• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

The PoLR Thread

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834

infinite

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
565
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
~8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp

chubber

failed poetry slam career
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
4,413
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
"Glancing over them..." sorry to say but that's really superficial use of logic. :p

As for the links; neither describes me particularly well. But all that's just a silly assortment of concrete traits...

logic... without data is pointless. :doh:
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
271
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
You'd probably have to ask [MENTION=5759]edchidna1000[/MENTION], he is a lot more qualified than me at Socionics explanations, but I would take a gander and say that Fi PoLR creates a problem in determining one's own stance with others, whether someone is directly friend or foe. (Though this might also be true of an Fi Hidden Agenda type such as the ILI due to the fact that it isn't that much stronger, but it would be more obvious for the ILE)

I would say that one can tell the difference between Role and Vulnerable function, not just in terms of degrees of strength but also in the fact that the Vulnerable function is the opposite temperament to the Leading function while the Role is the same. Although an ILE will not value Se, Fi will be a lot more counter-intuitive to him because it's orthodox usage is IJ i.e. personal judgements leading to a sense of obligation and commitment.

The difference between an Fe Mobilising/Fi Vulnerable and Fi Mobilising/Fe Vulnerable should be too difficult to spot when one considers the pairs working in tandem. For instance, xLE would be the sort who aspires to affect the emotions of his environment, for instance attempting to instil humour in the group. The attempt might backfire due to a failure to take into account people's individual sensibilities, accidentally upsetting someone and coming across as a disingenuous, insensitive jerk.

xLI would be the sort who aspires to become a good person by following their moral compass and not being swayed by the group. However their inability to express their personal convictions warmly and persuasively will cause them to come across as an apathetic party-pooper.
 

infinite

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
565
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
~8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
logic... without data is pointless. :doh:

I never said data wasn't needed. :wubbie:

I actually strongly argue for the need of using data. I'm a real data cruncher machine. :wink:
 

infinite

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
565
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
~8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Do any of them describe you well? I am trying to ascertain how socionics translate to MBTI...

http://www.socionics.com/prof/prof.htm

Uhh I dunno. I don't feel like wading through all of them. I did read the ESTp one, I still don't relate to all of it, but some of it does work. I guess the order of the three I've read is ESTp, ISTj, ISTp in terms of how well they fit me. But really, that dumping of concrete traits together isn't going to define type that well.

As for trying to understand how socionics compares to MBTI, that's a really complex topic IMO. If you're interested in analysing it further, cool. But basically it boils down to what was said earlier about how it's not oranges vs apples, nor oranges vs tangerines.
 

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,276
Easily. The j/p switch for introverts. Keep the extroverted types the same.

For example, INFj = INFP

What's the basis of this switching thing? ...I've also heard it being uttered elsewhere... Where does it originate from?

I relate more to socionics INFj description... It's super-ego block is also compromised of Ti and Se, as in MBTI INFJ's tertiary and inferior...

I think the switching thing is not the way to convert it... I believe XXXj/p in MBTI = XXXj/p in socionics...
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
What's the basis of this switching thing? ...I've also heard it being uttered elsewhere... Where does it originate from?

I relate more to socionics INFj description... It's super-ego block is also compromised of Ti and Se, as in MBTI INFJ's tertiary and inferior...

I think the switching thing is not the way to convert it... I believe XXXj/p in MBTI = XXXj/p in socionics...

Well you're wrong. Both systems are loosely based off of Jung's Psychological Types and descriptions of the functions. The Ni dominant in MBTI (INFJ) is the same as the Ni lead in Socionics (INFp).
 

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,276
Well you're wrong. Both systems are loosely based off of Jung's Psychological Types and descriptions of the functions. The Ni dominant in MBTI (INFJ) is the same as the Ni lead in Socionics (INFp).

Yeah where does it say to swith j and p?
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
Yeah where does it say to swith j and p?

Origins and Implications of the J/P switch (wikisocion)

Some maintain that judging introverts in MBTI map to irrational ("perceiving") introverts in socionics, and perceiving introverts to rational ("judging") introverts, with extraverted types remaining the same. The rationale for this is based on an equivalence between the two theories' functional models. According to MBTI theory, the leading function of judging introvert is an introverted perceiving function (Si or Ni), while perceiving introverts' leading function is a judging function (Fi or Ti). Myers and Briggs maintained that introverts make contact with the world through their second, extraverted function, and decided to define judging or perceiving through the second function rather than the first, as in socionics. According to MBTI theory, if the 1st function is judging, then the 2nd is perceiving, and vice versa. For MBTI extraverts, it is the leading function that determines perceiving or judging.
Therefore, if we look at the functional structure of an MBTI INFP, we actually see the functions of a socionics EII (or INFj):
INFP = (1) introverted feeling, (2) extraverted intuition
The official theoretical MBTI definition of J/P is thus identical in structure to the Dynamic/Static Reinin dichotomy, again on the assumption of functional equivalence. For example, an LII or "Ti Ne" which is classified as static (introvert*rational), would be expected to test as an INTP, whereas an ILE, which is extrovert*irrational, and predicted to test as ENTP, would be Static as well. In Socionics an LII (along with LSI, EII, and ESI) is commonly called a j type (lowercase is preferred) because it is rational, yet the term "static" applies nonetheless. The converse, that MBTI J corresponds to Dynamic, is implied as well.

