User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 36

  1. #11
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Enneagram
    8w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    LIE Ni
    Posts
    503

    Default

    I'm more shocked that combining them is still acceptable, especially when there is a J/P switch. I think it's best to use the systems separately, as they are intended to be. Also, it's best to learn Jung's Psychological Types so one can get a grasp on the basis of the theory and how Jung first perceived each type.
    Likes Zeego liked this post

  2. #12
    Mind Wanderer Zeego's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IxI Ni
    Posts
    392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by biohazard View Post
    Also, it's best to learn Jung's Psychological Types so one can get a grasp on the basis of the theory and how Jung first perceived each type.
    Yeah, when I read Chapter 10 for the first time I was taken off guard by just how different Jung's original functions were from both MBTI and Socionics, especially the Sensing functions.
    INTP
    ILI or IEI
    5w4 - 9w1 - 4w5 sp/sx
    MelPhleg

    Johari | Nohari

  3. #13
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Enneagram
    8w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    LIE Ni
    Posts
    503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeego View Post
    Yeah, when I read Chapter 10 for the first time I was taken off guard by just how different Jung's original functions were from both MBTI and Socionics, especially the Sensing functions.
    Yup! Nailed it!

    I notice that MBTI oversimplifies the definitions of them the most. But Jung treats them as one sole type. Whereas Socionics tries to create relationships and processes between them. I won't even start on the inconsistencies of the logic either. That's a whole 'nother complaint for me. 🤣
    Likes Zeego liked this post

  4. #14
    Senior Member erg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    None
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LIE Ni
    Posts
    293

    Default

    Not sure this can be done. Looking at both theories objetively and based on results, socionics would get the upper hand,. I started off with MBTI (this Lithuanian friend taught me the basics) and I used it for a long time. I could not pin myself to one single type using MBTI, but thanks to the functions I knew before I got into socionics what my preferences were (and I noticed something was wrong, because being Te Ni Se Fi, I could not relate to the ENTJ descriptions, nor did I score ENTJ in tests). The way I am hard-wired (as a LIE-Ni), I can't go around using two seperate theories for the same underlying phenomena, and I tested socionics to be the most accurate one, so I scrapped MBTI. MBTI is like playing pong, while socionics is like using a Playstation 4.
    Likes Zeego liked this post

  5. #15
    Mind Wanderer Zeego's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IxI Ni
    Posts
    392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erg View Post
    and I noticed something was wrong, because being Te Ni Se Fi, I could not relate to the ENTJ descriptions, nor did I score ENTJ in tests
    Just out of curiosity, what do you usually score in MBTI tests?
    INTP
    ILI or IEI
    5w4 - 9w1 - 4w5 sp/sx
    MelPhleg

    Johari | Nohari

  6. #16
    Senior Member erg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    None
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LIE Ni
    Posts
    293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeego View Post
    Just out of curiosity, what do you usually score in MBTI tests?
    INxx, most commonly INTJ though.
    Likes Zeego liked this post

  7. #17
    Junior Member DestroyTheSpineless's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Enneagram
    5
    Socionics
    ILI Te
    Posts
    29

    Default

    I think there is no possible way to compare the two systems. By far, I prefer Socionics. It's just a step forward. Socionics is more detailed, every type has a clear relationship with the 8 functions so it's also easier to get you typed. The most shocking difference is in the Se function, which in MBTI is defined like "living in the present, action" while in Socionics it's "force and power". Two completely different things. Due to this, I'm no longer trying to guess a Socionics type from the MBTI type.
    Likes Zeego liked this post

  8. #18
    Mind Wanderer Zeego's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IxI Ni
    Posts
    392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DestroyTheSpineless View Post
    The most shocking difference is in the Se function, which in MBTI is defined like "living in the present, action" while in Socionics it's "force and power". Two completely different things.
    Si is also very different between the systems, in part because MBTI has infused its version of Si with J traits by default (hence "SJ").
    INTP
    ILI or IEI
    5w4 - 9w1 - 4w5 sp/sx
    MelPhleg

