Referendum: abolish extrovert and introvert

[consentingadult]

I propose the abolishment of the words "extrovert" and "introverted" in relation to Socionic. We should only use "extratim" and "introtim" and reserve "extravert" end "introvert" exclusively to point towards social orientation, i.e. in the sense Eysenck meant it.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I propose the abolishment of the words "extrovert" and "introverted" in relation to Socionic. We should only use "extratim" and "introtim" and reserve "extravert" end "introvert" exclusively to point towards social orientation, i.e. in the sense Eysenck meant it.

Hmm..yes and no, I can see why, but i'm more for no, because extratims tend to be extraverts anyway, but not always in perhaps the way Eysenck meant it, and end of day, it's not exactly..or should it be?..a socionic concentration camp

[ZTCrawcrustle]

It would be quite pointless. Learning a slightly altered definition is not that hard; the MBTI also tries to hash out a new definition for both terms, but continues to use them. Secondly, they are very popular in their use and familiar to any newcomers, who can recognize the terms and have some idea of what they mean, even if that idea is not completely accurate as it applies to socionics.

[consentingadult]

It would be quite pointless. Learning a slightly altered definition is not that hard; the MBTI also tries to hash out a new definition for both terms, but continues to use them. Secondly, they are very popular in their use and familiar to any newcomers, who can recognize the terms and have some idea of what they mean, even if that idea is not completely accurate as it applies to socionics.

I do not agree: the extaversion/introversion dichotomy in MBTI is the same as Eysenck's and the Big5/FFM, and has only some correlation to extroversion/introversion according to Jung. Which is one of the reasons why MBTI is so fucked up, imho.

[consentingadult]

What are the differences in MBTI and Jung definition of E and I?

Jung speaks of attitude of a function, not merely social orientation. This was the starting ground for MBTI too, but in order to come up with a test, Meyers and her mother started splitting up things into dichotomies (failing to come up with a way of measuring functions), and in effect, accepted Eysenck's version of extroversion/introversion, which is about (measurable) social behavior, not about the focus on the exterior or interior world in relation to a function.

The same was done with the Judging/Perceiving dichotomy, which is, in essence, the same as the conscientiousness dimension in FFM/Big5. This is only somewhat correlated to the concepts of Jungian rationality/irrationality.

So, in MBTI we end up with two dimensions that do not correlate strongly with Socionic functions. MBTI is like apple pie where someone got the crazy idea that it should also contain pieces of pear, since they somewhat resemble apples, while still retaining the name "apple pie"

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Hehe, I deleted the question because I thought perhaps it wasn't too relevant to (I take it) sensible discussion, but I wasn't sure as I could see it applying..hehe am *I* Mr Decisive.

Anyway, on reading Jung, he talks about extraversion introversion much the same way as MBTI does, and then moves on to functions, as I recall.

Anyway, it's all good in the end

[ZTCrawcrustle]

I do not agree: the extaversion/introversion dichotomy in MBTI is the same as Eysenck's and the Big5/FFM, and has only some correlation to extroversion/introversion according to Jung.

At a base level, similar to how many understand socionics extroversion/introversion, the MBTI dichotomy was all about social interaction. As I recall, MBTI followers who wrote articles of a greater depth tried constantly to alter the definition of the two terms away from the commonly accepted view. This is one of the reasons that one of the terms is actually spelled differently, but everyone really pronounces it the same.

[Jarno]

I vote for: educate eysenek and mbti and every layman so that they know what introvert and extravert actually mean.

[consentingadult]

Hehe, I deleted the question because I thought perhaps it wasn't too relevant to (I take it) sensible discussion, but I wasn't sure as I could see it applying..hehe am *I* Mr Decisive.

Anyway, on reading Jung, he talks about extraversion introversion much the same way as MBTI does, and then moves on to functions, as I recall.

Anyway, it's all good in the end

There's always the possibility that I am wrong, but my main point is: I am not against the use of the words extroversion and introversion, but it doesn't help Socionic newbies understanding the theory, especially when they come from MBTI. By choosing different names, we can establish a clear difference between psychological E/I and social E/I. If this difference indeed exists. I think it does.

