Results 1 to 31 of 31

Thread: Valid Info?

  1. #1
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  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

    I like that introduction. I read it when I first came to the forum.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  3. #3
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ok cool.

    I was wondering about the correlations bit between keirsey types (or was it MB types?) and Socionics...those are correct too then? Have you seen anything to contradict that? Your thoughts?
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  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

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    Ok cool.

    I was wondering about the correlations bit between keirsey types (or was it MB types?) and Socionics...those are correct too then? Have you seen anything to contradict that? Your thoughts?
    I think they're decent enough. What they do is explain the correlations (or lack thereof) socionists saw between two different types, and the socionics type different people with Myers-Briggs types identified most with. What they do not do is show that if you are XXXX then you are XXXx. Such an idea is foolish, and is only applied by people like Phaedrus, who don't really understand systems like socionics because they're so obsessed with correct logic.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  5. #5
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    I think they're decent enough. What they do is explain the correlations (or lack thereof) socionists saw between two different types, and the socionics type different people with Myers-Briggs types identified most with. What they do not do is show that if you are XXXX then you are XXXx. Such an idea is foolish, and is only applied by people like Phaedrus, who don't really understand systems like socionics because they're so obsessed with correct logic.
    It's not being obsessed with correct logic; it's being obsessed with perfect little Ti parallels that makes him reduce everything down to some one-dimensional level of "objective truth" lol.

  6. #6
    ...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 strrrng View Post
    It's not being obsessed with correct logic; it's being obsessed with perfect little Ti parallels that makes him reduce everything down to some one-dimensional level of "objective truth" lol.
    Yes, correct logic. He thinks he is correct. Phaedrus' logic is actually good, and he likes to correct everyone else's poor logic. What is disgraceful about Phaedrus' thoughts are his really shitty premises.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  7. #7
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Yes, correct logic. He thinks he is correct. Phaedrus' logic is actually good, and he likes to correct everyone else's poor logic. What is disgraceful about Phaedrus' thoughts are his really shitty premises.
    His logic is internally consistent but it frequently lacks any accurate reference to external data.

  8. #8
    ...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 strrrng View Post
    His logic is internally consistent but it frequently lacks any accurate reference to external data.
    Exactly. That's why he needs to be exterminated.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  9. #9
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Exactly. That's why he needs to be exterminated.

    Fuck yes.

  10. #10
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What about the few types that did seem to correlate across systems?

    Wait, did that sentence make sense?
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  11. #11
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    What about the few types that did seem to correlate across systems?
    We've been through this so many times, especially here:

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...t=11502&page=3

    That discussion remains relevant.

    Obviously there are overlaps between the two systems, in as far as it will be difficult to find cases where someone could be reasonably typed as EII in socionics and ESTP in Myers-Briggs. Etc.,

    Yet the most interesting "correlations" in that study are:

    - 52 of the Russians thought that Keirsey's INTJ was a SLE and 32 thought it was a LIE, against only 9 who thought it was a LII;
    - 62 thought that the ESTP was a SEE and 24 thought it was a ESE, against only 5 who thought it was a SLE;
    - 50 thought the INTP was a LII, against only 22 who thought it was a ILI

    And so on and so forth.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  12. #12
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also, if you actually look at the figures - not just at the "blue line" - it is clear that the only types where there is a decent correlation are these:

    - ENFP - IEE
    - ENTP - ILE
    - ISFP - SEI
    - ISTP - SLI
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  13. #13
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thank you, Expat and Jxrtes.


    Now I'm wondering, do you think that those correlations mean anything? The ISTP, ISFP, ENTP, ENFP ones. Are there still going to be significant amounts of ENTps that aren't ENTPs? Could you safely say:

    A) If you're an ENTp, you are most likely going to be an ENTP

    or

    B) If you're an ENTp, there's no telling what kiersy type you might be

    or

    C) If you're an ENTp, you'll probably be x,y, or z kiersy type
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  14. #14
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    Thank you, Expat and Jxrtes.


