View Poll Results: How often do you think MBTI types correlate with Socionic Types?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • 60% of the time

    6 17.14%
  • 70% of the time

    7 20.00%
  • 80% of the time

    1 2.86%
  • 90% of the time

    3 8.57%
  • All the time

    3 8.57%
  • 50% of the time

    3 8.57%
  • 40% of the time

    2 5.71%
  • 30% of the time

    4 11.43%
  • 20% of the time

    1 2.86%
  • 10% of the time

    2 5.71%
  • Never

    3 8.57%
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 175

Thread: How often do MBTI types correlate with Socionic Types?

  1. #1
    Suomea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    TIM
    ILE-Ti
    Posts
    1,054
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default How often do MBTI types correlate with Socionic Types?

    ??????
    Suomea

  2. #2
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Technically, they don't. I am ENTJ and SLE (ESTp).

    But I'm beginning to doubt my types.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    I am ENTJ and SLE (ESTp).
    You are not. Maybe you get the result ENTJ on MBTI tests. But that result might be incorrect. Or you are not an SLE.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    But I'm beginning to doubt my types.
    Good. You should. At lest one of them is incorrect.

  4. #4
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thank you Phaedrus. I was waiting for a post like that. Now, tell me, if I am definitely ENTJ in MBTI, what options does that leave socionics-wise?
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  5. #5
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ezra, please don't get this blowhard going again. You'll never hear sense from him.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  6. #6
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    it's better to blow well than to blow hard

  7. #7
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's complicated because the preference orders for MBTI are different. So even though an SLI (just as an example) may correlate to ISTP, it isn't the same animal.

    SLI = Si, Te, Ni, Fe
    ISTP = Ti, Se, Ni, Fe

    It is not the same--the first two functions are completely reversed.

    However there is more similarily with extrovertive types...

    EIE = Fe, Ni, Te, Si
    ENFJ = Fe, Ni, Se, Ti

    Here the second two functions are reversed.

    I think that most MBTI-like tests are heavy on the 1st two functions, so since in introvertive types those are reversed between Socioncis and MBTI, most MBTI tests are likely give introverts a result that doesn't match their Socionics type. On the other hand, I think that MBTI-ish tests and Socionics may come to similar results with extroverted types because the first two functions are at least the same. I realize there are some holes in this idea of mine... So I sort of thought that there would be about a 60% match between the Socionics type and the MBTI type.

    I also don't know if MBTI-like tests define the functions in the same way... So they may be getting at different definitions/ideas of the functions themselves. Also it seems most of these tests aren't very interconnective... they neglect any larger picture instead focusing on question to distinguish N from S, or J from P, or... Making it black and white like that may not help.

    So my MBTI type tends to be INFP, but my Socionics type tends to be INTP. One cannot be both. I think that all models for understanding people break down at some point however, so it matters not in the end.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    Now, tell me, if I am definitely ENTJ in MBTI, what options does that leave socionics-wise?
    If you are definitely ENTJ in MBTI (MBTT), you definitely have an EJ temperament, because the four temperaments (EJ, EP, IJ, and IP) are exactly the same in both models.

    And if you are definitely ENTJ in MBTI, you definitely belong to the Club of Researchers (NTs) in Socionics, because the four groups Pragmatists (STs), Socials (SFs), Researchers (NTs), and Humanitarians (NFs) are also the same in both models. Two of those groups -- NTs and NFs -- are also identical in typical behaviours and attitudes to David Keirsey's groups of Rationals (NTs) and Idealists (NFs).

    So, if you are definitely ENTJ in MBTI, that leaves you with exactly one option: LIE (ENTj) in Socionics.

  9. #9
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You'll never hear sense from him.
    Gilly, I've heard nothing but sense from Phaedrus from the day I got here. He's never made any illogical or irrational assertion whatsoever, his reasoning is meticulous and his claims are undoubtedly founded.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  10. #10
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    So, if you are definitely ENTJ in MBTI, that leaves you with exactly one option: LIE (ENTj) in Socionics.
    That's what I thought. Thank you, Phaedrus.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You'll never hear sense from him.
    Gilly, I've heard nothing but sense from Phaedrus from the day I got here. He's never made any illogical or irrational assertion whatsoever, his reasoning is meticulous and his claims are undoubtedly founded.
    No wonder I don't like you.

