Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 79

Thread: Success tips for INTj

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    18
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Success tips for INTj

    I have read some success tips for INTJ from personalitypage.com

    http://www.personalitypage.com/INTJ_per.html

    If anyone knows more life success tips for INTJ , please post it.

    Thanks
    INTJ

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi,

    I am new to this forum but have been lurking it for the past month. Anyway, I just wanted to mention that from what I have seen and from my own understanding of the descriptions of the personality types, socionics INTj most corresponds with MBTI INTP. In fact, in most of the personality literature I have found online, including that site, MBTI INTP is analyzed according to Functional Analysis as having Introverted Thinking as the dominant and Extraverted Intuition as the auxiliary, which is the same for socionics INTj. I believe this is something that Cone has alluded in a previous thread about a website dedicated to INTjs (www.intp.org).

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Hi,

    I am new to this forum but have been lurking it for the past month. Anyway, I just wanted to mention that from what I have seen and from my own understanding of the descriptions of the personality types, socionics INTj most corresponds with MBTI INTP. In fact, in most of the personality literature I have found online, including that site, MBTI INTP is analyzed according to Functional Analysis as having Introverted Thinking as the dominant and Extraverted Intuition as the auxiliary, which is the same for socionics INTj. I believe this is something that Cone has alluded in a previous thread about a website dedicated to INTjs (www.intp.org).
    My experience: I tested INTj under both MBTI and Socionics.

    MBTI doesn't really make a clear distinction between Ti/Te, etc. I'm not going to rehash the whole thing about how each theory interprets the whole P/J thing. Frankly, I'm tired as shit of that rant. Basically, socionics has a more indepth, elegant theory than MBTI.
    INTj
    "... the present is too much for the senses, too crowding, too confusing, too present to imagine" - RF

  4. #4

    Default

    On second thought, is this an MBTI test?

    http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp

    Thanks.
    INTj
    "... the present is too much for the senses, too crowding, too confusing, too present to imagine" - RF

  5. #5
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: success tips for INTJ

    I'll update this later
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  6. #6
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlendieOfIndie
    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Hi,

    I am new to this forum but have been lurking it for the past month. Anyway, I just wanted to mention that from what I have seen and from my own understanding of the descriptions of the personality types, socionics INTj most corresponds with MBTI INTP. In fact, in most of the personality literature I have found online, including that site, MBTI INTP is analyzed according to Functional Analysis as having Introverted Thinking as the dominant and Extraverted Intuition as the auxiliary, which is the same for socionics INTj. I believe this is something that Cone has alluded in a previous thread about a website dedicated to INTjs (www.intp.org).
    My experience: I tested INTj under both MBTI and Socionics.

    MBTI doesn't really make a clear distinction between Ti/Te, etc. I'm not going to rehash the whole thing about how each theory interprets the whole P/J thing. Frankly, I'm tired as shit of that rant. Basically, socionics has a more indepth, elegant theory than MBTI.


    How to convert MBTI® type to Socionics type
    by Sergei Ganin

    Anyone who had closely read all the articles about Socionics and MBTI® theory compatibility issues has already got a fair idea that there is no straightforward conversion between the two systems. This obviously creates quite a lot of confusion, especially when it comes to the introvert types. The most common question people ask is: "Is MBTI INTJ the same as Socionics INTp or Socionics INTj?" Some people have created the myth that if you change the last letter of the MBTI introvert type acronym to the opposite then you get a Socionics equivalent, i.e. MBTI INTJ = Socionics INTp. As I said, it is a myth and even though such conversion may work in some cases, it does not work in all cases. So here I'll try to show how to make such conversion possible without getting into too much trouble.

    The Thinking and Feeling pair of functions is bound together in the same way the Sensing and Intuition pair is. The two functions in a pair always go up against each or fight for the domination if you like. If one of the functions in a pair appears to be Dominant function then the other function in the same pair is Inferior and is well suppressed by the Dominant function, and the domination of the Dominant function is obvious. However, if one of the functions in a pair is Auxiliary, then the other would be Tertiary, which represents the Hidden Agenda. The Auxiliary and Tertiary combination of functions provokes a war between these functions, because there is no clear dominator. On one hand the Auxiliary function is much stronger than Tertiary, however the Tertiary function is the Hidden Agenda and is extremely important. So what happens in reality is that a person find it difficult to separate these two functions in order to give them clear preference, the functions always appear to be mixed up together to a certain degree.

    So, if a person's Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), then such person find it hard to keep these two in peace and may find it difficult to decide whether they are F or T. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), and should be quite easy to separate. Because the Dominant function is Perceiving in this case, the person would be Socionics Perceiving type (XXXp). So if MBTI INTJ person is more uncertain about being T or F than S or N i.e. IN(T/F)J or INxJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTp.