    Now I'm wondering, do you think that those correlations mean anything? The ISTP, ISFP, ENTP, ENFP ones. Are there still going to be significant amounts of ENTps that aren't ENTPs? Could you safely say:

    A) If you're an ENTp, you are most likely going to be an ENTP

    or

    B) If you're an ENTp, there's no telling what kiersy type you might be

    or

    C) If you're an ENTp, you'll probably be x,y, or z kiersy type
    ENTp's are mostly ENTP's, but they can also be INTPs and ENFPs.

  15. #15
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    ENTp's are mostly ENTP's, but they can also be INTPs and ENFPs.
    And the other three types? ENFps, ISFps, and ISTps?

    Do most socionics-savy people agree with what you said?
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  16. #16
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    And the other three types? ENFps, ISFps, and ISTps?

    Do most socionics-savy people agree with what you said?
    ENFps will most likely be ENFPs, but I could also see INFP and a slim chance of ENTP. The ISFps will probably be ISFPs most of the time. And ISTps will mostly be ISTPs.

    edit: I doubt many people would disagree. I merely illustrated general correlations which have held true IME (I used to study mbti, so I know the types well).
    Last edited by strrrng; 10-06-2008 at 09:56 PM. Reason: adding shit

  17. #17
    ...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

    Obviously Phaedrus is going to say that he is correct and that those hundred Russian socionists are all wrong.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  18. #18
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    Obviously Phaedrus is going to say that he is correct and that those hundred Russian socionists are all wrong.
    Wow. He hasn't showed up. Maybe he's on vacation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  19. #19
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    K. One last question...thanks so much guys...ahem..

    Would you all say that it is a rarity for ENTPs, ISFPs, ENFPs, and ISTPs to be something other than their same type in socionics?

    Rare for an ENTP to not be an ENTp. Rare for an ISFP to not be an ISFp. Etc. ????


    EDIT: NVM. I guess you guys already answered that but in different words. Or well Strrrng did. What do the rest of you guys think?
    Last edited by Robot; 10-07-2008 at 05:43 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  20. #20
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    I think there's a big potential for ISFps to mistype as ISFJs, moreso if the person is very artistic and very serious... given these kinds of endorsements.



    And for ESFjs to mistype as ESFPs is possible as well. ENFjs as ENFPs etc. Particularly since some of the ENFJ descriptions I remember seem really over the top overdramatic.

    All this is assuming the person briefly looked at the descriptions and didn't study the system in detail, assuming that the system is even consistent.
    That is the problem of some Myers-Briggs sites, and typelogic in particular. The confusion between ISFps and ISFJs, even as far as that site is concerned, is much less likely if you look at the main description of the types, rather than at the descriptions of functions - which often don't make much sense in M-B.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  21. #21
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    Would you all say that it is a rarity for ENTPs, ISFPs, ENFPs, and ISTPs to be something other than their same type in socionics?
    ???
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  22. #22
    Your DNA is mine. Mediator Kam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    4,481
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    ???
    I def coorelate with ISFP. I actually have not heard of an ENTP who wasn't a ENTp or an ISFP who wasn't ISFp also.
    D-SEI 9w1

    This is me and my dual being scientific together

  23. #23
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Are you guys saying yes it is rare?
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  24. #24
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If you are asking as to how people of those socionics types will tend to test in MBTI, or even be typed by Myers-Briggs professionals, I think it will be not rare at all for IEEs to be typed as INFP or ENTP; for ILEs to be typed as INTP or ENFP; for SLIs to be typed as INTP. And I think that the more you understand socionics, the less point you will see in even bothering about Myers-Briggs.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  25. #25
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    As a whole the MBTT works. The type descriptions IMO are far better than socionics descriptions....as in I can type people correctly solely using descriptions....well then again I've been familiar withe the MB for years now.
    The only thing that I can see that is a little off is the functions which is one of the things that socionics does well.

