[Fe] Extraverted feeling - I don't get it.

[phoenity]

they must be interchangable, because they are both applied to estp, and estp test as estp in both systems.
if they are not interchangeble, one of them must be untrue.

i dont know you, but for the isFp i know, i can tell, they dont have the same S that estp have, but they have Si

I see what you mean, but as to which is untrue I do not know.

See here: Sensing logical introvert - Wikisocion

Socionics states my preferences are Si/Te/Ne/Fi, while MBTI states that they are Ti/Se/Ni/Fe.

So one of them has to be incorrect, but in order to determine which one I need concrete definitions of Si/Se/Ti/Te/Ni/Ne/Fi/Fe, and I have not been able to find anything consistent.

 

[nanook]

i think you need a basic understanding of how carl jung used the terms introversion and extroversion. its a very abstract thing that has nothing to do with inside and outside. it only defines how we experience both.

if someone can visualize this abstract layer of *version, he can apply this pattern to the theory of mind, that arises when reading (written) thoughts or observing actions of real people. so in time the vivid understanding of functions will grow.

maybe you can derive this understanding from some of the definitions, that float around

oh here is some copy paste from my bookmarks folder
(especially the two boldfaced links):

player2000gi:
Insights into Consciousness & Personality - part 2
Insights into Consciousness & Personality
Fundamental Nature of the MBTI
Brain Hemisphere Specialization, Autism & Anosognosia.
Conclusions

lifexplore:
Lifexplore - Personality, Myers-Briggs, Enneagram, Tests, Type Descriptions, More
The Sixteen Myers-Briggs Types
Personality Tests
Myers-Brigg Intro
Enneagram Introduction
Jungian Function Theory


for me jungs original book was helpful.


definitions of functions are always just abstract reductions. they are not ever losslessly descriptive.
no one can explain the human mind in a lossless way. a definition in typology is only a signifier. it can point to vivid understanding, if understanding is available. it can inspire it as well. but not create it.

 

[phoenity]

i think you need a basic understanding of how carl jung used the terms introversion and extroversion. its a very abstract thing that has nothing to do with inside and outside. it only defines how we experience both.

if someone can visualize this abstract layer, he can apply the pattern to the theory of mind, that arises when reading (written) thoughts or observing actions of real people. so i time the vivid understanding of functions will grow.

maybe you can derive this understanding from some of the definitions, that float around

oh here is something copy paste from my bookmakrs
(especially the two boldfaced links):

Insights into Consciousness & Personality - part 2
Insights into Consciousness & Personality
Fundamental Nature of the MBTI
Brain Hemisphere Specialization, Autism & Anosognosia.
Conclusions
Lifexplore - Personality, Myers-Briggs, Enneagram, Tests, Type Descriptions, More
The Sixteen Myers-Briggs Types
Personality Tests
Myers-Brigg Intro
Enneagram Introduction
Jungian Function Theory


for me jungs original book was helpful.


definitions of functions are always just abstract reductions. they are not ever losses descriptive. no one can explain the human mind in a lossless way. a definition in typology is only a signifier. it can point to vivid understanding, if understanding is available. it can inspire it as well. but not create it.

That is correct - I realized last night after I posted that I did not have an understanding of what Jung originally meant by introversion and extroversion. I'll read up on it - thanks!