Can we please keep this thread on topic for PoLR instead of making it an analysis of the entire system?
 

yeghor

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,276
Dmitri Lytov reports[1] an experiment related to possible mappings between typologies, although it uses Keirsey type descriptions instead of MBTI results. In this experiment, 108 socionists were asked to read all Keirsey type descriptions and rate which Socionics type was being described. Although the main conclusion of the author was that the results simply demonstrated the lack of correlation between the typologies, the table of results could be viewed as mildly supportive of the J/P switch for IN-- Keirsey types, and not at all for IS-- Keirsey types.

However, one must be warned against making overly firm conclusions from these data, because the evaluators tended to choose extroverted rather than introverted Socionics types when rating Keirsey INTJ descriptions: Far more socionists in the experiment typed the INTJ description as SLE or LIE rather than as LII or ILI. These results can only be called odd from the point of view of a correlation between Keirsey and socionics. The article, moreover, acknowledges that the study does not represent the definitive mapping between the typologies, and states the position that Keirsey typings are further from Socionics than MBTI typings.

Just maintain a neutral stance when analyzing this...
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
Just maintain a neutral stance when analyzing this...

Those are Kiersey Types*. We work with JCF here, for if we worked with Keirsey types, everything would be a lot easier.

*Old school E vs I, N vs S, T vs F, J vs P
 

infinite

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
565
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
~8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Easily. The j/p switch for introverts. Keep the extroverted types the same.

For example, INFj = INFP

No. That's a loose heuristics.

Assume there's an ISTP who tests ISTP by a dichotomy test and doesn't take a function test. Tests strong P in the official MBTI test (94 questions one, doesn't measure functions). Then same person tests as ISTp in socionics and discovers that he's indeed SiTe in that system. What gives?

This I've actually seen as an example somewhere.

There's no guarantee that someone who tests as an IxxP in an MBTI test will be an Ixxj in socionics.


Well you're wrong. Both systems are loosely based off of Jung's Psychological Types and descriptions of the functions. The Ni dominant in MBTI (INFJ) is the same as the Ni lead in Socionics (INFp).

"Loosely" is key word.


Yeah where does it say to swith j and p?

Nowhere officially :)
 

infinite

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
565
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
~8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Those are Kiersey Types*. We work with JCF here, for if we worked with Keirsey types, everything would be a lot easier.

*Old school E vs I, N vs S, T vs F, J vs P

Nonono. Dichotomies are official MBTI. The official MBTI test I've seen tests for those, not functions.

(There's functions too, of course, mentioned on the official MBTI website.)
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
Nonono. Dichotomies are official MBTI. The official MBTI test I've seen tests for those, not functions.

Exactly. Therefore, people who are actually discovering their true psychological type through Jung's cognitive functions like we do here should have a much higher correlation with their actual Socionics type than with the dichotomy based testing.
 

infinite

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
565
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
~8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Can we please keep this thread on topic for PoLR instead of making it an analysis of the entire system?

Well then tell me if I have Ne or Fi PoLR hahah... If you don't know then well I at least hope you liked the detailed descriptions (two pages back), even if one of them is just the Role function. :shrug:
 

infinite

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
565
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
~8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Exactly. Therefore, people who are actually discovering their true psychological type through Jung's cognitive functions like we do here should have a much higher correlation with their actual Socionics type than with the dichotomy based testing.

Perhaps better but it still isn't quite 100%. But yeah, we should discuss this in a different thread.
 

Alea_iacta_est

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
1,834
Perhaps better but it still isn't quite 100%. But yeah, we should discuss this in a different thread.

The problem lies in the fact that the only people who use actual JCF are typology forums, so whenever there is a MBTI correlation to another typology system, it is non-comparable to our situation due to the fact that their correlations concern how individuals test on dichotomy-based tests rather than cognitive function based test.

I'm not sure I have enough energy to debate this further anyways, with [MENTION=20531]yeghor[/MENTION] and me going at each others' throats since we apparently can't see eye to eye on each others' stances.
 
Top