Socionics vs. MBTI -- not so different in the end!

[maliafee]

OK. So I don't know MUCH about the differences in the fuctions of the socionics types versus the corresponding MBTI types. I do know that I've heard that, for instance, if you are an INFJ in MBTI, you would likely be an INFp in socionics. But I don't think that's right. Aren't the functions interpreted differently in each system? Also, haven't you noticed that ISFPs are like ISFps, not ISFjs, and so forth?

Who else is with me?

 

[527468]

I think socionics gets the terms introverted and extroverted mixed up when they name their functions. In any case it's all relative. MBTI is just more convenient.

 

[D'Artagnan]

The confusion that arises when the two systems are compared is caused by their completely different understanding of the functions.

If we look at the ISFP and SEI/ISFp they are both described as artistic, peaceable, in touch with their physical environment and with the feelings of others. For MBTI the focus is on the archetype while in socionics somebody's 'type' is merely a product of their functions. My personal preference is for socionics but I do not feel it is my place to tell others which system is right (How very un-ENTP of me :rolli: ).

When having discussions on this board I find it doesn't really matter which system is being used. If I convey irritation of my SEI gf and her hedonistic procrastination then others can relate ISFPs with the same behaviour cry: followed by all sharing a group hug ). In the end it boils to whether you wish to use functions or personality traits to compare types.

In MBTI:

ISFP = Fi, Se, Ni, Te

ISFJ = Si, Fe, Ti, Ne

While in Socionics:

SEI/ISFp = Si, Fe, Ne, Ti

ESI/ISFj = Fi, Se, Te, Ni

For a decent breakdown of information elements and functions check out Wikisocion home - Wikisocion

 

[wolfy]

I can relate to the Socionics ISFP and the descriptions. The functions are described differently so the different combinations make sense.

 

[Ezra]

The best policy when you come to socionics is to throw away any conception about typologies and start anew. When I discovered socionics two years ago, I spent the first two months wasting time explaining that because I was an ENTJ, I must be an LIE. This is not the case. I am actually an SLE in socionics. There are a lot of INTPs who think they're ILIs in socionics, and often they're merely fitting the male stereotype of an IEI. In MBTI, the ESFP is not a commanding figure, at all. In fact, Se has nothing to do with any kind of command. In socionics, commanding takes a great role in Se. For example, Caesar was an SEE, and a lot of great commanders have been SLEs (both of these types have Se as their base function. Anyway, you can see how they are so different, and why you should discard any MBTI-related notions when looking at socionics.

Generally, I prefer socionics because I feel it has more practical value; it is based on a well thought out system of intertype relations. Nonetheless, I still enjoy studying MBTI and Keirsey.

 

[527468]

While in Socionics:

SEI/ISFp = Si, Fe, Ti, Ne

ESI/ISFj = Fi, Se, Ni, Te

No, rather in Socionics, each function has a unique disposition. There is less mathematical reasoning of functions and simply more definition.

There is no order of usage, rather implied when one doesn't use the first function, he uses the third. One is pleased by the fifth and one realizes problems with the sixth function. One supposedly creates and reflects with their second. Conceptual yet nominal.

Technically the order they try to give is

SEI/ISFp = Si, Fe, Ni, Te

ESI/ISFj = Fi, Se, Ti, Ne

But I'm no socionicist

I believe Socionics is quite limited in the knowledge that every type is incompletely conceivable. It is designed for those who can't accept truth thus rather accept some personal understanding. There is no proof of negative connotation which is why I am not omitting it, but I'd rather not spend time studying what I think as useless at this moment.

What I really think the socionicists are doing ineffectively is defining sixteen types out of say a hundred possible types, and expecting people to fit into one of them. They're setting themselves up for future complication, and more inevitably a lack of feedback. Soon most people will begin to realize how similar all the functions are to one another, and that the socionicists are just rewriting profiles without any validity of structure.

Though, keep the conversations rolling. I don't mind listening.

 

[garbage]

I spent the first two months wasting time explaining that because I was an ENTJ, I must be an LIE. This is not the case. I am actually an SLE in socionics.

Yeah, this is true.. there's a correlation between MBTI and socionics types, but it's not a definite relation. While LIE is a good fit for me (along with ILE), a lot of ENTJs even resonate more with LII.