I have spent two years on MBTI, got a whole stack of books here, and their introduction of the dichotomies has created something in which I and many others find themselves untypable. Occasionally, I grab one of these books, and read so much BS that I can draw no other conclusion that I must be INTP, ENTP, ENFP and INFP at the same time! Why, because I FFM-wise, I'm an social ambivert (MBTI tests are constructed in such a way that ambiversion should be a valid outcome, but MBTI simply decides that if you're 51% E, you must be E). Also, my Feeling and Thinking are quite balanced too.

I do not experience this fuzziness with Socionics, apart from periods where I'm depressed. And even then, my doubts do not go beyond the Delta quadra, or occasionally ILE. Why is this? Because Socioncs has restrained itself by not trying to describe most of personality and by not straying too much from the Jungian path. E/I and J/P are as Jung intended them to be.

[ZTCrawcrustle]

Well, that everyday layman technically has the correct mainstream definition of extrovert and introvert.

Edit: MBTI wise, I have come up borderline in every single dichotomy except intuition/sensing. They are not that distinct of concepts.

[consentingadult]

I vote for: educate eysenek and mbti and every layman so that they know what introvert and extravert actually mean.

Okay, can you draw up a plan for that? ;-)

[consentingadult]

Well, that everyday layman technically has the correct mainstream definition of extrovert and introvert.

My point exactly! Which is why we should have words that make Socionics unique an stand out!

[ZTCrawcrustle]

Every "unique" kid gets bullied harshly. Popular people are those who excel at common, ordinary, everyday things that everyone understands.

[Khola aka Bee]

Yes and no. There are also very intelligent unique kids that learn to fit in and take that uniqueness one step further and make it the trend, play the game, become the rules.

[consentingadult]

Yes and no. There are also very intelligent unique kids that learn to fit in and take that uniqueness one step further and make it the trend, play the game, become the rules.

can you please change your avatar? I'm running out of shirts this way and my client doesn't allow for casual clothing.

[ZTCrawcrustle]

Yes and no. There are also very intelligent unique kids that learn to fit in and take that uniqueness one step further and make it the trend, play the game, become the rules.

I've known several such kids in my life. Each is unique, but instead of accentuating their uniqueness, they downplay it when joining a group. Then, when they've assimilated into the group, they let their individuality out in wider and wider circles. But the process they go through to join the group hinges on "lowering" themselves and fitting to the group standards. I do not mean this to be a critic of such kids. Now that I've finished writing this, I realize that I've joined groups in a similar way.

BTW, keep the avatar. It is a nice dress.

[Mediator Kam]

Yes, I am incredibly social.

[crazedrat]

Pretty sure Jung coined the words first ..
Anyway I propose we continue on not giving a fuck and let the INTjs melt down about it in their own little world

[consentingadult]

Pretty sure Jung coined the words first ..
Anyway I propose we continue on not giving a fuck and let the INTjs melt down about it in their own little world

Why is it that you feel the need to put down LIIs? Have they been taking you from behind or something? You are a moderator here, aren't you? Tell us, do you think such statements are befitting of a moderator?

[crazedrat]

I'm not a moderator, and I put everyone down because I'm a big bully with an empty heart. : (

[consentingadult]

I'm not a moderator, and I put everyone down because I'm a big bully with an empty heart. : (

No, you're not. you're ILI, which means you are suggestive Se. Secretly, you are dying to be spanked!

(just kidding, nothing personal).

[crazedrat]

if i were a woman i would of made some good pornos

[strrrng]

Pretty sure Jung coined the words first ..
Anyway I propose we continue on not giving a fuck and let the INTjs melt down about it in their own little world

lmao...exactly

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Most of you are potential quacks and quacks in the making. The world needs less go-nowhere "psychologists" that think they're helping but really don't do jack shit, and more workers that actually mean something. But, machines and computers can replace all practical job anyway so I don't know. Social interactions sure are interesting. I think though, that simply most problems that stem from social situations have to do with where you desperately want others to see you for your inner worlds (as your introverted hobbies, that's how you get energy from yourself), but they can only judge you based on externally what you say and do.

I think simply all problems we have with people is we all have a childlike, innocent urge for somebody to read our minds and really like us, but this is of course impossible.