User Tag List

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 94

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

  1. #71
    Senior Member Array
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Socionics
    LSI Se
    Posts
    308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oaky View Post
    I suppose there's a slight correction in thought. Yes, there is more than one model. However socionics' interpretations are also labelled and structured in the manner that they hold. MBTI on the other hand, fades far too many of the crossovers.
    That's true


    And this is it. Nevermind the definition itself, Lenore's version has, or is closest to, a direct symmetrical formation of the mental processes of the types in it. With that, it is very possible to mentally empathise the process of Si to Ni by changing only one clear boundary of the two defined structures in the function itself. And that is the definition of intuition and its perceivable changes towards sensing as an opposing dichotomy of perceptive thought while the other, unchanged, is the subjectivity of those functions defined by one's very own personal experience of the functions, which dichotomises to the objective experience of the extraverted counterparts.
    Huh? What boundary do you change to change from Si definition to Ni?


    I'm quite curious about this also but unfortunately socionics scarcely defines a thought process over a focus, philosophy and behaviour of Ni users. And with this I cannot reply in more detail. I'm currently outside in an MBTI meetup with a coup d'etat of socionics revolutionaries. Socionics people are more well educated on socionics theory, but not so much about MBTI, and the MBTI people are... well... almost hurtfully stereotypical and fairly simple-minded. Either way, I'm wondering how this meetup will end up at when the biases appear.
    It's easy. Do you fit the Sensing dichotomy or the Intuition dichotomy?

    Do you seek Se or do you seek Ne as your suggestive function?

    These are all you need to answer.

  2. #72
    Senior Member Array
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Socionics
    LSI Se
    Posts
    308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard View Post
    Socionics and MBTI share overlaps, but they are different enough that a significant minority of people will have differing types between the theories. What it truly comes down to is how each theory deals with the functions. While function definition between them is similar, it's really how they are pieced together that creates the difference.

    I'm an ENFJ, but in socionics I am ESTp which seems like an odd/impossible combination. When the functions are looked at on the surface, it would seem like EIE would be the best fit for me. However, when the functions are put in their blocks, and fit to how each block work and doesn't, it becomes clear that SLE fits better than EIE does, and is ultimately my sociotype.

    I've noticed that individuals who only weakly identify with their MBTI type, tend to have a different sociotype. Where as if there is strong identification, the types tend to be the same.
    The main dichotomies are pretty much the same across the systems. If you are N in MBTI, you'll hardly become a S base type in Socionics. Sounds like you are going by type descriptions, that's not the right method for typing.

    I agree with the rest of your post.

  3. #73
    Senior Member Array
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Socionics
    LSI Se
    Posts
    308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    I'm ESFP in MBTI but IEE/ENFp in Socionics. But that is because in Socionics I have no grasp of the physical impact on the physical world and the use of force and power and stuff like that ... I do not have that forcefulness or presence or immediacy of the Se ego. That kind of forcefulness coming from other people irritates me to the point I've considered Se PoLR/EII. MBTI Se is more cerebral, for lack of a better word, and is more analogous to Ne as an extraverted perceiving function.
    What seems cerebral to you about Se in MBTI?

  4. #74
    All Natural! All Good! Array
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by existence View Post
    What seems cerebral to you about Se in MBTI?
    It's actually described in MBTI as a cognitive function, not something almost instinctual like in Socionics.

    Still, I type as SEE-Fi now, even though I don't relate to Se in Socionics. Oh well. Especially not as a base function.

    Also, as an edit, I saw your above posts. The Dichotomies are similar, But if you're typed by Functions in one system and Dichotomies in another, they won't necessarily equate. I can easily imagine sensor Ji dominants (Ij) (ESI/LSI) identifying with N, especially the lead subtype, which emphasizes mobilizing function more and perhaps somewhat represses creative function. So you get something like Ji+Ni focus which can be N dichotomy. But functionally ESI/LSI will still be Ji+Se.

