User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 89

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by badger055 View Post
    It's not logically sound. It's such a bad system. Everything is innacurate. Most of it looks made up. There is no ISTP type it's like split into different types and it's like that for other types too. Not one socionics type describes me. Lots of people I have talked to also have no socionics type too it describes them 60% at most. It adds nothing new or valuable because it's all wrong. Typing people by how they look is total bullshit. People who don't know any better are the only people who use this thing. It's like a cult. It's worse than astrology. Why anyone would choose this MBTI abomination over the actual MBTI system I have no idea. MBTI is actually accurate and logical.
    I agree the VI seems bullshit.

    There is also the reinin bullshit, it doesn't really make a lot of sense to me, some of it does and a lot of it doesn't.

    I do find though that the Se/Ni stuff in socionics is scarily accurate for me in some things. The other functions are interesting too. Just very different from MBTI.

    Some of the concepts on function placement are interesting too, e.g. creative, mobilizing, PoLR function...

    So I'm interested in the system.

    Otoh, I've had this thought that the socionics stuff on valued functions and quadra values etc could all be eliminated by just using MBTI and enneagram together.

    And overall I'm not really sold on the idea that functions are always placed like the theory says, either in MBTI or in socionics. (Order and attitude of dominant, auxiliary, etc. functions)

  2. #12
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infinity- View Post
    I agree the VI seems bullshit.

    There is also the reinin bullshit, it doesn't really make a lot of sense to me, some of it does and a lot of it doesn't.

    I do find though that the Se/Ni stuff in socionics is scarily accurate for me in some things. The other functions are interesting too. Just very different from MBTI.

    Some of the concepts on function placement are interesting too, e.g. creative, mobilizing, PoLR function...

    So I'm interested in the system.

    Otoh, I've had this thought that the socionics stuff on valued functions and quadra values etc could all be eliminated by just using MBTI and enneagram together.

    And overall I'm not really sold on the idea that functions are always placed like the theory says, either in MBTI or in socionics. (Order and attitude of dominant, auxiliary, etc. functions)
    You don't even have a type in it I don't know how you take it seriously. You can't just choose the parts you like. If one part is bad the whole system is bad. And yea for me MBTI and enneagram cover almost my whole personality. Socionics looks like the retarded step child to me.

  3. #13
    #KUWK Kierva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Enneagram
    3w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    2,494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by badger055 View Post
    You don't even have a type in it I don't know how you take it seriously. You can't just choose the parts you like. If one part is bad the whole system is bad. And yea for me MBTI and enneagram cover almost my whole personality. Socionics looks like the retarded step child to me.
    C#2-C#5-F#5
    3 octaves, 2 notes and 1 semitone
    Supported range: F#2-F#4-C#5

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by badger055 View Post
    You don't even have a type in it I don't know how you take it seriously. You can't just choose the parts you like. If one part is bad the whole system is bad. And yea for me MBTI and enneagram cover almost my whole personality. Socionics looks like the retarded step child to me.
    Yes the system itself may be crap but I might as well say MBTI and enneagram are crap also. None of these systems are perfect. So the only way I can use them is by just observing things and seeing what works and what doesn't.

    Oh and I've at least narrowed my socionics type down to 8 types (Se/Ni valuing types), that's more than nothing

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    I forgot to mention intertype relations, which is something MBTI and enneagram don't really have. I think of it the same way as the reinin dichotomies, some of it makes sense and some doesn't...

  6. #16
    Senior Member sulfit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/so
    Posts
    492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by badger055 View Post
    It's not logically sound. It's such a bad system. Everything is innacurate. Most of it looks made up. There is no ISTP type it's like split into different types and it's like that for other types too. Not one socionics type describes me. Lots of people I have talked to also have no socionics type too it describes them 60% at most. It adds nothing new or valuable because it's all wrong. Typing people by how they look is total bullshit. People who don't know any better are the only people who use this thing. It's like a cult. It's worse than astrology. Why anyone would choose this MBTI abomination over the actual MBTI system I have no idea. MBTI is actually accurate and logical.
    It works decently well from what I could tell. But it's complicated and requires an IQ of at least 120+ to be comprehended. Anyone below that will make a mess out of it or view it as a religious cult. Similarly to how our ancestors assigned mystical properties to lightening because they didn't know how it works, some lower IQ people assign mystical properties to socionics. It's actually a very elegant system, and more advanced than MBTI.