    If a person's Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), then such person may find it difficult to keep these two in friendship and may find it hard to decide whether they are S or N. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), and should be quite easy to divide. Because in this case the Dominant function is Judging, the person would be Socionics Judging type (XXXj). So if MBTI INTJ person is more unsure about being S or N than T or F i.e. I(S/N)TJ or IxTJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTj.

    So here it is all of the above simplified:

    Unsure about being T or F -> you are Socionics XXXp
    Unsure about being S or N -> you are Socionics XXXj
    http://www.socionics.com/advan/howto.htm
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My experience: I tested INTj under both MBTI and Socionics.

    MBTI doesn't really make a clear distinction between Ti/Te, etc. I'm not going to rehash the whole thing about how each theory interprets the whole P/J thing. Frankly, I'm tired as shit of that rant. Basically, socionics has a more indepth, elegant theory than MBTI.
    I myself was tested as INTJ under MBTI and INTj under Socionics but I believe the issue is, most MBTI online literature isn't based on MBTI alone. What I was specifically mentioning is that in almost every site I have been to, Functional Analysis is also used to describe the type and it appears that the type that they are analyzing for INTJ is really INTp in Socionics. In fact, the evidence is explicitly clear when they refer to the fact that Introverted Intuition is the dominant function and Extraverted Thinking is the auxiliary function. Here is a sample quote from http://www.personalitypage.com/INTJ_per.html that was referred in the OP that might clarify my position:

    Explanation of Problems

    Most of the problems described above are a result of Introverted iNtuition overtaking the INTJ's personality to the point that all of the other functions become slaves to Introverted iNtuition. A healthy personality needs to have a good balance between its dominant and auxiliary functions. For an INTJ, the dominant Introverted iNtuition needs to be well-supported by the auxiliary Extraverted Thinking function. If Extraverted Thinking exists only to support the desires of Introverted iNtuition, then neither function is being used to its potential.
    Perhaps the issue here is that given that the internet is full of unchecked information, there is much misinformation as to what MBTI precisely is in that the original work of CG Jung is being confused with MBTI (I doubt that MBTI is being confused with Socionics given that Socionics is relatively unknown and based in Russia). Unfortunately I do not have indepth knowledge of the original work of CG Jung, Socionics and MBTI so I not have a precise explanation that I can vouch for.

    I myself once skeptically and informally believed that I was an MBTI INTJ because I was tested as such and this belief was reinforced years later when I found this site in that I no longer felt unusual after reading some of the posts of the INTjs in this forum. Perhaps what shocked me the most was that I found many others that shared my extreme sensitivity to touch (this is something that I have found to be awfully weird about myself and has bothered me quite a bit). Anyway I found a post by Cone that referred to a site http://www.intp.org/ and in which I found their profile of an INTP http://www.intp.org/intprofile.html. The profile was so accurate that it was chilling and truly showed me the accuracy of Functional Analysis. One of the most shocking aspect is that almost everything it said about my music preferences are true (not those composers in particular (I am a poor student with no money to waste on music) but the kinds of music in general), and my interests in photography are partially true. If I weren't a student and had more free time, and owned a Digital SLR, the profile might have been true in that area too.

    I don't know if other INTjs will find the profile accurate but for me, it really doesn't matter what designation I am: whether I am INTJ or INTP. It's very clear to me that my dominant function, auxilary function. tertiary function, and inferior function are Introverted Thinking, Extraverted Intuition, Introverted Sensing, and Extraverted Feeling respectively and my understanding of socionics tells me that INTj has that order of functions (There are actually many many other small things I have noticed in my informal study of socionics that convinces me that I am INTj). However, when I looked back at the other profiles for INTP and INTJ and did sysmatic comparisons between each by deleting all similarities in each (I ended up deleting more than 50% sometimes!!), I realized that INTP does fit me better overall. I suppose for INTJ and INTP, there are so many similarities that unless one is reading carefully, noting all the differences (which is something that isn't natually accomplished for intuition people unlike sensing people), it is easily to overlook the fact that INTJ is not the best fit, especially given the bias that comes with knowing your MBTI test results.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    OK. you want to play the Seigei Ganin game? I will have some fun then.

    INTj or INTp?
    by Sergei Ganin

    INTjs and INTps can have very similar behaviour, interests and even appearance. However, when it comes to intertype relations there is a big difference between these two, because one's Dual is the other's Conflicting type. Also, two INTjs or two INTps can co-exist quite peacefully, whereas an INTj and an INTp do not make a very promising combination. Join any INTj discussion forum or mailing list and you can see this Quasi-identical tension for yourself. This is because there are many INTps among those INTjs.

