Hard
I won't disagree with the socionics test result, LSI seems to fit you pretty well, much more than EIE. And that enneagram 1-3-x thingie also does seem to. Based on the few posts I've read from you.
I don't know you IRL so maybe you're very different there, but here I just don't see you as a socionics
lead type. Leading
in socionics is about a lot more than just control over what emotions to share. It's about a certain skill and especially confidence in all
related aspects. Are you confident in affecting other people's emotions, moods etc and energizing them into action through arousing their passion? LSI would make people do something by a very different method than an EIE would.
As for MBTI I have no idea, MBTI Fe is obviously different from the socionics
. In MBTI I don't know either how Fe-doms exactly go about keeping control of the sharing of feelings other than it's adherence to some sort of social rules. But more than that, I can't really say what this is:
What kind of things? Yes this could be just Fe or it could be a T function dominating F function. You know yourself best so it would be interesting if you tried to analyse this further if you haven't yet. I'm certainly not going to guess without information about what's behind the stuff I quoted from you above.
On the surface your reasoning is reminiscent of how a friend of mine controls his emotions. He's a strong T type. But, as I said, these are not necessarily the same statements, only on the surface, I don't know what's behind it in your case.
I'm a bit lost there, you first say it's common for Fe doms to share their emotions but you don't share them? This stuff about being unwarranted or being unfair, why do you think it's unfair?
If it's a function you described here then definitely Fe-related. E1 through Fe? I dunno
They aren't entirely independent because they have the same subject, people. And obviously not independent if not all combinations are equally likely. But I do strongly agree about your conclusion, yes, the theories shouldn't be mixed up. They are indeed different theories and there is no fully consistent correlation between them exactly because they are different. Another better framework is required to make sense of the relations between the theories. If there's no such framework then yes best to treat them as entirely different.
Yep, MBTI Fe is more about social rules and socionics Fe is more about emotionality. Though in socionics Fe is still also about going with the group and emotions can and will still be used as a tool by Fe egos but at the same time they are indeed like the MBTI Fi types with less of an emotional filter, less sticking to a certain kind of appropriate behaviour/talking style/etc. It seems to me that both Ti and Fi in socionics are less subjective in the original jungian sense and that instead they are more about universal truths (Ti truths or Fi norms). (Introversion and extraversion in socionics is really just different from Jung or MBTI.) So then that would explain why it's Fi that tries to be appropriate and not Fe. Even though Fe is still regulated by the shared group goal, common shared *and* expressed emotionality of the group etc. It's just not static universal ethical truths/norms but dynamic role playing with emotions or something.
I'm sure edchidna1000 has a better way to explain all this though. This above is just what I know about socionics so far.