    The MBTI aspects(facets?) would leave me with INFP, for example. And I'm Fi-aux/creative, not base.

    I would also recommend using the multiquote feature instead of making 3-4 consecutive posts.
    Last edited by strychnine; 03-28-2016 at 06:24 PM.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.
    Likes Thalassa liked this post

  5. #75
    Junior Member Array Andronas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    MBTI
    INTP
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by teothebest View Post
    I have quite certainly typed myself as an INTJ in MBTI, still socionics tests keep typing me as an INTp and I have to admit the description are quite more suitable than MBTI's INTP.
    does it make any sense to you?

    I have noticed slight variations in the definitions of functions, still I'd like to receive a confirm from people more knowledgeable than me
    The J/P switch applies when translating between introverts in the two systems. But other than that, you should have the same type. They are both based on Jungian functions.

  6. #76
    not a dude Array Snickie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    954 sp
    Socionics
    SLI Te
    Posts
    180

    Default

    In MBTI, I type as an IxTP. I just don't relate well to the Je functions, nor do I use them well (although I admit I do use them). I think I use Ne more than Se but I can't accept that Ne is somehow stronger than my Si, but again I don't use Je functions well.
    In dichotomies, I'm strictly ISTP.
    When I first was introduced to socionics, the person who introduced me suggested I start by looking at LSI (I was rather insistent about being ISTP at the time). At first I related to it somewhat. Now I don't.
    I've taken the socionics test twice on Sociotype.com. The first time I got SLI (ISTp) and the second time I got ILI (INTp), both with subtype Te. I've read about both types, and I relate to them on similar levels (some kind of abstract quantity), though I'd have to get a piece of paper and jot down the specifics (quality) to see if I prefer one more than the other.
    The interesting thing is that both of these results, if regarding the Interoverted J/p switch as true, correspond with IXTJ.
    I think I relate most to socionics Delta quadra anyway.
    In various MBTI personality tests that I've taken over the years that tend to type by dichotomies, I've scored (from most to least common) ISTP, INTJ, ISTJ, INTP. Obviously they're all covered here.

    I'm still up in the air about my type (S/N mainly). I'll be back with more after I write that paper and finally post & hear back about that monster questionnaire I've been working on. Maybe.
    Accidentally offensive

    MBTI: IxTP (Ti-dom, leaning on Ne-aux)
    Socionics: idek anymore. SLI, ILI, LII....
    Enneagram: 9w1 > 5b > 4w5 sp
    Alignment: Neutral (inching toward Lawful neutral)
    Temperament: Phlegmatic/Melancholic > Sanguine (online persona) > Choleric

  7. #77
    Senior Member Array wolfnara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    649 sp/so
    Socionics
    EII Fi
    Posts
    497

    Default

    It depends what you mean by MBTI type, and what descriptions typing yourself by - dichotomies? mbti functions descriptions? Jung's descriptions?

    In that case:
    MBTI - Most definitely
    MBTI Cognitive functions - Very likely
    Jung's psychological types - lol not sure. I haven't read much of the content.
    "Those who do not move, do not notice their chains"
    -Rosa Luxemburg

  8. #78
    Senior Member Array
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Socionics
    LSI Se
    Posts
    308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strychnine View Post
    It's actually described in MBTI as a cognitive function, not something almost instinctual like in Socionics.
    It's described both cognitive and instinctual both in MBTI and in Socionics.

    I do think it has more than one facet in this way... the perceptual and the instinctual. This isn't my idea only, others noted it too.


    Still, I type as SEE-Fi now, even though I don't relate to Se in Socionics. Oh well. Especially not as a base function.

    Also, as an edit, I saw your above posts. The Dichotomies are similar, But if you're typed by Functions in one system and Dichotomies in another, they won't necessarily equate. I can easily imagine sensor Ji dominants (Ij) (ESI/LSI) identifying with N, especially the lead subtype, which emphasizes mobilizing function more and perhaps somewhat represses creative function. So you get something like Ji+Ni focus which can be N dichotomy. But functionally ESI/LSI will still be Ji+Se.

