Accurate Personality Test

[Venom]

contrary to what has been said in the last few post, there has been no indication that Socionics did not prescribe to cognitive functions, so I am unsure where a claim that being Fi-Ne under Socionics is the same as Ni Fe under MBTI. No it's not!

dude. you're wrong . ill even make it painfully easy for you:

Fi is responsible for understanding the quality, nature, and proper maintenance of personal relations; makes moral judgments; and aspires to humanism and kindness. Fi has a strong understanding of the social hierarchy and how people feel about each other, their attitudes of like or dislike, enthrallment or disgust, repulsion or attraction, enmity or friendship.

Ne is responsible for understanding the essence (permanent traits) of a thing, estimating opportunities and possibilities for people and things, and visualizing potential outcomes of events. It is responsible for the sense of interest or boredom. Ne will speculate as to why an event occurs, but sees the specific event as static and unalterable.

Ni -- Introverted Intuition (not Nickel, which I know is what you thought). Allows you to see ideas from different perspectives, as well as have unusual insights or hunches that are often useful. And for the last time, it does NOT make you psychic (normally). {ie: it can be a process of predicting outcomes}

Fe -- Extraverted Feeling. Hello everyone, this is the function that observes commonly held social rules and pleasantries, and is very concerned with the welfare of the group. {I will add in that on a less superficial leve, Fe seems to pick up on the emotional vibe "of the room".} If you don't have this function, then you're a rude person, and I don't want to be seen with you.

Now do you see?

 

[Nat]

How strange.... I did this test again and got INFJ. I think the only thing I changed was answer 'sometimes' to more questions that I gave a clearer answer to last time.

The hell are you talking about? It says "accurate" right in the title!

Well then it must be accurate!

 

["?"]

dude. you're wrong . ill even make it painfully easy for you:

Originally Posted by socionics FiNe Fi is responsible for understanding the quality, nature, and proper maintenance of personal relations; makes moral judgments; and aspires to humanism and kindness. Fi has a strong understanding of the social hierarchy and how people feel about each other, their attitudes of like or dislike, enthrallment or disgust, repulsion or attraction, enmity or friendship.Ne is responsible for understanding the essence (permanent traits) of a thing, estimating opportunities and possibilities for people and things, and visualizing potential outcomes of events. It is responsible for the sense of interest or boredom. Ne will speculate as to why an event occurs, but sees the specific event as static and unalterable.

Uh dude you’re wrong.

Fi-Ne under MBTI:

Introverted Feeling: Valuing; considering importance and worth; reviewing for incongruity; evaluating something based on the truths on which it is based; clarifying values to achieve accord; deciding if something is of significance and worth standing up for. Evaluating whether you like an outfit or not: “This outfit suits me and feels right.”

Extraverted iNtuiting: Interpreting situations and relationships; picking up meanings and interconnections; being drawn to change “what is” for “what could possibly be”; noticing what is not said and threads of meaning emerging across multiple contexts. Noticing the possible meanings of what you might wear: “Wearing this might communicate…”

I am unsure where you are getting your references to the Socionics descriptions, however if you post them Ni-Fe of each system side-by-side, you will painfully see that Ni-Fe and Fe-Ne under either system (as long as Socionics continues to refer to Jung) will be the same. Unless you are making them up as you go, there is no difference.

Now do you see?

What I see is a half witted attempt at a shell game. You do not compare MBTI/Socionics side-by-side. The problem with any attempts to write test to determine type in Socionics is that you continue to write the questions with dichotomies from MBTI in mind instead of writing them to result in the three letter codes of Socionics (SLI, LIE, etc.)Your argument is pointless as long as you refer to cognitive functions and the four letter codes of MBTI since Socionics refers to Jung. Now do you see? We have been through this argument with others before you and you provide nothing different.

 

[JRT]

ISTP

ISTPs are quiet and reserved, interested in how and why things work. Excellent skills with mechanical things. Risk-takers who live for the moment. Usually interested in and talented at extreme sports. Uncomplicated in their desires. Loyal to their peers and to their internal value systems, but not overly concerned with respecting laws and rules if they get in the way of getting something done. Detached and analytical, they excel at finding solutions to practical problems.


meh I must be across between ISTP and ISFP

 

[Eileen]

The hell are you talking about? It says "accurate" right in the title!

kind of like... oh, what was it...? fail safe?

 

[Venom]

Uh dude you’re wrong.