    Why do INTps test as INTjs? Because it is possible that some INTps actually do behave in such way that they could be mistaken for Judging types. The common perception of Perceiving types is as disorganised, unreliable and wavering. There are INTps out there that are, on the contrary, organised, reliable and unwavering or at least they may behave as such. As a result they often score as Js. But let's not forget that type is not about how you behave, it is about how your psyche is structured, which in return influences your behaviour in one way or another. Taking more tests or reading more type descriptions may not give an answer to the INTj/INTp question for the reasons explained above. The right way to distinguish between these two types is by making a comparison on a "molecular" level.

    Let's take a look at INTj's main function - introverted thinking ( ). INTjs are mainly interested in accumulating an understanding. They want to know why and what causes things happen the way they happen. They want to know and see the logic behind everything. If "it" does not contradict logic then "it" is right, otherwise "it" is wrong. INTps on the other hand seem to be logical too as their second strong function is extroverted thinking ( ). However, if for INTjs it is about gaining understanding, for INTps it is about exercising their knowledge, and therefore they mostly concern themselves with known facts. Moreover, INTj's logic is their area of confidence and conservatism. This makes their logic fundamental, meaning once the rules are established, they can be applied anywhere. INTps logic is their area of creativity. This makes their logic circumstantial and unpredictable - the rules apply here but may not apply there.

    The same goes for Intuition. INTp's main function is introverted intuition ( ). Since introverted intuition is about internal wholeness or belief, this manifests itself in INTps being highly religious and spiritual people. It is also their area of confidence and conservatism and they will not welcome anything that could disturb that internal wholeness. And since you can believe in things that are not necessarily there or actually true, INTps criticise a lot. As for INTjs, their intuition is their second strong function, which is extroverted intuition ( ). Extroverted intuition is about perspective and potential and because it is INTj's creative output, their "creations" could be very unexpected and original, often bearing a high potential for future development. So, combining two and two together, INTjs are in their element when involved with science, invention, innovation, discovery, theory, explanation, interpretation, philosophy etc. INTps are in their element when involved with business, enterprise, commerce, industry, trade, financial institutions, church etc.

    Another comparison will be between Dual-seeking functions. INTps are looking out for extroverted sensing ( ), INTjs are looking out for extroverted feeling ( ). Since both functions are the subconscious functions, they are likely to influence the subconscious choices. INTps would want to go power driven, moneymaking, sometimes risky places, whereas INTjs would prefer a happy, cheerful and exciting surrounding.

    The last comparison - "Hidden agenda". This is what people hide from other people, because it is very sensitive area of one's psyche. If the main function is like a geometric cone firmly standing on its base, the hidden agenda is like the same cone standing on its tip that one is trying to balance. For INTjs their introverted sensing () is their nightmare. Introverted sensing is mainly about the body, its functions, sensory perceptions etc. The only way they can balance that cone is for them to be physically healthy and if this is not that important to you, you are most probably not INTj. INTps are also trying to balance this cone on its head when it comes to introverted feeling (). Introverted feeling is love, affection, morality etc. It is important for an INTp to be involved with someone, to have an object of affection, to like people. If this doesn't concern you, you are probably a type other than INTp.

    So if after all this you are still not sure whether you are INTj or INTp, maybe you are neither...
    http://www.socionics.com/advan/intjorintp.htm

    Things to consider about MBTI® theory (Part 1)
    by Sergei Ganin

    You have probably noticed that the types on this website have a slightly different acronym: three capital letters followed by a small "j" or "p" instead of the traditional four capital letter acronym. This is because there is a slight incompatibility between the MBTI® and Socionics/Jungian type due to the inconsistency in MBTI theory. This incompatibility sometimes (note sometimes) appears between Introvert types. As for Extrovert types - MBTI theory, Socionics and Jung seems fully compatible.

    So, what is the story?

    When Myers was designing MBTI, she took Jungian typology as the basis for her project. According to Jung, people can be Extroverts (E) or Introverts (I) plus Thinking (T), Feeling (F), Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N). So Jungian types ended up looking like this:

    Extraverted Thinking type
    Introverted Thinking type
    Extraverted Feeling type
    Introverted Feeling type
    Extraverted Sensing type
    Introverted Sensing type
    Extraverted Intuitive type
    Introverted Intuitive type

    Jung also said that along with the main function, type could have a secondary function as well. In other words, the type with a main preference for T or F could also have a secondary preference for N or S and types with a main preference for N or S could also have a secondary preference for T or F. The two variations of the same type are differing from each other, for instance, F type with preference for S differs from F type with preference for N, etc.

    Myers was particularly interested in the mental processes that were dynamically opposite like E vs. I, S vs. N, T vs. F. In this way it was possible to formulate a question and for the individual to choose a preferred answer. So, if you prefer one thing, you do not prefer its opposition, theoretically.

    Myers was faced with the challenge of how to identify which mental process would be the main and which one would be the secondary. For example if the person would score as NT, then is it N that is the main preference and T the secondary, or vice versa?