    If you think Pheadrus makes "sense", then you must be just as fucked up in the head as he is. No offense.



    As for the thread... despite what people think, socionics didn't invent the Te-Fi rules and things like that. I have heard on at least some occasions MBTI people talking about types like ESTJ and INFP being able to understand each others thinking (because they are both listed as Te-Fi-Si-Ne), which of course sounds remarkably similar to socionics (though with J/P switching). And then other MBTI people think the relations are totally different. So it's hard to put a "number" on it, but sometimes people are probably the same type, sometimes they might have to switch J/P, and sometimes they are a completely different type.


    p.s. Pheadrus- do not respond to my post, because I already know what you are going to say since you have shit for brains and never read anyone else posts so you keep on posting the same shit over and over again. Thanks.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  12. #12
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ezra is ESTp and Phaedrus is either ISTj or INFp. Maybe that's why they "understand" each other.

    Anyway, I vote for 60% or so, but that's just a guess.

    Here are some ways that they can get mixed up:

    • Men are more likely to get typed as S and/or T even when they're not. Women are more likely to get typed as N and/or F even when they're not.

      E and I are defined differently. Ditto for J and P. In Socionics, it's whether your first function is an E or I, and J or P function. That might very well correspond to how MBTI defines those letters, but it won't necessarily.

      Introverted types are kind of mixed up in MBTI. They say that the types are the opposite J/P wise as far as what functions they're using, but their descriptions only slightly follow that. So they say that ISTP is and ISTJ is , but the descriptions seem to either not follow that, or only follow it to an extent. I think an introverted person could easily get mixed up between J and P, but not necessarily.

      Smart people are more likely to get typed as N and/or T even when they're S and/or F.


    And I know what you think Phaedrus, and you're wrong, and I don't want to get into it with you. Go find an MBTI board if you like that typing system so well.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  13. #13
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    J and P especially
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    p.s. Pheadrus- do not respond to my post, because I already know what you are going to say since you have shit for brains and never read anyone else posts so you keep on posting the same shit over and over again. Thanks.
    And no thanks. You will not succeed in stopping me from responding to your posts by saying things like that. What words of abuse would you find appropriate to describe your own behaviour here?

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    Phaedrus is either ISTj or INFp
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    And I know what you think Phaedrus, and you're wrong, and I don't want to get into it with you. Go find an MBTI board if you like that typing system so well.
    I'm sorry, Slacker Mom. You are wrong about my type, and your behaviour is basically on the same level as Rocky's. And I will probably correct you again in the future, if you insist on making false statements over and over again.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    p.s. Pheadrus- do not respond to my post, because I already know what you are going to say since you have shit for brains and never read anyone else posts so you keep on posting the same shit over and over again. Thanks.
    And no thanks. You will not succeed in stopping me from responding to your posts by saying things like that. What words of abuse would you find appropriate to describe your own behaviour here?
    "...because I already know what you are going to say..."

    That's why I didn't need you responded. You HAVE said the same thing over and over again. Until you change your opinion, there's no reason to keep on repeating it. We get it. We know what you believe. Even though you're wrong. I won't debate you. That is all.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    your behaviour is basically on the same level as Rocky's.
    I think that was a compliment.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  18. #18
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    your behaviour is basically on the same level as Rocky's.
    I think that was a compliment.
    Yeah, it reads like, "You are also right."
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    your behaviour is basically on the same level as Rocky's.
    I think that was a compliment.
    Yeah, it reads like, "You are also right."
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Your extremely high level of competence, intelligence, and kindness is shining through like a sun in the desert when you debate on such a high level, Slacker Mom and Rocky. That level is much too high for me; I can't follow. But maybe people can learn something from watching the two of you in action.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Your extremely high level of competence, intelligence, and kindness is shining through like a sun in the desert when you debate on such a high level, Slacker Mom and Rocky. That level is much too high for me; I can't follow. But maybe people can learn something from watching the two of you in action.
    Finally you realize this.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  22. #22
    cunnilingus epilepsy inducer
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,429
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The reason why the two don't correlate much has nothing to do with the theory, but the interpretation of it. Like SM said MBTI have biases which Socioncs doesn't have and visa vera, so the descriptions are different. And because the decriptions are different people identify with 'illogical' combinations.

