Similarities

[Suomea]

Why do ENTjs look like ESTps and vice versa, ENTps look like ESTjs and vice versa, ENFjs look like ESFps and vice versa, ENFps look like ESFjs and vice versa, INFjs look like ISFps and vice versa, INFps look like ISFjs and vice versa, ISTps look like INTjs and vice versa, and INTps look like ISTjs and vice versa?

I'd say based on the discrepancies between typing by people here on the forum they mixing these pairs up the most. Maybe you don't agree, but I find when I'm looking at posts at lot of people go back and forth between these two types for people. Do they share cognitives strengths but have a different outlook on life? I'm a little bit cognitively lazy right now (and sick) to think about too much.... so I'll probably think about it a little bit deeper later, but just thought I'd put it up for discussion before I do.

[Suomea]

Ok, got unlazy and tried to answer my question myself.

With regards to the ENTp/ESTj pair this is how things line up.

1st function in ENTps equals 6th function in ESTjs. Both 1st and 6th functions people tend to show a lot in my opinion. Sometimes the 6th is bad sometimes it's not, but often times it's shown at least a decent amount of the time and we like showing it. So it is seen often in both. (Ne)

2nd function in ENTps equals 7th function in ESTjs. This is the one that shouldn't make sense. One should expect to see a lot of one's 2nd function and not all that much of one's 7th.... however one is strong in one's 7th and uses it when other's need it and are weak in it IMO so it may show up in the ESTj at times. (Ti)

3rd function in ENTps equals the 8th function in ESTjs. This again to me seems like a similar usage of an element. While neither one values the functions that much both are semi capable of using it... obviously the 8th function being more capable but the 3rd function isn't a complete dud. (Se)

4th function in ENTps equals the 5th function in ESTjs. This seems like a good reason why they may look similar. Neither one shows the function all that much, and the 5th function, while needed and liked in others, isn't necessarily asked for as much as the 6th. (Fi)


5th function in ENTps equals the 2nd function in ESTjs. This one doesn't make much sense at all and is prolly the thing that should be looked for the most. Both mayl like to be in environments where it is present though.
(Si)

6th function in ENTps equals the 3rd function in ESTjs. Both have somewhat similar adeptness in these functions. Seeking of this in others might be a good clue. (Fe)

7th function in ENTps equals the POLR in ESTjs. This one might be similarly expressed. The 7th function at times can be repressed, and at times a little too much. The 4th function is not shown very often. So basically it's somewhat dislike and non use, versus semi dislike and poor usage. (Ni)

8th function in ENTps equals first function in ESTjs. Both are good at it. Both use it. The use of it in others doesn't bother either one. (Te) Might look similar.... sorry didn't take that much time to think about this last one and I got to get back to my food which is cooking right now so any comments are welcome....: )

*Editted for grammar and added the functions.... still poorly written though hehe*

[Suomea]

and you expect me to believe you're Ti-ENTp after this lud of Ni and Te lol?

If you want to make a Suomea type thread go ahead.... but I really don't want to get off topic on this.

[Suomea]

Sorry to burst your bubble, dude, but no one's ever thought I'm an INFj. They're perfect angels who bake brownies, remember?

Actually, you may have a point there. I've noticed that both me and INFjs can be excessively diplomatic sometimes...also we can be quietly goofy when you don't know us well. But hmmm. Once you know us both better, you'll realize the INFj is a much better kinder person overall. They've got a sense of rightness that I don't have, (but they're still really kind about it and don't rub it in my face).

P.S. If you want the definition of excessively dramatic, just ask FDG. I'm sure he'd be happy to give it.

I don't think it's necessarily an everyone thing. Ms. K once said I looked like an ESTj but that was about it. I was more referring to the many instances when people have gone back and forth in the past about other people's type in such a similar manner....: ) Not sure it should work out that way for everyone.....: )

[munenori2]

From a layman's standpoint, I find it hard to imagine similarities between ESTps and ENTjs. However, my personal experience as to the former has probably hopelessly jaded me. As my prior posts may attest, he's certainly not the best of representative by any means.

Also the gender correlation on the rational functions saddens me. Too bad for F-males and T-females (though I suppose in an historical sense that's foolish to complain about). Well, period probably, given recent events.

[Suomea]

your pairs preserve:

extroversion/introversion, thinking/feeling, judicious/resolute

wild speculation on why these dichotomies might stand out:

thinking/feeling is the only dichotomy [that i know of] with a significant correlation to gender.

judicious/resolute are paired with Gulenko's romantic attitudes. (and relates to N/S by virtue of a 1:1 relationship with the sensing functions.)

extroversion/introversion differentiates the 8 functions orthogonal to both T/F and N/S.

Haven't read anything specifically using the terms judicious/resolute but I understand what they mean I believe. If you are able to direct me to any articles specifically about those I'd be more than grateful. I'm glad you broke it down into those three things because they they seem to be pretty observable compared to other differences. Specifically the judicious/resolute pair..... at least in my mind.

[misutii]

Suomea most of the pairings you discuss are quasi-identicals, it was the first relation that Aushra identified when she was coming up with socionics. Quasi-identicals look confusingly similar on the surface so they're often mislabelled at first...

I think you pretty much hit at why already, I see it as being due to both quasi-identicals, i.e. INFp/INFj having the same strong functions and the same weak functions, in this case Fe/Fi/Ne/Ni are all strong, Se/Si/Te/Ti are all weak.

However once you get to know these people better, and they become familiar with you, then they become less inhibited and act more naturally, this is when you recognize that the similarities were much like an optical illusion because INFps value Ni/Fe/Se/Ti compared to INFjs valuing Fi/Ne/Si/Te. Giving them what they value leads to friendship, marriage, babies, grandkids, a sweet happy sugary death. Giving them what they don't leads to either loss of interest, or sado-masochistic pleasure, marriage, one baby and 2 miscarriages, alcoholism, and a miserable painful bitter, as black coffee and grapefruit juice with a touch of cheap whiskey, death lol

[Suomea]

Suomea most of the pairings you discuss are quasi-identicals, it was the first relation that Aushra identified when she was coming up with socionics. Quasi-identicals look confusingly similar on the surface so they're often mislabelled at first...

I think you pretty much hit at why already, I see it as being due to both quasi-identicals, i.e. INFp/INFj having the same strong functions and the same weak functions, in this case Fe/Fi/Ne/Ni are all strong, Se/Si/Te/Ti are all weak.

However once you get to know these people better, and they become familiar with you, then they become less inhibited and act more naturally, this is when you recognize that the similarities were much like an optical illusion because INFps value Ni/Fe/Se/Ti compared to INFjs valuing Fi/Ne/Si/Te. Giving them what they value leads to friendship, marriage, babies, grandkids, a sweet happy sugary death. Giving them what they don't leads to either loss of interest, or sado-masochistic pleasure, marriage, one baby and 2 miscarriages, alcoholism, and a miserable painful bitter, as black coffee and grapefruit juice with a touch of cheap whiskey, death lol

I actually think I was referring to many relations of benefit.... : ) At least the ENTp/ESTj and ESTp/ENTj ones are...hehe. Maybe some of the rest aren't, I'll have to look them up.

[misutii]

lol my fault, personally i don't tend to confuse beneficiaries but I notice lots of people here tend to so you're on to something!

[PotatoSpirit]

You can probably find a reason for similarities between any two random pair if you want to play around with Ti, except maybe conflictors and supervisors.
I think what you noticed is due to the small amount of population considered, and to the unequal amount of attention you (like anybody else) paid to various similarities.