which, as you should know, involves putting the dominant and auxiliary functions of INTP with the tertiary and inferior functions of INTJ, which does not make a whole lot of sense because Ti and Fi do not go together in any of the Jungian function pairings for MBTI.
    This is a misunderstanding of the system. The superego block which is Fi and Se for an LII, is conscious but it is not valued, meaning your psyche does not appreciate, nor does it care for, information that concern these two elements. The valued functions are 1, 2 and 5 and 6 aka ego and super-id block or Ti, Ne, Si and Fe. So the functional model is actually in this regard the same. Socionics arranges what in the MBTI would be the shadow functions a little differently. The only real difference is that socionics claims that Fi and Se are conscious for the LII. I am not sure I wholly agree with this either, tbh. Another thing to point out here is that the superego block in socionics is very similar to Lenore Thomson's idea of the crow's nest and I think if Lenore would physically organize her vision of the psyche, it would probably look very similar to model A.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

Similar Threads

  1. When is it time to move on from MBTI?
    By Octarine in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 04-13-2016, 11:44 PM
  2. Is it possible to have subcultures anymore?
    By Lark in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-02-2015, 01:26 PM
  3. [MBTItm] Is it normal to have two sides?
    By Eckhart in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-16-2012, 02:04 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