Jarno

"Ni dominant people are always on time."

Indeed a misconception. Intuition in time has to do with knowledge about cause and effect.
It has nothing to do with looking at your watch the whole day.

I would even claim the contrary of this statement because of their day dreaming: "Ni dominant people are always late."

I once went to an INTP meeting for 4 people,
the first was 10 minutes late,
the second half hour,
the third missed his train,
the fourth called the next day, he had forgotten the whole meeting...

__________________
ILI -Te

Jonathan

This is a great point, and really gets the heart of where misconceptions come from and how to overcome from. The key words are "if the person's favorite kind of ... is..."

For my part, I love relaxing and having fun; however, I think posting on this forum or looking something up on Wikipedia is relaxing. Writing a story about people on the beach would be relaxing.

But actually spending two weeks on a beach doing nothing would be the most boring, stupidest waste of time that I could possibly imagine (although walking on the beach and coming up with great philosophical insights while doing so is worthwhile).

Jarno

another misconception:

- Introverts don't talk
- Extraverts talk all the time


Introverts do talk. And sometimes even more then an Extravert.
Extraverts can be withdrawn or shy (in big groups).

The most difficult to notice a difference is probably in the following two types.
ISFJ's are known to talk in great detail what they have experienced.
ESFJ's are known to be shy sometimes and say few words.

Remember, (as defined by Jung):
introversm means you are more aware of your own subjective opinion about an object in the world
extraversm means you are more aware of your relation between yourself as a person to an object in the world

I don't know if Socionics uses an other definition...

__________________
ILI -Te

Creepy-niffweed17

precisely.

Jonathan

A few more:

"That person acted like a jerk to me. He must be my conflictor."
"It's easy to find who's your conflictor, super ego, and other 'trouble' relations. They're the people you despise on first sight."
"I have a great relationship with my spouse/sig-other,etc. Therefore we must be duals! Therefore, since she's this type, that means that I'm this other type."

Reality: people often seek acceptance by the supervisor type and other people who represent their PoLR.
A great relationship doesn't mean you're duals.
Being a jerk is being a jerk; and a person who's nice may still be your conflictor relation.
Friendships do not always work on standard Socionic lines, although Socionic conflict means a potential for some conflicts.

thehotelambush

Absolutely. More accurate is that great long-term relationships are likely to be intra-quadra. That's about it.

There is a widespread tendency in Socionics to assume that famous people only freely marry/associate within their quadra.

Jonathan

Yes, that's a great point. Even experienced Socionists seem to go down that path. I think who a person's friends are is corroborating evidence for type, but by no means conclusive.

Here's another biggie:

"That person shows a lot of . Therefore, he's ILI."

Somehow, people assume that if someone has a function as a quadra value, then that means the person displays that function prominently. It could be true sometimes, more often not. A great example of how Ni types value Se is depicted in the relationship between Rocky and Adrian. Note that Adrian doesn't demonstrate an awful lot of Se, but she still likes Rocky.

thehotelambush

Along the same lines:

And my own personal variation:

"This person is an idiot, and therefore my supervisee."

(most prevalent among logical types )

machintruc

[web:ec6d8ab661]http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ru_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww. socionika.info%2ferrors.html[/web:ec6d8ab661]

These are important socionics misconceptions.

machintruc

[web:ec6d8ab661]http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ru_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww. socionika.info%2ferrors.html[/web:ec6d8ab661]

These are important socionics misconceptions.

Jonathan

I touched on this in the Niffweed thread, but I think the basic observation belongs here too:

Myth: Alphas are the great idea generators who are highly accepting of unusual ideas; Gammas criticize and shoot down ideas on the basis of them being unconventional and going against the norm.

A more accurate revision is:
* Alphas criticize ideas when they suspect that they stem from systemmic misunderstanding (i.e., they question if the person who came up with idea really understands).
*Gammas criticize ideas when they suspect that they're not the best or most effective way to go about something, or if they don't think they're useful (i.e., they question if the person who came up with the idea is going in the right direction or implementing it properly).
* Ability to come up with a lot of ideas that are useful to society is more related to intelligence, overall creativity, and other abilities than it is to type.

Unfortunately, the myth version appears to be deeply embedded in Socionics literature.

thehotelambush

Looking at it totally objectively, you're correct.

However, it's helpful to examine both the positive and negative aspects of types, especially as they appear through the lens of good or bad relationships. We're only human, after all.

Jonathan

A common misconception that has come up a lot lately: The idea that people in a given quadra, especially duals or mirrors, are "basically the same type." This idea probably comes from the fact that people, in their work, often give some sort of special attention to their super id block, which makes it hard for the typist to tell which functions are ego block, and which are super id. Also, some highly successful people seem to be good at so many things within their quadra, it can mask their types.

However, duals are not almost the same. They're both really confident at what the other is not confident (or is even downright terrible) at. That's a big difference.

Mirror types are also sharply opposed in terms of the directionality (creative vs. accepting function) of the ego block.

Parkster

All ISTp's are car mechanics.

__________________

Elro

Definitely a misconception. Some are plumbers instead.

__________________

Alternate Socionics Forum:
The Socionics Workshop

Taking break from posting, e-mail or PM to contact.

lefty

7) Duality is not some sort of "mystical experience" as some descriptions sometimes may suggest. Your dual is simply someone whose company, by temperament and functional preferences, is most comfortable for you, since your dual appreciates and needs precisely what you regard as your strengths and is most happy to help you and support you precisely in those areas you most appreciate it. However, you may still not get along with your dual if s/he is your boss, your rival, your superior officer, your teacher, someone of a very different culture, etc.[/QUOTE]


********************
yeah well youre not a soulmate youre a mindmate so you have to speak for yourself. some people might find duality to be mystical and what the hell is wrong with thinking that way anyway?

__________________
Lefty
ENFJ

"I'm Sick of Old Men Dreaming Up Wars for Young Men To Die In," George McGovern.

BulletsAndDoves

This isn't what people meant. We're just saying that duals seem extremely similiar to each other when you put them in a group of people. They *appear* to be the same type and behave as Identicals. That is why you ignore your dual, and why they pleasantly surprise you over time.

Mirrors are basically the same internally, but externally have different lifestyles. So that's why they get along. An EIE would get acting ideas from an IEI's writing, and vice versa.

Yes you made that post in February. It's now October. But I'm bored.

Kirana

or both.