    The MBTI aspects(facets?) would leave me with INFP, for example. And I'm Fi-aux/creative, not base.
    They may identify with N superficially, sure. Key word, superficially. So not really N. If someone is truly Ji+Ni and not Ji+Se with just a strengthened Ni, they are INxx then and would not really be xSI either, Se PoLR instead of Se creative. I do know an ESI-Fi that for years couldn't decide if they were ESI or EII but even with strengthened Ni she's still a person who's more grounded than EIIs in her way of thinking.

    I'm not sure why you'd go with I in MBTI because I/E is basically defined the same as in Socionics - I is receptive, E is initiating.


    I would also recommend using the multiquote feature instead of making 3-4 consecutive posts.
    I already use the fucking multiquote. Because once I did not, I don't need to be told this crap unsolicited.


    Quote Originally Posted by Andronas View Post
    The J/P switch applies when translating between introverts in the two systems. But other than that, you should have the same type. They are both based on Jungian functions.
    It does not necessarily apply. No. This misconception should die already.


    Quote Originally Posted by Snickie View Post
    In MBTI, I type as an IxTP. I just don't relate well to the Je functions, nor do I use them well (although I admit I do use them). I think I use Ne more than Se but I can't accept that Ne is somehow stronger than my Si, but again I don't use Je functions well.
    In dichotomies, I'm strictly ISTP.
    When I first was introduced to socionics, the person who introduced me suggested I start by looking at LSI (I was rather insistent about being ISTP at the time). At first I related to it somewhat. Now I don't.
    I've taken the socionics test twice on Sociotype.com. The first time I got SLI (ISTp) and the second time I got ILI (INTp), both with subtype Te. I've read about both types, and I relate to them on similar levels (some kind of abstract quantity), though I'd have to get a piece of paper and jot down the specifics (quality) to see if I prefer one more than the other.
    The interesting thing is that both of these results, if regarding the Interoverted J/p switch as true, correspond with IXTJ.
    I think I relate most to socionics Delta quadra anyway.
    In various MBTI personality tests that I've taken over the years that tend to type by dichotomies, I've scored (from most to least common) ISTP, INTJ, ISTJ, INTP. Obviously they're all covered here.

    I'm still up in the air about my type (S/N mainly). I'll be back with more after I write that paper and finally post & hear back about that monster questionnaire I've been working on. Maybe.
    Lol, ISTP != LSI. And xLI-Te != IxTJ.

    The thing is, xLI-Te is Irrational, LSI is Rational. With Te subtype, less strongly Irrational but still that's the basic pattern. If the person is additionally Judicious, it will not fit well with J in MBTI. If Decisive, can still turn into a J in MBTI. If you want to discuss your type more, I'm happy to help.


    Quote Originally Posted by wolfnara View Post
    It depends what you mean by MBTI type, and what descriptions typing yourself by - dichotomies? mbti functions descriptions? Jung's descriptions?

    In that case:
    MBTI - Most definitely
    MBTI Cognitive functions - Very likely
    Jung's psychological types - lol not sure. I haven't read much of the content.
    You are Fi by jung, why not EII and some IFxx in MBTI then?

  9. #79
    Senior Member Array wolfnara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    649 sp/so
    Socionics
    EII Fi
    Posts
    497

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by existence View Post
    You are Fi by jung, why not EII and some IFxx in MBTI then?
    I haven't yet read about the other functions in psychological types to identify anything else yet don't want to jump to conclusions
    "Those who do not move, do not notice their chains"
    -Rosa Luxemburg

  10. #80
    Senior Member Array
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Socionics
    LSI Se
    Posts
    308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfnara View Post
    I haven't yet read about the other functions in psychological types to identify anything else yet don't want to jump to conclusions
    Ah, I see. Next logical step would be reading about Si, no? (It's very different from MBTI Si btw... Socionics Si is still different but less different because it's at least a proper Irrational function.)

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