  7. #17
    Stansmith
    Guest

    Default

    I think Socionics clears up alot of the discrepancies present among people who identify as the same Myers-Briggs type, although it isn't a perfect system either by any means.

    For example, why is at that some people describe Myers-Briggs ISFPs passive, playful and self-forgetting, while others describe them as relatively aggressive, righteous and argumentative? The SiFe (ISFp) and FiSe (ISFj) descriptions in Socionics help clarify this discrepancy to a certain extent.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    ~8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sulfit View Post
    It works decently well from what I could tell. But it's complicated and requires an IQ of at least 120+ to be comprehended. Anyone below that will make a mess out of it or view it as a religious cult. Similarly to how our ancestors assigned mystical properties to lightening because they didn't know how it works, some lower IQ people assign mystical properties to socionics. It's actually a very elegant system, and more advanced than MBTI.
    I hope you were just joking here about the IQ requirements.

    I don't think it's a truly complicated theory, nope. Go study something at university, that'll be a lot more complicated. Yet you don't need a 120+ IQ for it. I'm going to give you a real specific example, a friend of mine was officially tested and got a 115 IQ and she's majoring in computer science and almost completed it already. No don't tell me socionics is harder than compsci! :P

    So where did you get the idea that there is this limit of 120 for understanding socionics? How did you even measure that reliably on a big enough sample? But more importantly, what do you think it is that's so terribly complicated in socionics that requires that much IQ? It's surely not the math part. Not the concepts either and not the Model-A. Application of the theory? That I think just needs a certain orientation, not IQ. (No I'm not talking about any specific jungian function here! I can elaborate if anyone wants.)

    I do agree though that there isn't anything mystical about socionics. And sure it's more complex than MBTI but its complexity is nowhere near real complex systems...


    Quote Originally Posted by Stansmith View Post
    I think Socionics clears up alot of the discrepancies present among people who identify as the same Myers-Briggs type, although it isn't a perfect system either by any means.

    For example, why is at that some people describe Myers-Briggs ISFPs passive, playful and self-forgetting, while others describe them as relatively aggressive, righteous and argumentative? The SiFe (ISFp) and FiSe (ISFj) descriptions in Socionics help clarify this discrepancy to a certain extent.
    So what happens to MBTI ISFJ?

    Are all ESIs happily relating to the entirety of the ESI description? I don't think so.

    All in all, I think it's not exactly about clearing up MBTI discrepancies, it's just that socionics organizes various observed traits into 16 types in a different way. This on its own doesn't mean it's better or worse than MBTI. To decide if it is actually better at categorizing people, quite a few studies would have to be done.

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

    Default

    ...and since this is my typing thread, you all can now analyse to your heart's content what I posted above, is it revealing of my ways of thinking? Lol

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edchidna1000 View Post
    Hey, sorry for taking so long to get back to you. I've been doing Socionics stuff on my Facebook group.

    I wouldn't be surprised if you were SEE. They use Fi creatively meaning it's not so hard-line but situational. The main thing for SEEs is that they get what they want and their personal relations with others are a means to that end.
    Hey, have you been busy?

    I'm finding I don't really relate to Ti PoLR. I actually naturally keep checking for consistency in what I say when reasoning about something. The creative Fi, if it means personal relations are manipulated to get things, I don't relate to that either. So SEE would have to be out the window.

    Thing is, function wise, I relate to Beta quadra but not so much to some quadra values. But if I consider Model-A, then Te/Fi valuing is out the window too. I don't relate to a few of the Gamma values either anyway. The quadra values I'm skeptical about anyway, they look like they can be affected by other things, especially by how your life has developed and played out, under what circumstances etc.

    Examining Model-A, I find Fe and Ni are more superid-like. So I would like to further explore LSI or SLE. The problem here is, I can't decide based on Model-A. I could go for either functional structure of SLE or LSI, I relate about equally to both. The same for EP and IJ temperaments too, honestly.

    Any ideas on how to go from here to pick one?

    Of course I'm open to hearing from others even if they have different types for me in mind.

    Thanks

Similar Threads

  1. What's my type? LSI vs ILI? Beta vs Gamma?
    By Saiko124 in forum Socionics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-19-2017, 06:08 PM
  2. What's my type? LSI vs ILI? Beta vs Gamma?
    By Saiko124 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-17-2017, 10:40 PM
  3. Socionics type: EII or LII
    By Athenian200 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 11-15-2011, 09:16 PM
  4. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 12-29-2010, 01:39 AM
  5. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-23-2010, 04:22 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