Fi-Ne under MBTI:I am unsure where you are getting your references to the Socionics descriptions, however if you post them Ni-Fe of each system side-by-side, you will painfully see that Ni-Fe and Fe-Ne under either system (as long as Socionics continues to refer to Jung) will be the same. Unless you are making them up as you go, there is no difference.
What I see is a half witted attempt at a shell game. You do not compare MBTI/Socionics side-by-side. The problem with any attempts to write test to determine type in Socionics is that you continue to write the questions with dichotomies from MBTI in mind instead of writing them to result in the three letter codes of Socionics (SLI, LIE, etc.)Your argument is pointless as long as you refer to cognitive functions and the four letter codes of MBTI since Socionics refers to Jung. Now do you see? We have been through this argument with others before you and you provide nothing different.

i will be away from my computer for the next three days. I will respond when I return. My main point is that if you're INFJ and yet think you're INFp in socionics...you screwed up somewhere in typing yourself. I know you disagree with that statement. I will provide further argument when I return.

 

[Spartacuss]

I got INTJ.

 

[Jack Flak]

i will be away from my computer for the next three days. I will respond when I return. My main point is that if you're INFJ and yet think you're INFp in socionics...you screwed up somewhere in typing yourself. I know you disagree with that statement. I will provide further argument when I return.

Yes, that's right. Question mark is notoriously, habitually blind to reason and cold hard observable facts.

You hear that, Question mark? People don't type themselves using Jung's descriptions of functions and nothing else. They don't read his description of Introverted Feeling and say "I'll be damned, I must be INFJ!" You don't hear me though, do you.

kind of like... oh, what was it...? fail safe?

That was in reference to something other than the general viability of the test, you know.

 

["?"]

i will be away from my computer for the next three days. I will respond when I return. My main point is that if you're INFJ and yet think you're INFp in socionics...you screwed up somewhere in typing yourself. I know you disagree with that statement. I will provide further argument when I return.

No need to provide an argument unless you are going to show viable references of facts. The fact is that Socionics uses the same cognitive functions created by Jung. The difference is that when Socionics focuses on the four letter codes from MBTI, they believe that the final code is a small j/p letter giving homage to the rational/irrationaldominant function, regardless of whether its extraverted or introverted. I have no problem with that argument, in fact in reading Jung's work I would surmise that he would most likely have considered Socionics’ theory since contrary to Myers-Briggs opinion, he does recognize and believe that the dominant introverted function of any type is as recognizable as extraverted functions. Now if I have that wrong, point me to a site that shows different. Otherwise subjective opinions are all that is being given in this discussion. In the end and as I have said regarding your threads here and at INTPc, if you really want to do Socionics justice, stop writing questions with MBTI codes in mind and focus on the three letter codes of Socionics. By the way, I relate more to Maxim (LSI) than Gaben (SLI) in Socionics, ergo I would be ISTj, not ISTp, because I dominate with Ti not Si.

 

[Apollanaut]

You are the INFJ

It got me right, even though I was sure I'd get a different result!

 

[527468]

No need to provide an argument unless you are going to show viable references of facts. The fact is that Socionics uses the same cognitive functions created by Jung. The difference is that when Socionics focuses on the four letter codes from MBTI, they believe that the final code is a small j/p letter giving homage to the rational/irrationaldominant function, regardless of whether its extraverted or introverted. I have no problem with that argument, in fact in reading Jung's work I would surmise that he would most likely have considered Socionics’ theory since contrary to Myers-Briggs opinion, he does recognize and believe that the dominant introverted function of any type is as recognizable as extraverted functions. Now if I have that wrong, point me to a site that shows different. Otherwise subjective opinions are all that is being given in this discussion. In the end and as I have said regarding your threads here and at INTPc, if you really want to do Socionics justice, stop writing questions with MBTI codes in mind and focus on the three letter codes of Socionics. By the way, I relate more to Maxim (LSI) than Gaben (SLI) in Socionics, ergo I would be ISTj, not ISTp, because I dominate with Ti not Si.

Nonetheless, you may be missing the point, because "Te" in socionics claims to be partly what MBTI "Ti" is, thus socionics believes that MBTI applies a bit of false reasoning.

A socionics theorist might conclude that you are an ISTp, if you have been tested ISTP, because what is applied to MBTI "Ti" has been more reasonably explained as socionics "Te," being a creative function as well as an extroverted function. So most basically ISTP and ISTp are the same type, but ISTp happens to have clearer definition backing it up as well as its relation to other types.

You are not automatically an ISTj if an ISTP that you claim to always have dominant Ti, because Ti (introverted thinking) is of an older branch of theory than white square (introverted thinking.) This explanation may seem a bit gilded though it is simply theory, and it so happens to be the theory of socionics.

 

[Nonsensical]

INFP- and great test, I must add..it really asked in depth questions, and not generalities, like most MBTI sorters..it was easy to take, and didn't require a lot of hard decision making.

 

[Orangey]

INFP- and great test, I must add..it really asked in depth questions, and not generalities, like most MBTI sorters..it was easy to take, and didn't require a lot of hard decision making.

Did we take the same test? I spent like ten minutes trying to figure out what the hell these even meant...

Learning comes quickly to you, and you like to take action immediately

You seek out activities where people are totally engaged in what they are doing

You tend to promote your thinking as it is essential to your well being and sense of inner peace

You don't give in to the pressure of what others think unless you can't get the desired results

Something like half of the other questions were ones that you see on all of the type sorter tests, like these...