    Johari | Nohari
    Likes DestroyTheSpineless liked this post

  9. #19
    Member Straylight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/so
    Socionics
    INTj Ne
    Posts
    48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bush Did 9/11 View Post
    They're trying to describe very similar things, but from different and incomplete perspectives. They could very well be pointing at the same things -- the same types -- but have some kinks to get worked out in their explanations. Those kinks cause the differences between their perspectives. We typically frame things in terms of how the models actually are at present, kinks and all, because otherwise it'd be difficult to discuss them (on account of no common ground of what JCFs are about). Until there's a Grand Unified Theory of typology, they're going to be different, and there's little choice but to roll with their differences.

    That is, they define things at least somewhat differently now, but they could very well be combined. Combining them can't be forced; it has to wait until there's a better understanding of what they're trying to get at.

    Kind of like how the different Abrahamic religions perceive God differently. Basically, there's a truth out there, and there are many different stabs at capturing it.


    eta: should say that I don't mean this as "well both are equally true"
    I agree completely with this response.

    I wish to add as well that at present I think there is too much subjectivity (yes, even for a soft-science) in both models, especially with Socionics. The dichotomies of MBTI are corroborated by research into the Big 5 to an extent, so there is a good deal of evidence to support the theory, and by extension this research can corroborate some of the descriptions and predictions of the so-called "Jungian foundation" tier 1 dichotomies in Socionics. However, since both models attempt to incorporate a theory of cognitive "functions" into their respective frameworks which has yet to be reconciled with discrepancies noted by many researchers and data sets that seem to run contrary to the predictions of function-based models, merging the two systems would be extremely problematic.

    It would be less problematic if Socionics were not so heavily invested into the concept of functions and were simplified to a dichotomy-based approach. However, socionics also has a different definition of each cognitive function compared to the definitions given for each function by MBTI. Some of these definitions are more in-line with and supportive of the evidence for certain basic dichotomies (I/E, T/F, S/N in particular). However, neither model clearly defines cognitive functions in a way that is categorically complicit with the evidence for dichotomies. Until this happens, I doubt either model will ever be compatible, or even very accurate.
    Formerly known as "Abraxas" on Personality Cafe, now retired.
    Likes Zeego, *avariel*, Agent Washington liked this post

  10. #20
    Senior Member sulfit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/so
    Posts
    495

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeego View Post
    how do you reconcile the fundamental differences in how the types and functions are defined between the systems?
    Some parts of functional descriptions are different, but then if you read descriptions of functions from MBTI authors and researchers, they also vary. Does this mean we need to invent an additional typological system for each person who comes up with yet another set of descriptions? That sounds like an absurd proposition.

    Furthermore, if you look at the very foundation of functions, which according to Jung is Perception vs. Judgement, at this level the functions are not defined any differently between the two systems:

    Sensing and Intuition are both considered to be Perception.
    Thinking and Feeling are both considered to be Judgement.

    This foundation is same for both typologies. From this point the burden of justification lies one anyone who types as dominant in Judging in one system and Perception in another. Since which elements are Judging and which are Perceiving is NOT defined any differently between Socionics and MBTI, it forms a contradiction to type yourself as both INTP (Ti dom) and Ni-IEI (Ni lead). Could you go over how is it that you've flipped intuition and logic for each other? Logic is logic in both Socionics and MBTI. Logic was never defined as Perception or Intuition.

Similar Threads

  1. Socionics vs MBTI
    By Azseroffs in forum Socionics
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 08-17-2019, 05:47 AM
  2. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 09-16-2013, 05:53 PM
  3. Understanding People with MBTI
    By Ravenetta in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 06-17-2009, 10:35 AM
  4. difficulty with MBTI tests
    By jnick1972 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-13-2008, 06:49 AM
  5. Is it reasonable to compare Socionics with MBTI?
    By Athenian200 in forum Socionics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-15-2007, 09:41 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