    That's why all that LIE = ENTJ thing doesn't work in reality.

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by electric
    The reason why the two don't correlate much has nothing to do with the theory, but the interpretation of it.
    The reason why the types in MBTT and Socionics do correlate has nothing to do with the theory, and it has nothing to do with the interpretation of it either.

    Quote Originally Posted by electric
    Like SM said MBTI have biases which Socioncs doesn't have and visa vera, so the descriptions are different. And because the decriptions are different people identify with 'illogical' combinations.
    But that is irrelevant. Types are not descriptions of types. Types are not theoretical explanations of functions. Types are sets of real existing entities (people) that have certain structural characteristics in common. People with the same type have the same relevent brain structures that cause them to think and behave in certain typical and recognizable ways. They share the same relevant attitudes, values, and energy rhythms. And they also share structural similarities in body type and facial structure.

    You spot the type by recognizing those and other similarities and differences -- you recognize the pattern that exists out there in the world independently of any theory designed to explain that pattern. That is what a type is. Not the theoretical explanation that comes after the type has been recognized in the first place. The type is an empirical, observable phenomenon -- not a theoretical construct.

    Quote Originally Posted by electric
    That's why all that LIE = ENTJ thing doesn't work in reality.
    And that's why LIE = ENTJ is perfectly true of the referents to the labels "LIE" and "ENTJ". Because both those two labels refer to the same set of entities, that is the group of people with the same relevant similarities in body type, facial structure, brain structure, values, energy rhythms, etc. That the descriptions and explanations of why that group of people think and behave in the way they do are not the same in MBTT and Socionics is a totally different thing that has nothing to do with the type (= the referent) itself.

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    2,916
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I dunno phaedrus. Why can't you accept that people have different points of view and that not everything that someone says (including you) is the absolute truth!
    INTp
    sx/sp

  25. #25
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    Ezra is ESTp
    According to Phaedrus' logic, if I am ENTJ in MBTI (which I know I am, so don't debate it with me), I can only be ENTj in socionics. Ergo, you are incorrect.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  26. #26
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    Ezra is ESTp
    According to Phaedrus' logic, if I am ENTJ in MBTI (which I know I am, so don't debate it with me), I can only be ENTj in socionics. Ergo, you are incorrect.
    According to Phaedrus' "logic" is the key phrase there.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  27. #27
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    Ezra is ESTp
    According to Phaedrus' logic, if I am ENTJ in MBTI (which I know I am, so don't debate it with me), I can only be ENTj in socionics. Ergo, you are incorrect.
    According to Phaedrus' "logic" is the key phrase there.
    Slacker Mom, I would genuinely like to see you show me how I can suddenly go from having Extraverted Thinking and Introverted Intuition as dominant and auxiliary functions respectively to having Extraverted Sensing and Introverted Logic as leading and secondary functions respectively.

    MBTI is Jung is Socionics. There's no way you can distort Jung's functions, because if you could you could easily end up coming to a conclusion like MBTI INFP = socionics LSE, which is just plain bullshit.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    Ezra is ESTp
    According to Phaedrus' logic, if I am ENTJ in MBTI (which I know I am, so don't debate it with me), I can only be ENTj in socionics. Ergo, you are incorrect.
    According to Phaedrus' "logic" is the key phrase there.
    Slacker Mom, I would genuinely like to see you show me how I can suddenly go from having Extraverted Thinking and Introverted Intuition as dominant and auxiliary functions respectively to having Extraverted Sensing and Introverted Logic as leading and secondary functions respectively.

    MBTI is Jung is Socionics. There's no way you can distort Jung's functions, because if you could you could easily end up coming to a conclusion like MBTI INFP = socionics LSE, which is just plain bullshit.
    What you have to remember is that there are also different interpretations within MBTI, and likewise for socionics. So it seems even more difficult to "translate" them.