    If you are not familiar with Jungian work on types, there are two more definitions that Jung used to describe his types - Judgement and Perception (Some sources call it Rationality/Irrationality, perhaps due to the differences in translation). All his eight types Jung divided into two groups. Judging types were all Thinking and all Feeling types, Perceiving - all Sensing and all Intuitive types.

    Judging types according to Jung:

    Extraverted Thinking type
    Introverted Thinking type
    Extraverted Feeling type
    Introverted Feeling type

    Perceiving types according to Jung:

    Extraverted Sensing type
    Introverted Sensing type
    Extraverted Intuitive type
    Introverted Intuitive type

    How could this have helped Myers? Simple, if person scores as ENT (Extravert and Intuitive and Thinking) their type could be either Extraverted Intuitive type (Perceiving group), or Extraverted Thinking type (Judging group). Which one it is, would be defined by knowing if the type was Judging or Perceiving. So everything was already concluded in Jungian research. However the preference for Judgement/Perception was not explored by Jung in his work as well as all the other preferences, so Myers decided to come up with her own Judgement/Perception scale instead. She figured, if people use their preferred judging process to order the external (!) world - they are Judging types, if they use their preferred perceiving process to experience the external (!) world - they are Perceiving types.

    Have a look:

    Jung: Sensing and Intuition are P functions, always!
    Myers: Sensing and Intuition are P functions, but only if they are extraverted!
    Socionics: Sensing and Intuition are P functions, always!

    Jung: Thinking and Feeling are J functions, always!
    Myers: Thinking and Feeling are J functions, but only if they are extraverted!
    Socionics: Thinking and Feeling are J functions, always!

    Fair enough, maybe Jungian definition of J and P was not clear enough to be implemented practically at once, but what was absolutely clear is that Sensing and Intuitive types he called P and Thinking and Feeling types he called J.

    Now let's have a look at the official MBTI correspondence between Jungian type and MBTI type:

    Code:
    Jung                         MBTI theory 
        
    Extraverted Thinking type    ENTJ, ESTJ 
    Introverted Thinking type    INTP, ISTP <-- &#40;emphasis mine&#41;
    Extraverted Feeling type     ENFJ, ESFJ 
    Introverted Feeling type     INFP, ISFP 
    Extraverted Sensing type     ESFP, ESTP 
    Introverted Sensing type     ISFJ, ISTJ 
    Extraverted Intuitive type   ENFP, ENTP 
    Introverted Intuitive type   INFJ, INTJ
    What we have here is a violation of the Jungian definition of J and P. According to Myers, Introverted Thinking and Introverted Feeling types appeared to be P instead of J, and Introverted Sensing and Introverted Intuitive types appeared to be J instead of P.

    So, why MBTI theory it is still live and kicking?

    First of all whether you want it or not, MBTI types obtained via MBTI test results (under ideal conditions) are actually quite compatible with Jungian type. The reason for this is that despite Myers wrongful, one-sided J/P definition, MBTI J/P questions often identify one's preference for Jungian J/P.

    So, what is the problem?

    The problem is that there are three kinds of MBTI type profiles in existence.

    1. Type descriptions empirically gathered from the observation of people who took the MBTI test. These profiles are compatible with Jungian types.

    2. Type descriptions artificially manufactured based on different functions as they appear in MBTI model. These descriptions are more accurate than the previous, but they only refer to the descriptions of extravert types obtained this way. Only extravert type descriptions are Jung compatible for the reasons explained above. All introvert type descriptions are twisted around the J and P preference. So if you have MBTI description of ISFP obtained this way, for example, you should know that it is actually Jungian ISFJ description you look at.

    3. Mixed type descriptions obtained via combination of 1. and 2. Extravert type descriptions are, again, compatible with Jung, but Introvert type descriptions look like a compromise between J and P types. Basically, introvert type descriptions look like one-size-fit-all descriptions.

    So, what's in it for me?

    If you are an introvert type, you are in trouble. For example, you take the test and you are J. You read some P type descriptions and then you find out that your type fits P better then J. Then you look further and find out that you might be J after all. Or is it P? This thing starts bothering you (if you are really J). You might start thinking that there is something wrong with you. Apparently there isn't!

    Thanks to Myers, who once decided that J and P must be connected with the external (!) world. That is why extrovert types do not suffer. And all this is after Jung said that J and P are independent of E and I.

    So, what is the solution?

    There are two solutions.

    1. A very simple solution. Let's admit that MBTI type and Jungian type are quite different, and drop all the relations between them. This will not solve the internal MBTI inconsistency problem (test results vs. modelling), though.

    2. An even simpler solution. Let's finally agree that Jungian definition of J and P is the one to use. This eventually will straighten up MBTI model as for introverted types. The problem here is that so many researches and publications have been carried out using the faulty MBTI model and at the end of it all, those works will only be good for recycling purposes.