..in a Google search for the correlation, I stumbled upon one of your threads.. the tables there are pretty telling.

 

[maliafee]

This is so interesting. Talk to me about a possible 100 types, Lemons!?

 

[Magic Poriferan]

This is so interesting. Talk to me about a possible 100 types, Lemons!?

I don't know what lemons means, but I do know that if you did not force the order in anyway, including all 8 processes, there'd be 40320 permutations. A lot more than hundreds, eh?

However, there are some explanations for why we don't do that.

 

[Glycerine]

How to convert MBTI® type to Socionics type
This might help.

 

[maliafee]

Oh dear, IDK123, you do know who you're talking to, right? I'd have to have a lot of mental energy to get through an article like that... Hehe...

It's true, but what's also true is that I read that before. I already forgot everything.

 

[527468]

When I say 100 types, I refer to a contingency for specificness. They are provoking complication. Where the MBTI has grasp of the boundaries of personality in its constructed form, Socionics does not bracket its similarities. It is extravagant.

 

[D'Artagnan]

No, rather in Socionics, each function has a unique disposition. There is less mathematical reasoning of functions and simply more definition.

I would respectfully disagree but I'm not exactly sure of what you're trying to say. Function in Socionics refers to the order of preference (e.g. Leading function, Creative function etc.) while Information element refers to the 'objective' mental processes (e.g. Ti, Se etc.). I'll assume you're using the MBTI definition of function but apologise in advance if this is not the case

Mathematical reasoning? Are we looking for formulas? I'm not sure if I've ever thought about psychology, philosophy or even one's personality in this way before (if L = love received and S = self-worth then... ). Socionic's premise is that everyone uses every information element, but with a greater or lesser proficiency. Proficiency with a certain element automatically determines how you other connected elements.

For example, as an ILE (ENTP) I use my Ne near constantly to imagine unusual possibilities and day dream about the potential of the unknown. Thus when it comes to using Se (which is in direct competition with Ne) I find it very difficult to get things finished just because they need to be, finding myself procrastinating and going off and doing something else less rigid (curse you Se! ). For me this a perfect illustration of formal logic and its where Socionics really shines.

There is no order of usage, rather implied when one doesn't use the first function, he uses the third. One is pleased by the fifth and one realizes problems with the sixth function. One supposedly creates and reflects with their second. Conceptual yet nominal.

Lies! Slander!
Socionics is all about preference of usage and how each Function makes up a distinct part of our personality. Its not really as simple as 1st trumps 3rd, or that any Function can be summed up in one word (they're mere labels). The interweb decrees it! (If you're interested check it out here Functions - Wikisocion)

While in Socionics:

SEI/ISFp = Si, Fe, Ti, Ne

ESI/ISFj = Fi, Se, Ni, Te

Technically the order they try to give is

SEI/ISFp = Si, Fe, Ni, Te

ESI/ISFj = Fi, Se, Ti, Ne

But I'm no socionicist

Whoops! My bad (one hasty edit later) I mixed up the 5th and 6th functions, please don't sacrifice me to your god
Didn't really want to get into this one, but as stated earlier Socionics considers all eight Information Elements relevant to one's type. However, for simplicity and brevity, standard notation is to list the Ego functions (1st, 2nd) followed by Super-Id functions (5th, 6th).

I believe Socionics is quite limited in the knowledge that every type is incompletely conceivable. It is designed for those who can't accept truth thus rather accept some personal understanding.

Pretentious much? Got a pamphlet and a place to sign up so I can receive this 'truth'? Nah, I'm just joshing you

There is no proof of negative connotation which is why I am not omitting it, but I'd rather not spend time studying what I think as useless at this moment.

Go you double negative! Whatever floats your boat I am happy to let others reach their own conclusions and enjoy life to their own choosing. Mahalo.

What I really think the socionicists are doing ineffectively is defining sixteen types out of say a hundred possible types, and expecting people to fit into one of them. They're setting themselves up for future complication, and more inevitably a lack of feedback.

Are we talking about MBTI or Socionics (or both)? Secretly though, I share your concern with this criminal lack of efficiency and yet nobody takes me seriously! Well, we'll see who they come running to when their world falls apart...

Soon most people will begin to realize how similar all the functions are to one another, and that the socionicists are just rewriting profiles without any validity of structure.