    The problem with your logic is exactly this; you assume people can't be incompetant.

    I assume it happens all the time. Of course you can't go from TeNi to SeTi. But whose to say you have such an awesome self-understanding? And further more, how can you know everyone who uses the function, in any camp, fully understands Jung's descriptions? Do you understand them? If you did, then why would you rely on faulty assumptions such as ENTJ-LIE? You wouldn't have to if you were fully aware of all your functions.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mea
    I dunno phaedrus. Why can't you accept that people have different points of view and that not everything that someone says (including you) is the absolute truth!
    I accept that people have different points of view, and that not everything that someone says (including me) is the absolute truth -- but only one of two contradictory views can be true.

    Truth is not relative. Everyone (including you) thinks that their own point of view is true. To have a point of view logically implies a claim to be right. It is logically impossible to have a point of view and not think that that particular point of view is correct (= true).

  30. #30
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,938
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    To have a point of view logically implies a claim to be right. It is logically impossible to have a point of view and not think that that particular point of view is correct (= true).
    What if someone thinks that their POV is only correct from their POV? They might recognise that they can't be certain their POV is correct without observing all possible POVs - even then, they might not consider their POV to be correct - it's just their POV.
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  31. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There are plenty of "Jung" tests on the internet which measure your type on a sliding scale for each of the four Jung dichotomies. In my experience, those are THE MOST effective tests.

  32. #32
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phaedrus pretty much
    I am INTP in MBTT and I have to be ILI in Socionics, so therefore I must believe that INTP = ILI, and subsequently insist that this is UNDENIABLE FACT when discussing the matter with others. They must agree with me, and in doing so affirm that I am indeed ILI and that is in fact the reason that I am socially inept. The reasoning I use to try to explain a lifetime of social rejection is tied up the ABSOLUTE FACT that INTP = ILI, so don't even try to tell me it's not true.
    Phaedrus, I spent a long time trying to convince people here that I am one type or another. The conflicts I created over the matter were a reflection of my own inner conflict. When people try to prove that they are one thing or another, it's only because they feel the need to prove it to themselves.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  33. #33

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Quote Originally Posted by phaedrus
    I am INTP in MBTT and I have to be ILI in Socionics, so therefore I must believe that INTP = ILI, and subsequently insist that this is UNDENIABLE FACT when discussing the matter with others. They must agree with me, and in doing so affirm that I am indeed ILI and that is in fact the reason that I am socially inept. The reasoning I use to try to explain a lifetime of social rejection is tied up the ABSOLUTE FACT that INTP = ILI, so don't even try to tell me it's not true.
    Phaedrus, I spent a long time trying to convince people here that I am one type or another. The conflicts I created over the matter were a reflection of my own inner conflict. When people try to prove that they are one thing or another, it's only because they feel the need to prove it to themselves.
    When did he say that?


    That is a pretty messed up post.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  34. #34
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That's the synopsis of the sum of his posts here.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  35. #35

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    To have a point of view logically implies a claim to be right. It is logically impossible to have a point of view and not think that that particular point of view is correct (= true).
    What if someone thinks that their POV is only correct from their POV?
    That is a logical contradiction. The concept correctness loses its meaning if you use it that way. Either they think that their view is correct, which implies that they think that what they believe is correct from every possible point of view, or they don't think that their view is correct, which is a logical contradiction because it implies that they don't have a view at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean
    They might recognise that they can't be certain their POV is correct without observing all possible POVs - even then, they might not consider their POV to be correct - it's just their POV.
    It is often the case that people (including me) are not 100 % that their view is correct, but that only means that they don't know that their view is correct. They still believe that their view is correct -- if they have a view. This illustrates again what I have been trying to explain many times -- that there is a very important and fundamental difference between truth and knowledge. We usually don't know for sure that our views are true, but of two contradictory views one must be true and the other must be false. That is a logical necessity. If I say that I believe that p, and you say that you believe that not p, we both know that one of us is right and the other is wrong. But it is quite possible that neither of us knows which one of us is right.