    So for the time being, in order to separate the Jung compatible four-letter type acronym from the one that is not compatible with Jung, it is advisable to use the small letter "p" or "j" at the end of the four letter abbreviation. This would mean that the type is different from MBTI type and also fully compatible with Jungian theory and Socionics as well.

    In conclusion, MBTI is actually one of the most popular psychometric tools of today. In fact, it is so well-known that MBTI type stands next to astrological type by its popularity. Despite this, MBTI theory has no proper method to verify its test results. The only verification tools available are the profiles of sixteen types accompanying the test. The problem with this is that the profiles are poorly written, reminding one of astrological interpretations and giving only vague answers regarding the accuracy of the test results. Unfortunately, MBTI is widely used to implement important decisions, for example regarding the suitability or unsuitability of a particular person for employment, education, etc.
    http://www.socionics.com/advan/mbti.htm

    So either you can agree with or repudiate all of what he said. Anything in between is bias and irrational. But you should notice that what you have posted doesn't really contradict what I have said. My main point is, MBTI sites analyze INTJs assuming Introverted Intuition as the dominant and INTP assuming Introverted Thinking instead, which is reverse for Socionics. I am really not talking about the letter change and if fact, I am actually implicitly suggesting to ignore the letters and just go for the functions alone because the letters are deceptive and misleading

  9. #9
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Hi,

    I am new to this forum but have been lurking it for the past month. Anyway, I just wanted to mention that from what I have seen and from my own understanding of the descriptions of the personality types, socionics INTj most corresponds with MBTI INTP. In fact, in most of the personality literature I have found online, including that site, MBTI INTP is analyzed according to Functional Analysis as having Introverted Thinking as the dominant and Extraverted Intuition as the auxiliary, which is the same for socionics INTj. I believe this is something that Cone has alluded in a previous thread about a website dedicated to INTjs (www.intp.org).
    Please read through this:

    oldforumlinkviewtopic.php?t=2416

    I hope you find it enlightening.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by socionics.org
    Analyst (Robesp'er, INTJ)

    Your strong side are analytical mind, structural thinking, skill to grasp laws governing any phenomenon. You are disposed to the objectivity and the validity, during the estimation of people you are guided by their contribution to the common cause, but not by personal sympathies. In the matter, with which you deal, you always separate the main thing, rejecting excess, unessential details. You also know how strictly to logically present material, to report basic idea to the listeners.

    Analyzing idea, after establishing its importance and prospect, you become its active supporter. Your creative intuition feeds her constantly newer and newer flashes.

    You are allotted also by the ability of careful handling with the concrete people. You know how to note man in the matter and soak to open his abilities, to move the faith in our own forces.

    The basic problem of your life - these are the inability to actively defend its interests and weak confidence in itself in the concrete vital matters. Indecision is characteristic of you, you lacks instantaneous reaction to a change in the situation. Inoperability, nedinamichnost' can to you injure. Try to more daringly present your rights, if you are assured in their validity.

    Study those forms of sport, which manufacture resoluteness and rapidity of reaction, by tennis, by mining skis, by automobilizm, by boxing. Compulsorily alternate mental labor with the physical. To you are recommended exercises to the concentration of attention, and also occupation, which develop this quality, for example the collection of fungi, berries, the catching of fish you need the moral support of your undertakings. In your environment must be the people decisively and optimistically disposed, which you from time to time pushed slightly, they helped to overcome pessimism and disbelief by their forces.

    Another your problem - inability to associate with the people, the distant psychological distance, which is received by those surrounding as dryness, staleness, alienation. Sometimes you consciously doom yourselves to the solitude. Not you be gloomy and sullen. More frequently smile, you be affable, but you do not go too far - to you difficult to refuse to people carefully select the circle of the contacts necessary for you in order to avoid overstrain and ethical problems unnecessary to you. Try not to lose the fixed emotional connections. You by many can soak by your reasonableness and by understanding. Consider that not all can so successfully analyze events and be abstracted from the emotions as you.

    Try to bring up the standards of the conventional ethics in itself and follow them daily. Be considered the interests of other people. Try more deeply to investigate the problems of each, if you want so that they with you would collaborate. You remember that the surface, inattentive relation to it offends man.
    babelfish translation so it may be choppy

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Pedro-the-Lion, I am not sure why you are showing me a profile of an INTj. Perhaps you misunderstood my point. I will make state it more succinctly to avoid confusion.

    1. According to Socionics the dominant function and auxiliary function of an INTj (also known as Logical-Intuitive Interim) are Introverted Thinking and Extraverted Intuition respectively. You can verify that with almost any site on Socionics.

    2. In almost every MBTI site, the INTJ is analyzed given that the dominant function is Introverted Intuition and the auxiliary function is Extraverted Thinking.

    3. How can you reconcile these two facts? To assume that MBTI INTJ and Socionics INTj are the related is nonsensical because they already have different foundations.