You focus on what is immediate, practical and real

You like logic and tend to pursue things in a clear sequence

You usually plan your actions in advance

You frequently and easily express your feelings and emotions

You easily see the general principle behind specific occurrences

You believe the best decision is one that can be easily changed

You value justice higher than mercy

I mean, not to be an asshole or anything...but the only thing especially different about this test is that there are fifteen or so "tricky" questions. And these are only "tricky" insofar as they are difficult to understand from a simple semantic viewpoint. And it manages to work the generalities just as well as any other test out there, so let's not get carried away with the praise here.

 

[sade]

You are the
INFJ

INFJs are quietly forceful, original, and sensitive. Tend to stick to things until they are done. Extremely intuitive about people, and concerned for their feelings. Well-developed value systems which they strictly adhere to. Well-respected for their perserverence in doing the right thing. Likely to be individualistic, rather than leading or following.

Like Apollanaut I felt I was going to get something very different, but actually got my type.
That aside, I liked it very much.

 

[Kasper]

Did we take the same test? I spent like ten minutes trying to figure out what the hell these even meant...

Something like half of the other questions were ones that you see on all of the type sorter tests, like these...

I mean, not to be an asshole or anything...but the only thing especially different about this test is that there are fifteen or so "tricky" questions. And these are only "tricky" insofar as they are difficult to understand from a simple semantic viewpoint. And it manages to work the generalities just as well as any other test out there, so let's not get carried away with the praise here.

Agree, the wording of the questions seemed overcomplicated, there were several I had to take a moment to work out what the hell they even meant.

Struggle to see the improved accuracy from other tests as well as so many people are getting E/I mixed up and then some, but yes, I know, I know, they must be mistyped!

 

["?"]

Nonetheless, you may be missing the point, because "Te" in socionics claims to be partly what MBTI "Ti" is, thus socionics believes that MBTI applies a bit of false reasoning.

A socionics theorist might conclude that you are an ISTp, if you have been tested ISTP, because what is applied to MBTI "Ti" has been more reasonably explained as socionics "Te," being a creative function as well as an extroverted function. So most basically ISTP and ISTp are the same type, but ISTp happens to have clearer definition backing it up as well as its relation to other types.

You are not automatically an ISTj if an ISTP that you claim to always have dominant Ti, because Ti (introverted thinking) is of an older branch of theory than white square (introverted thinking.) This explanation may seem a bit gilded though it is simply theory, and it so happens to be the theory of socionics.

You are discussing hypotheticals. If what you are saying is true (which forgive me but I am not taking your word for it without evidence) then Socionics cannot say they follow Jung. Either they do (which he makes clear distinctions between Te and Ti) or they don't. Don't speak in approximates when this is easily determined if you have evidence of what you're proposing Lemon. I am not missing a point since you are so far only provided an opinion and interpretation but nothing factual.

 

["?"]

Look all of you who are making arguments for Socionics here. Can any one of you provide references or facts to back up any claims? I have no problem (which I did in post #109) providing information to at least allow the forum to review to make their own decision. If you cannot, then admit every argument being made is an opinion and personal theory.

 

[INA]

You are the
ENTP

ENTPs are creative, resourceful, and intellectually quick. Good at a broad range of things. Enjoy debating issues, and may be into "one-up-manship". They get very excited about new ideas and projects, but may neglect the more routine aspects of life. Generally outspoken and assertive. They enjoy people and are stimulating company. Excellent ability to understand concepts and apply logic to find solutions.​

---

This again

 

[Jack Flak]

Look all of you who are making arguments for Socionics here. Can any one of you provide references or facts to back up any claims? I have no problem (which I did in post #109) providing information to at least allow the forum to review to make their own decision. If you cannot, then admit every argument being made is an opinion and personal theory.

No you look. You can't make that argument, because it's all theory. Theory against theory. Whichever makes more sense wins, and Socionics theory makes more sense than MBTI theory, if for no other reason than J/P actually match up to the damn primary functions.

 

[wildcat]

I developed this 41 question test with many variables in mind. I took into account theories on temperament, preference, and the functions. The fact that this test has many variables indicates that it is quite an accurate and reasonable personality test. I have seen complaints about personality tests because they miss out on significant defining questions from different categories of theory, thus leading to its inaccuracy. If you are unsure about your personality type or want to give testing another try, this test will prove very accurate. I put a lot of thought into sorting every personality type when designing this and a select few questions have been recycled from other tests. This test has had astonishingly influential mind-changing results with the original sample of people and it gives much insight to personality types. It has been recommended by the majority of its takers and many have said they have realized their type for the first time though this tool, after other tests have resulted otherwise.

Take TypeSorter to find out your personality type.

For once a test where you did not need to think what is meant.
INTP