ABCD=ABCd experiment

[Trevor]

?? ..?

[smccosker]

If ABCD=ABCD then I'm an ESTP-adventurer in MBTI or in Keirsey a Promotor Artisan. I like the promotor moniker sounds exciting. I also VERY strongly idenitfy as the adventurer. Indiana Jones ESTP??? Wow, how I'd love his job. At least it wouldn't be boring.

[Ritella]

wow. My inner-Phaedrus is dying a little right now.

[Mediator Kam]

You know what? I used to be ISFP.

http://www.geocities.com/lifexplore/isfp.htm

I remember agreeing with that a ton when I read it a while ago. Now my living style more represents a ESFP, simply because after forcing myself to open my mouth more and be more social, it has become an indelible part of me. In "Loving" and "Learning and Working", I am much more ISFP.

I have not changed on the inside that I have these differences, but that my world view is much more changed.

[Wynch]

MBTI is extremely superficial, imo. It's nothing you shouldn't be able to figure out for yourself without pondering for a bit. It was cool when I was younger, to see something that seemed to do a good job of pegging my personality down. Now that I'm older, I'm less interested. Socionics seems to do a better job of analyzing the way I think and process, which is substantially more useful to me.

I think people sometimes forget that socionics is less about personality from an external perspective as much as it is about cognitive functions.

[smccosker]

myers briggs is simpler and easier to understand for the common man. plus they actually give it in schools/career advisement. it is generally accepted, wheras socionics is looked at with skepticism and mistrust. will it ever be the accepted system of personality type codes??? in sincerely doubt it because the myers briggs test is SO much simpler to take and the descriptions go more in depth with easy to understand personality traits as opposed to Se versus Si, etc. socionics is more like a playing ground open to inerpretation and mind-numbing analysis for the intuitive mind.

[Trevor]

MBTI is extremely superficial, imo. It's nothing you shouldn't be able to figure out for yourself without pondering for a bit. It was cool when I was younger, to see something that seemed to do a good job of pegging my personality down. Now that I'm older, I'm less interested. Socionics seems to do a better job of analyzing the way I think and process, which is substantially more useful to me.

I think people sometimes forget that socionics is less about personality from an external perspective as much as it is about cognitive functions.

OK, it's settled then, Jung was SLE. Now tell me how do you relate to those descriptions.

[Trevor]

myers briggs is simpler and easier to understand for the common man. plus they actually give it in schools/career advisement. it is generally accepted, wheras socionics is looked at with skepticism and mistrust. will it ever be the accepted system of personality type codes??? in sincerely doubt it because the myers briggs test is SO much simpler to take and the descriptions go more in depth with easy to understand personality traits as opposed to Se versus Si, etc. socionics is more like a playing ground open to inerpretation and mind-numbing analysis for the intuitive mind.

Truth shall win, I believe. What's the truth?

[munenori2]

In the past, I've generally favored INFP MB descriptions over the INFJ ones but on that site it seemed the reverse (so long as I discount all the traditionally J-related behavior like being determined and all diligent about life). The rest seemed relatively good fit. Didn't bother reading any other descriptions though.

[Jarno]

Ofcourse the descriptions are ABCD = ABCd

You have to keep in mind that whenever 2 different people make a description of the same object, you'll always get 2 somewhat different descriptions. Nothing unusual with that. But it's clear they are describing, in this case, the same 16 phenomena.

The only difference is that MBTI has afterwards put the wrong functions on types. Which didn't affect the descriptions. Next to that the criteria for a type are somewhat different then in Socionics. Therefor it is possible that you get a wrong result on testing. Which is, something not unfamiliar in Socionics too!

For the record, I'm INTP and INTp.

(ps the lower capitalization is an invention of Ganin for commercial reasons, he got more hits on his site.)

[FDG]

I do test as ENTJ, with a mild J. I wouldn't say I relate to the ENTJ description, though.

[jessica129]

I've consistently tested INTP/INFP/ISTP with MBTI...in that order. So, no.

[Trevor]

I've consistently tested INTP/INFP/ISTP with MBTI...in that order. So, no.

How is that relevant?

[jessica129]

Are you slow?

[Trevor]

Are you slow?

How is that relevant?

[Ezra]

To all of you who know your sociotype. How do you relate to this type descriptions assuming that ABCD=ABCd thesis holds true.

http://www.geocities.com/lifexplore/mbtypes.htm

I for one find some of them(if not all) superior to socionics ones.

I'm an ENTJ in MBTI, and I'm an SLE in socionics.