    4. On the other hand, MBTI INTPs are analyzed with the functions similiar to Socionics INTj so it would make more sense to consider the possibility that INTP profiles are similiar to INTj profiles.

    5. I am not trying to establish a one-to-one correspondence between MBTI types and Socionics types and in fact, I suspect that all the MBTI information that is out on the web is not based on MBTI alone but also based on the works of CG Jung, where Socionics is heavily based on. It is possible that in the actual theory of MBTI, INTJ (Introverted Intuitive Thinking Judging) does most correspond with INTj (Logical-Intuitive Interim) and that some of these websites on MBTI simply got the whole MBTI framework wrong. I don't know since I myself do not have an authoritative perspective on MBTI.

    6. Given that there is possibly so much confusion, it is simply wise to consider the profiles on the basis of its foundations: Functional Analysis, and not the titles of the profiles, which are the acronyms. In other words, in regards to the OP, INTjs should be reading the INTP profile and not the INTJ one. In my personal experience, I myself found the INTP profiles to be more accurate, which makes sense because those profiles are based on what I believe are my primary functions.

    7. If you do not find the INTP profile to be more accurate than that of the INTJ on the site referred in the OP, then you should consider the possibility that you are not an INTj as your primary functions are not Introverted Thinking and Extraverted Intuition in that order, which are the defining characteristics of an INTj.

    8. To be honest, since we are not dealing with Intertype relations, which I believe is the characteristic and innovative feature of Socionics, my references to the framework of Socionics should really be the original framework of CG Jung.

  12. #12
    Creepy-

    Default

    wym123:

    Your point is valid and theoretically that is the case. However, in reality it doesn't seem to work quite like that.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by joseph2505
    If anyone knows more life success tips for INTJ , please post it.
    I posted what I did from a subsection of the site socionics.org called "recommendations for the types (by gulenko)." I was not trying to convince you of anything. If you look at the description it states problem areas for the intj and recommendations to avoid those problems...

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    To be honest, since we are not dealing with Intertype relations, which I believe is the characteristic and innovative feature of Socionics, my references to the framework of Socionics should really be the original framework of CG Jung.
    Since we are on a socionics site I see no problems with referencing material from that school of thought. I was merely responding to the first post in this thread not to you.

  14. #14
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ... the feeling of ... feeling that you're not doing enough....
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    wym123:

    Your point is valid and theoretically that is the case. However, in reality it doesn't seem to work quite like that.
    You probably know that that kind of statement is completely meaningless to an INTj right? It is simply devoid of persuasion.

    However, if you are trying to refer to the fact that in the thread you linked to, most Socionics INTjs tested as MBTI INTJ (or even any other type). Well, I can see how that happens especially given my personal experience in that I was tested as an MBTI INTJ. But to consider this concept alone is not really doing justice to my post because doing so basically ignores my main point (which is #6).

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    Since we are on a socionics site I see no problems with referencing material from that school of thought. I was merely responding to the first post in this thread not to you.
    Actually, part 7 was one of those "strictly speaking" statements about my arguments. It was not directed at your post but at mine. But anyway, I do realize, in retrospect, that you were posting for the OP and not me. I do apologize for my misunderstanding.

  16. #16
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    wym123:

    Your point is valid and theoretically that is the case. However, in reality it doesn't seem to work quite like that.
    You probably know that that kind of statement is completely meaningless to an INTj right? It is simply devoid of persuasion.

    However, if you are trying to refer to the fact that in the thread you linked to, most Socionics INTjs tested as MBTI INTJ (or even any other type). Well, I can see how that happens especially given my personal experience in that I was tested as an MBTI INTJ. But to consider this concept alone is not really doing justice to my post because doing so basically ignores my main point (which is #6).
    Actually, if they are an MBTI INTJ they should read that description even if they are a Socionics Logical-Intuitive Intratim.

    Because people's J/P don't seem to switch, we need to consider the idea that what MBTI measures/considers is different to Socionics, even if it appears to be the same or similar.

    We shouldn't cling to theories which, however logical, don't hold when subjected to the rest of the world.

    It should also be kept in mind that Socionics and MBTI aren't meant to be compatible with each other. They were devised independently of one another and they have different purposes. So, if there isn't a sound correlation, it's not the end of the world.

  17. #17
    Kristiina's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Estonia, Tartu
    Posts
    4,021
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I know you might not even notice this post, because you are already so heated up. I just want to say that it doesn't matter. We might as well be choosing the best religion or anything else that has neither one right answer nor possibility of compromise. Stop talking about the MBTI/ Socionics thing.

    Just tell us what you know, not what you read from a random website that could be either one - MBTI or socionics. What is the main thing that usually comes between INTjs and success.
    EIE, ENFj, intuitive subtype.
    E3 (probably 3w4)

    Cool ILI hubbys are better than LSIs any time!

