Apeironstella
New member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2022
- Messages
- 20
- Enneagram
- 5w4
- Instinctual Variant
- sx/sp
I'd say perceiving functions especially differ between both systems with MBTI Si being halfway to Socionics Ni, with MBTI Se being simplified to the point of being one step away from "being able to perceive things with your eyes+physically being active and present" actually?I prefer to adhere to MBTI definitions.
The only thing this table proves is that the two systems are not interchangable, at least not readily.
For instance Socionics Fe sounds like MBTI Fi and Socionics Fi sounds like MBTI Fe. Similarly Socionics T and MBTI T definitons seem to be reversed.
Ni and Ne seem more or less aligned.
MBTI Si makes great sense to me cause it represents traditions and cultural rules of good conduct internalized by a person, which also extends to any other experience recorded internally in sensory terms (i.e. information related to 5 senses). Socionics Si is not necessarily off the mark in that Si also relates to serenity in that Si is supressed Se meaning primal impulses being kept in check, calmness.
Likewise Socionics Se is not off the mark.
So I can say that when making a conversion from MBTI type to Socionics type, Se/Si and Ne/Ni can be kept the same whereas Fe/Fi and Te/Ti should be reversed.
For ESTP for instance, this would mean in MBTI Se-Ti-Fe-Ni, when converting that to socionics type, the function names should be changed as follows, Se-Te-Fi-Ni.
That's why I avoid socionics.
And I don't see why Socionics should rename things to comply with MBTI's descriptions of what functions is, frankly.
Both systems were developed independent of each other with very different goals, and Socionics information elements already have different names in use in Socionics circles as well.
And Ti is still the ability to create logical structures to scaffhold information in both systems, for it to be simply swapped to Te, especially when Socionics Te is about the concrete, objective logic in terms of being external.
And I don't see Fe and Fi that different in both systems, so much as what sides of it said element is focused on, really.
It's interesting to see how differently we perceive how functions are defined between systems, with which one we favor too, though.