    Socionics is more complex and goes in depth more. The MBTT is still valid though IMO. It's not just a bunch of fluff. To say you are X MBTT type actually means something.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  26. #26
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Are there any large sample sizes that shows what people's MBTT and Socionics types are? A big enough size to where you can actually draw conclusions? I want numbers. Percentages. Something tells me there's no such data. Oh well, I thought I'd ask.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  27. #27
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    Are there any large sample sizes that shows what people's MBTT and Socionics types are? A big enough size to where you can actually draw conclusions? I want numbers. Percentages. Something tells me there's no such data. Oh well, I thought I'd ask.
    Do you have any idea how many socionics beginners go through precisely the same steps as you are going now? Do you think you are raising any issues that haven't been raised lots of times before?

    Spend some time doing some research on the forum's old threads - you'll be amazed at what you'll find.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  28. #28
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat View Post
    Do you have any idea how many socionics beginners go through precisely the same steps as you are going now? Do you think you are raising any issues that haven't been raised lots of times before?

    Spend some time doing some research on the forum's old threads - you'll be amazed at what you'll find.
    Yes, you just told me twice.

    Why would I want to go digging through old threads when this is much faster and easier?

    If you find it waste of forum space go ahead and delete it. You're a mod afterall.

    Also, apart from the percentages, I already knew what I thought, about all of it. I was getting at something else in a very round about way on purpose.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

  29. #29
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    Yes, you just told me twice.

    Why would I want to go digging through old threads when this is much faster and easier?

    If you find it waste of forum space go ahead and delete it. You're a mod afterall.

    Also, apart from the percentages, I already knew what I thought, about all of it. I was getting at something else in a very round about way on purpose.
    Well, I think some MBTT descriptions are better than socionic descriptions, but MBTT has got the function descriptions and function order wrong, especially for introverts. I also think MBTT professionals confuse intelligence with N.

    Because the theory behind socionics makes more sense, I prefer socionics to MBTT. It gives more tools for typing people. Because the theory is more correct, it opens up more possibilities for instance sub types, romantic attitudes-ie aggressor infantile etc, and quadra values. This makes socionics more useful, and interesting to me.

    However I think MBTT is more focused on practical applications. It's just that what it has behind the descriptions doesn't make sense. So you can use both, or look to make socionics more applicable yourself. Socionics can also be used as a tool for, well, intellectual masturbation, like you might see happening here everyso often, I guess that can be useful also - perhaps it would be best to say it can be a mental exercise though

    What is it you are getting at, in a roundabout way?

  30. #30
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    Why would I want to go digging through old threads when this is much faster and easier?
    It's not faster if you get little to no response, and you might actually get far more information - in less time - if you'd botter to take a look at the older threads.

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    If you find it waste of forum space go ahead and delete it. You're a mod afterall.
    "Waste of forum space" is not one of my criteria for deleting threads, and my comment to you has nothing at all with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Robot View Post
    Also, apart from the percentages, I already knew what I thought, about all of it. I was getting at something else in a very round about way on purpose.
    Then to answer your question, there have been quite a few threads of people here giving their MBTT and socionics types. The results were inconclusive, for many reasons - a major reason being that there is no standard way for typing anyone in socionics, so people's types are always in dispute.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  31. #31
    Robot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    362
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat View Post
    It's not faster if you get little to no response, and you might actually get far more information - in less time - if you'd botter to take a look at the older threads.



    "Waste of forum space" is not one of my criteria for deleting threads, and my comment to you has nothing at all with that.



    Then to answer your question, there have been quite a few threads of people here giving their MBTT and socionics types. The results were inconclusive, for many reasons - a major reason being that there is no standard way for typing anyone in socionics, so people's types are always in dispute.

    You seemed to have a problem with me asking these questions in this thread so I took a guess at why that was. Apparently it's not a problem though.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mariano Rajoy View Post
    Pop psychology isn't rocket science.

Posting Permissions

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