    Old blog: http://firsttimeinusa.blogspot.com/
    New blog: http://having-a-kid.blogspot.com/

  18. #18
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    Since we are on a socionics site I see no problems with referencing material from that school of thought. I was merely responding to the first post in this thread not to you.
    Actually, part 7 was one of those "strictly speaking" statements about my arguments. It was not directed at your post but at mine. But anyway, I do realize, in retrospect, that you were posting for the OP and not me. I do apologize for my misunderstanding.
    I'm not trying to be nitpicky, but you might want to revise your post (I edited it here), just because I don't want to be given credit for things that Pedro said

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    110
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    1. According to Socionics the dominant function and auxiliary function of an INTj (also known as Logical-Intuitive Interim) are Introverted Thinking and Extraverted Intuition respectively. You can verify that with almost any site on Socionics. 2. In almost every MBTI site, the INTJ is analyzed given that the dominant function is Introverted Intuition and the auxiliary function is Extraverted Thinking.
    You are right wym123. There are differences in how MBTI/Socionics shows the order and energy of the type functions. Myers Briggs says that the introvert will not show their true selves (since Jung's theory was based on how extraverted types show themselves in the world). Therefore, Myers Briggs believes that the dominant function is internalized and people see the, not always best qualities of the introverted type.

    3. How can you reconcile these two facts? To assume that MBTI INTJ and Socionics INTj are the related is nonsensical because they already have different foundations. 4. On the other hand, MBTI INTPs are analyzed with the functions similiar to Socionics INTj so it would make more sense to consider the possibility that INTP profiles are similiar to INTj profiles.
    I don't think that you can relate the Socionics INTP with the MBTI-INTJ any better. Many years ago, when I originally discovered the Socionics theory, the INTp looked like the MBTI-INTJ. In the past couple of years, I think that Socionic enthusiasts have made attempts to separate the two systems, therefore, you are seeing an increasing change. I am suspect that the various descriptions are not unified. Instead, you have many people giving their subjective thoughts on what each type looks like. In the end, there is no means of correlating the systems, even for extraverted types. I have always voiced my disgust for socionics, keirsey and the hybrid systems like Beren, adopting the MBTI four letter codes. It only muddles the readers understanding that they are separate systems. Glad that others see that point of view.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    wym123:

    Your point is valid and theoretically that is the case. However, in reality it doesn't seem to work quite like that.
    You probably know that that kind of statement is completely meaningless to an INTj right? It is simply devoid of persuasion.

    However, if you are trying to refer to the fact that in the thread you linked to, most Socionics INTjs tested as MBTI INTJ (or even any other type). Well, I can see how that happens especially given my personal experience in that I was tested as an MBTI INTJ. But to consider this concept alone is not really doing justice to my post because doing so basically ignores my main point (which is #6).
    Actually, if they are an MBTI INTJ they should read that description even if they are a Socionics Logical-Intuitive Intratim.
    You statement rests of the following premise: The MBTI Personality exams are accurate. One of the criticism I have heard about MBTI is that the exams are far from accurate and that the answers are easily affected by the taker's current mood. I believe it is true that how an INTj is in front of a computer is completely different how such a person is in the "real world" because INTjs feel very comfortable in front of a computer. Regardless of this criticism, it is widely accepted that the MBTI Personality exams are not meant to be definitive in that you might be a different type despite the fact that you have been tests as a certain type.
    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Because people's J/P don't seem to switch, we need to consider the idea that what MBTI measures/considers is different to Socionics, even if it appears to be the same or similar.
    Don't get too stuck on the whole J/P Switching thing. MBTI could have called INTJs, ABCDs and INTPs, EFGHs and my point wouldn't change. I am not attacking the letters, I am attacking the designations. MBTI INTP (or EFGH) is probably the Socionics INTJ type despite what your intuition tell you.

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Functianalyst
    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    3. How can you reconcile these two facts? To assume that MBTI INTJ and Socionics INTj are the related is nonsensical because they already have different foundations. 4. On the other hand, MBTI INTPs are analyzed with the functions similiar to Socionics INTj so it would make more sense to consider the possibility that INTP profiles are similiar to INTj profiles.
    I don't think that you can relate the Socionics INTP with the MBTI-INTJ any better. Many years ago, when I originally discovered the Socionics theory, the INTp looked like the MBTI-INTJ. In the past couple of years, I think that Socionic enthusiasts have made attempts to separate the two systems, therefore, you are seeing an increasing change. I am suspect that the various descriptions are not unified. Instead, you have many people giving their subjective thoughts on what each type looks like.
    I have the feeling that you are on to something and I really want to hear more of what you have to say. Well first, I need you to clarify what you meant when you said that Socionics enthusiasts have been trying to seperate the two systems. What are they doing exactly for example?