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    To deliberatly attribute a quote to a person that the person has never written, knowing perfectly well that it is an incorrect quote is, in my opinion, even worse and more morally wrong than harassing people in other ways that some persons on this forum has been accused, correctly or incorrectly, of doing. Joy has now joined the group of a few people that has been guilty of posting false, misleading, and incorrect quotes. I don't know whether they have been doing it to others than me, but it is nevertheless an utterly objectionable act of misconduct, that should be stopped immediately.

  37. #37
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Phaedrus, I agree with you if and only if:

    Given test result ENTJ -> LIE
    But Given ENTJ description -> !LIE

    Basically, if you limit the transition from MBTI test to socionics description, I might agree with you that there is a good prediction. If you take into account comparison of descriptions, not at all - look by yourself.

    Also, you should always refer to statistical outcomes, not identities. Meaning that not every person that tests as ENTJ is going to be ENTj, and not necessarily for lack of self-knowledge but also for ambiguity of tests, challenging life situations, etc
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  38. #38
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,938
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    To have a point of view logically implies a claim to be right. It is logically impossible to have a point of view and not think that that particular point of view is correct (= true).
    What if someone thinks that their POV is only correct from their POV?
    That is a logical contradiction. The concept correctness loses its meaning if you use it that way. Either they think that their view is correct, which implies that they think that what they believe is correct from every possible point of view, or they don't think that their view is correct, which is a logical contradiction because it implies that they don't have a view at all.
    If I call my point of view 'my point of view', then that means I recognise my POV is only correct from my POV, and not from every POV.
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  39. #39
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    To have a point of view logically implies a claim to be right. It is logically impossible to have a point of view and not think that that particular point of view is correct (= true).
    What if someone thinks that their POV is only correct from their POV?
    That is a logical contradiction. The concept correctness loses its meaning if you use it that way. Either they think that their view is correct, which implies that they think that what they believe is correct from every possible point of view, or they don't think that their view is correct, which is a logical contradiction because it implies that they don't have a view at all.
    If I call my point of view 'my point of view', then that means I recognise my POV is only correct from my POV, and not from every POV.
    I think he's referring to "reality", if you believe your point of view to be a correct representation of reality, then it must be correct from every POV.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  40. #40

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    To deliberatly attribute a quote to a person that the person has never written, knowing perfectly well that it is an incorrect quote is, in my opinion, even worse and more morally wrong than harassing people in other ways that some persons on this forum has been accused, correctly or incorrectly, of doing. Joy has now joined the group of a few people that has been guilty of posting false, misleading, and incorrect quotes. I don't know whether they have been doing it to others than me, but it is nevertheless an utterly objectionable act of misconduct, that should be stopped immediately.
    Although the quoted was fabricated, I believed it was something you wrote at first since you've said very similar sounding things in the past. It's not like she made something up that was so far out there; you've pretty much said that anyway.

    [quote]
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean
    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus
    To have a point of view logically implies a claim to be right. It is logically impossible to have a point of view and not think that that particular point of view is correct (= true).
    What if someone thinks that their POV is only correct from their POV?
    That is a logical contradiction. The concept correctness loses its meaning if you use it that way. Either they think that their view is correct, which implies that they think that what they believe is correct from every possible point of view, or they don't think that their view is correct, which is a logical contradiction because it implies that they don't have a view at all.
    What? No, not at all. That's just silly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean
    They might recognise that they can't be certain their POV is correct without observing all possible POVs - even then, they might not consider their POV to be correct - it's just their POV.
    It is often the case that people (including me) are not 100 % that their view is correct, but that only means that they don't know that their view is correct. They still believe that their view is correct -- if they have a view. This illustrates again what I have been trying to explain many times -- that there is a very important and fundamental difference between truth and knowledge. We usually don't know for sure that our views are true, but of two contradictory views one must be true and the other must be false. That is a logical necessity. If I say that I believe that p, and you say that you believe that not p, we both know that one of us is right and the other is wrong. But it is quite possible that neither of us knows which one of us is right.
    Everything in the world is not black and white. Somethings, but not everything. Also, you can still have a view and know at the same time that you are not %100 correct. Only really immature people don't.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •