User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 78

Thread: INXX

  1. #31
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Basically forget MBTI when dealing with socionics. There's no such thing as INTJ in socionics.
    I second this. If you want to truly see the difference, here's an article on PerC that describes the stereotypical ILI which appears much more human than the MBTI stereotypical INTJ. I resonate the most with this description followed closely behind by ILE, but descriptions aren't always reliable sources for type-discernment.(though it doesn't go into detail for ILI-Ni and ILI-Te, which wikisocion has I think).
    http://personalitycafe.com/socionics...r-written.html

  2. #32
    Senior Member Opal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    That's your preference. Mine is simply this, give me the textbook and I will figure it out on my own. Charts, nah, I will build them for myself in my own head.

    Catacombs from above lol sure (funny idea)




    Well ILI in socionics is very indecisive because of weak Se suggestive function. Though the quadra itself is a decisive one. (Se/Ni = decisive, and not TJ). ILI is flexible additionally because they are an irrational-lead type (Ni base function), that's how the argument goes. It is INTp in socionics, not J.

    Basically forget MBTI when dealing with socionics. There's no such thing as INTJ in socionics.
    Haha, catacommmbs... flooded with dye and surrounded by transparent dirt... from above.

    INTp was listed parallel to INTJ, which is why I was surprised. I've read others insisting there are no true parallels, but I know very little about socionics. I just thought the type profile might help me rule out certain MBTI types.

  3. #33
    Senior Member Opal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    I second this. If you want to truly see the difference, here's an article on PerC that describes the stereotypical ILI which appears much more human than the MBTI stereotypical INTJ. I resonate the most with this description followed closely behind by ILE, but descriptions aren't always reliable sources for type-discernment.(though it doesn't go into detail for ILI-Ni and ILI-Te, which wikisocion has I think).
    http://personalitycafe.com/socionics...r-written.html
    Thanks for the link. I read through the description and it feels much truer to my personality than some INTJ characteristics.

    I'm not sure I understand the 7th and 8th functions' descriptions as "strong and lacking." Why exactly does the typical INTp loathe extraverted intuition? What I gathered from the description is that its pattern recognition can steer users into stagnant, traditional lifestyles--is that accurate? And is it unavoidable? I may have a weak understanding of Ne, because I definitely don't loathe it (though I do generally loathe tradition). The description of Ti seems to be loathed for the opposite reason; it renders the old obsolete and ushers in the new? Or is Ti considered the old in this case?

  4. #34
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by solipsists View Post
    Thanks for the link. I read through the description and it feels much truer to my personality than some INTJ characteristics.

    I'm not sure I understand the 7th and 8th functions' descriptions as "strong and lacking." Why exactly does the typical INTp loathe extraverted intuition? What I gathered from the description is that its pattern recognition can steer users into stagnant, traditional lifestyles--is that accurate? And is it unavoidable? I may have a weak understanding of Ne, because I definitely don't loathe it (though I do generally loathe tradition). The description of Ti seems to be loathed for the opposite reason; it renders the old obsolete and ushers in the new? Or is Ti considered the old in this case? Something possibly arbitrary and less malleable than it should be?
    Loathe is a bad word choice. It should say unpreferred. The concept is that you don't develop Te separate from Ti or vice versa, but you develop the thinking function as a whole. The person can utilize Ti or Te just as effectively as the other, it's just you trust one more than the other. This is harder to illustrate with judging functions, but with perceiving functions, it's highly noticeable. To an Ni user, doing things that require Ne will be easy, but it will seem very chaotic, unfocused, and inefficient. To an Ne user, unconscious visions presented by Ni will seem to come out of nowhere and be too in-depth; the Ne user thinks that the unconscious vision from Ni is highly unreliable and doesn't account for everything (when it can) because it seems to have come out of nowhere. The same applies with Te and Ti, except Te is the embodiment of pragmatism while Ti is the embodiment of understanding. Te wants to finish something as quickly as possible and make changes in the external environment. Ti wants to pile-drive a concept into the ground with incredible depth and understand everything about it. To a Te user, Ti will seem very subjective and highly inefficient. To a Ti user, Te will seem very structured and broad, not honing in on any particularities or understandings.

  5. #35
    Senior Member Opal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Loathe is a bad word choice. It should say unpreferred. The concept is that you don't develop Te separate from Ti or vice versa, but you develop the thinking function as a whole. The person can utilize Ti or Te just as effectively as the other, it's just you trust one more than the other. This is harder to illustrate with judging functions, but with perceiving functions, it's highly noticeable. To an Ni user, doing things that require Ne will be easy, but it will seem very chaotic, unfocused, and inefficient. To an Ne user, unconscious visions presented by Ni will seem to come out of nowhere and be too in-depth; the Ne user thinks that the unconscious vision from Ni is highly unreliable and doesn't account for everything (when it can) because it seems to have come out of nowhere. The same applies with Te and Ti, except Te is the embodiment of pragmatism while Ti is the embodiment of understanding. Te wants to finish something as quickly as possible and make changes in the external environment. Ti wants to pile-drive a concept into the ground with incredible depth and understand everything about it. To a Te user, Ti will seem very subjective and highly inefficient. To a Ti user, Te will seem very structured and broad, not honing in on any particularities or understandings.
    This is the most helpful description of both N and T I've read, thank you. Is this true of MBTI as well as socionics, if thinking and intuition even differ between the two? Based on this I can say with fair certainty I'm NiTe.

  6. #36
    Senior Member Alea_iacta_est's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    1,838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by solipsists View Post
    This is the most helpful description of both N and T I've read, thank you. Is this true of MBTI as well as socionics, if thinking and intuition even differ between the two? Based on this I can say with fair certainty I'm NiTe.
    Glad this description is good.

    Actually this description was posed more toward Jungian Cognitive Functions, which are the basis of MBTI (non dichotomy) and Socionics. Though the functions are a little different from each other in both systems, it's the same premise.

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    Loathe is a bad word choice. It should say unpreferred. The concept is that you don't develop Te separate from Ti or vice versa, but you develop the thinking function as a whole. The person can utilize Ti or Te just as effectively as the other, it's just you trust one more than the other. This is harder to illustrate with judging functions, but with perceiving functions, it's highly noticeable. To an Ni user, doing things that require Ne will be easy, but it will seem very chaotic, unfocused, and inefficient. To an Ne user, unconscious visions presented by Ni will seem to come out of nowhere and be too in-depth; the Ne user thinks that the unconscious vision from Ni is highly unreliable and doesn't account for everything (when it can) because it seems to have come out of nowhere. The same applies with Te and Ti, except Te is the embodiment of pragmatism while Ti is the embodiment of understanding. Te wants to finish something as quickly as possible and make changes in the external environment. Ti wants to pile-drive a concept into the ground with incredible depth and understand everything about it. To a Te user, Ti will seem very subjective and highly inefficient. To a Ti user, Te will seem very structured and broad, not honing in on any particularities or understandings.
    Nice sum up. To me, Te sometimes does feel a bit unsatisfying. I can drive some people mad with my interest in depth. At the same time, I can totally see why Ti may seem inefficient. Sometimes it is. Then sometimes it is quite the opposite because it gives you an understanding that allows you more power in practice than just simply using Te would. (This sometimes would only be really true if the Te user isn't that strong in Te, I think. But in special cases I do feel Ti gives more power to do something than Te.) Overall, preference in my case boils down to it simply being more enjoyable doing the task from the deep understanding. I say "task" because I have a practical bent affecting my Ti use most of the time (not always). I hope that makes sense.

    Ni is okay, as long as I can support the Ni insight with something actual. Ni-doms don't need that to feel satisfied with the insight, do they?

    How about you with Ni? Why do you not like Ti that much, from your own viewpoint? Talk more about what you see as too subjective about it. As I said I can see where the notion of inefficiency comes from, regarding Ti, but I don't see the issue with subjectivity.

    Quote Originally Posted by solipsists View Post
    This is the most helpful description of both N and T I've read, thank you. Is this true of MBTI as well as socionics, if thinking and intuition even differ between the two? Based on this I can say with fair certainty I'm NiTe.
    So do you feel Ti is inefficient and uninteresting?

  8. #38
    Senior Member Opal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    So do you feel Ti is inefficient and uninteresting?
    Quite the opposite. In conjunction with Ni Te is useful for application of insight, but I view Ti as a vital part of my thought process (as I do Ne). In fact, my Ti is probably stronger than my Te. This is why I've flip-flopped so many times. Narrowing down my dominant function to Ni helped, and examining what I do with my Ni insights led me to Te (largely thanks to Alea_iacta_est's distinction). I observe, query, and am met with an answer. I look to act on or execute this answer in a logical way ("pragmatic" is a keyword here).

    I can still imagine instances where I may fall back on NeTi or NeFi if my confidence in Ni is shaken or a change is called on by circumstance. So I wouldn't consider the INTJ label absolute, but it is the dominant/most common function hierarchy for me.

  9. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by solipsists View Post
    Quite the opposite. In conjunction with Ni Te is useful for application of insight, but I view Ti as a vital part of my thought process (as I do Ne). In fact, my Ti is probably stronger than my Te. This is why I've flip-flopped so many times. Narrowing down my dominant function to Ni helped, and examining what I do with my Ni insights led me to Te (largely thanks to Alea_iacta_est's distinction). I observe, query, and am met with an answer. I look to act on or execute this answer in a logical way ("pragmatic" is a keyword here).

    I can still imagine instances where I may fall back on NeTi or NeFi if my confidence in Ni is shaken or a change is called on by circumstance. So I wouldn't consider the INTJ label absolute, but it is the dominant/most common function hierarchy for me.
    Hmm okay... I guess Te can stand out for me too so it's vital in that sense but, what I was really asking about is whether you *like* "using" Ti much

  10. #40
    Senior Member Opal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Hmm okay... I guess Te can stand out for me too so it's vital in that sense but, what I was really asking about is whether you *like* "using" Ti much
    I do... I think I'll be a little freakish for whatever I type as, because throughout my life I've consciously avoided committing to one type of thought/action for too long; my mother is a therapist/dance & yoga instructor, and my father is an investment banker/author, so I tried to embody very polarized ideals throughout my childhood. Though it doesn't add up to one type, I trust my cognitive functions percentages (roughly): my Ni, Ti and Fi are all strong, but the combination of NiTe best describes my thought patterns when isolated from social influence. So in response, I do like to use, and in fact rely on, Ti, but Ti alone is directionless and ultimately very frustrating in conversation. My Ti operates best within a pragmatic frame built by Te... as I understand Ti and Te. If I say something that seems obviously off I hope you'll tell me.

Similar Threads

  1. If you're an INxx, must you own a cat?
    By Samvega in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 134
    Last Post: 05-23-2009, 07:50 PM
  2. INXX
    By Kuro in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-14-2009, 09:36 AM
  3. INxx's, Intelligence, and Internet Use
    By cdal233 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 02-25-2008, 05:38 PM
  4. [NT] imagination - all INXX's, not just NT's
    By Il Morto Qui Parla in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-21-2008, 11:59 PM
  5. Greetings of an INxx (trying to figure out what I am)
    By TenebrousReflection in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 10-05-2007, 01:56 AM

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