Viva La Revolucion!
I think the great thing about MBTI and Socionics is that they in fact show how similar we are all are. By analyzing the small differences between us we can learn that though someone may think differently from you, we are all essential human

Though, keep the conversations rolling. I don't mind listening.

Your munificence knows no bounds

 

[snegledmaca]

Comparison of MBTI and Socionics

For a decent breakdown of information elements and functions check out Wikisocion home - Wikisocion

I would along with wikisocion recommend Rick DeLong other project, his socionics blog. It has lot's of interesting articles on socionics. If anybody is interested.

 

[D'Artagnan]

^ ^

Great, many thanks!

I've inadvertently checked out Rick's blog before, but didn't realize he was involved with wikisocion. I'm a big fan of how relaxed and unpretentious wikisocion is and will definitely have check his blog out (if only for a refreshing view of socionics). Rick seems like a friendly guy with a good sense of humour - two things that can never be overated

The Socionist: The Socionics 'Game'

 

[entropie]

I found another different approach to the function system from Socionics PoV. This makes some functions more graspable and understandable but narrows their impact radius down on the other hand:

Se = sensation of volition, under which it understands the outer abilities of objects, forms and colors, aswell as strength of will and energy

Si = sensation of senses, whereby it sums up the perception of health, the taste of meals or the sensation of sexuality

Ne = probabilty intuition, what is the ability to see the basics or the potential

Ni = time intuition, whereby informations are summed up on a time axis, which allows future planning

Te = Activity Logik, which deals with an encyclopedic knowledge and aspects of moneymaking

Ti = Structure Logik, which deals with the development of unambiguous theorethical systems or statements

Fe = Emotion Ethics, deals with the ability to develop morales and emotions

Fi = Relation Ethics, which deals mainly with the emotions of cohabitation, what compasses things like sympathy or antipathy.

-------------

At first glance that sounds quiete weirdo and things like time intuition, I havent grasped fully yet, to understand whats meant by it.

To me its one of the first systems that ventures deeper into things and doesnt stop with superficial evaluations of like all leading Ne people are idea people. Because the socionics system deals with all 8th functions in all types and therefore naturally makes more sense.

Like the antic statement from mbticentral stated, why should a Ti be bad at Te and vice versa ?!

 

[Eric B]

What Socionics did made sense, as far as trying to make the last letters represent dominance rather than extraversion. But for them to remove the J/P and then put them back with new meanings causes a lot of confusion (when I see someone's code with the lowercase j/p, I don't know if they're using Socionics, or they're just uncertain of that preference, which is what that means elsewhere).
What they should have done is use different letters. Instead of "J", use "R" for Jung's "rational" and then another letter/word for "irrational".

 

[Lady_X]

that's interesting entropie...apparently some test thinks my si is completely unused...i'm thinking this is no good.

 

[jezroué]

Well, we'll see who they come running to when their world falls apart...

Awww. You're as eloquent as an Italian ENTp buddy I have.

I've found many posts where INTPs for some reason or another immediately denounce Socionics. It's strange. I believe they're happy with "discovering" something and make it their own. Any second "discoveries" aren't permitted because their first is their baby : )

 

[INTP]

if i remember right, socionics is based more on how the person behaves, while mbti is about how the person thinks. also those socionics descriptions have some aspects on physical structures that are total bullshit, like face structure etc.

in most cases this would translate to mbti INTP

INTjs have a characteristic ascetic face. There are two reason for this. Firstly the facial structure itself is often reminiscent of ancient portraits because of its angularity and composition of the features, like cheekbone and eyebrow arcs. Secondly their facial expression is often accepted as emotionless and severe. Their face is usually pale or bloodless. Males often have a short haircut.

In many cases INTjs are slim. Their stomach is usually placed ahead of the chest giving them their characteristic posture. Their gait is somewhat unsure, wavering slightly. Sometimes it seems like they are not sure where they are going. This becomes more obvious in moments of excitement.

as you can see most of this kind of speculation is totally ridiculous.

the truth is that both of these system leave out many things from personality that effect the persons behavior, like how the person was raised etc. since these things are left out, its really hard and really limited to talk about behavior based on this typology, because of this socionics kinda fails.

i dont think socionics is totally crap tho, how could it be since it has so much similarities with mbti ?