    Quote Originally Posted by Functianalyst
    In the end, there is a means of correlating the systems, even for extraverted types. I have always voiced my disgust for socionics, keirsey and the hybrid systems like Beren, adopting the MBTI four letter codes. It only muddles the readers understanding that they are separate systems. Glad that others see that point of view.
    However, I have shown that there is a means of correlating the two systems. Assuming that MBTI is well-intertwined with CG Jung's idea of Dominant/Auxiliary functions (I Have been waiting for someone to challenge this assumption because I believe this is where the fault lies), then we can simply correlate MBTI types with Socionics types by matching the functions. To put it in another sense, the INTJ description is elaboration of a person with Introverted Intuition and Extraverted Thinking. Similarly, the INTp description is an elaboration of a person of the same type. Hypothetically, if you are telling me that INTJ does not match with INTp, then are you telling me (implicitly) that there are multiple interpretations for the expression of the same sets of functions, if that's the case, then we have to call the whole framework into question because it is now no different from Astrology. How do we actually know which interpretation is correct? To respond to ishysquishy's remark, we should ONLY cling to logical theories because the alternative is much worse.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kristiina
    I know you might not even notice this post, because you are already so heated up. I just want to say that it doesn't matter. We might as well be choosing the best religion or anything else that has neither one right answer nor possibility of compromise. Stop talking about the MBTI/ Socionics thing.
    I am not heated up, I do like debates though and it brings out my passionate side. This is one of those times where the INTj's eyes flare up as mentioned in the profiles. I didn't come here for a fight though. I just have strongly felt that given my understanding, INTjs most closely correspond to INTP. If some of you believe that I am incorrect, I would love to hear your reasons so I may learn why I am wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kristiina
    Just tell us what you know, not what you read from a random website that could be either one - MBTI or socionics. What is the main thing that usually comes between INTjs and success.
    I sometimes think that INTj (MBTI INTPs) are just wired for failure because everything about us seems to be unfit for the "real world." We do have some very serious personal obstacles to overcome in order to succeed and I still haven't figured out a good way to overcome them. In fact, before I discovered personality typing, I was extremely depressed because I was acknowledging all these "problems" that consistently stopped me from achieving my goals. I thought that I was poorly raised and that in addition to picking up good traits, I also picked up very bad traits. Well, I now know better (and feel better) in that the qualities I have always admired in myself are the expression of my functions and it is these same functions that also expresses these "poorer" qualities. So in some sense, I have all these bad traits because I have all these good traits; I can't actually acquire just the good traits.

  23. #23
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    I sometimes think that INTj (MBTI INTPs) are just wired for failure because everything about us seems to be unfit for the "real world." We do have some very serious personal obstacles to overcome in order to succeed and I still haven't figured out a good way to overcome them. In fact, before I discovered personality typing, I was extremely depressed because I was acknowledging all these "problems" that consistently stopped me from achieving my goals. I thought that I was poorly raised and that in addition to picking up good traits, I also picked up very bad traits. Well, I now know better (and feel better) in that the qualities I have always admired in myself are the expression of my functions and it is these same functions that also expresses these "poorer" qualities. So in some sense, I have all these bad traits because I have all these good traits; I can't actually acquire just the good traits.
    ... right, but like any person, one must learn to balance their strengths with and against their weaknesses. It's nothing specific to INTjs.

    I like how you said
    I sometimes think that INTj (MBTI INTPs) are just wired for failure because everything about us seems to be unfit for the "real world.
    I think learning how to apply the "powers" you posses to functional things, regardless of type, is part of it all. Everyone does have issues to overcome, I do agree. But they can be overcome

    I'm really lucky, honestly, because I've had a great family (though weird and eccentric), who, other than leaving my a lot of time to myself (or perhaps I did that naturally...), were loving, and showed me a lot of good things. And when the bad things did come, I was able to learn from them, and not just get "affected" and ndegatively affected by them

    I mean, I grew up with a few divorces in my life, and a whole lot of.... "untypicalness", but I've learned how to manage myself in society; it can be done. It's, perhaps, really just a matter of contingency....
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think I should have been more clear about what I was really talking about when I said I feel that INTjs are wired for failure. I meant, not posessing some of the neccessary traits that enables them to achieve the high goals they establish for themselves. Before I knew about personality typing, I thought I was wired for failure but only after reading about INTjs (INTPs) that I learned that my problems actually do affect other INTjs (INTPs).

    First and foremost, the one thing I hate about myself the most is my procrastination. I have procrastinated for as long as I can remember but back then, I could easily get away because I was just a brilliant kid; I could do things that would take a fraction of the time it would take for other kids. Now that I am in college, I am finding procrastination increasingly more difficult to get away with and my procrastination has bitten me more than enough times already. The sad part is, I am having such great difficulty changing this habit.

    Another thing that is prevents me from succeeding is that I can't seem to focus on that which I must accomplish and only focus what I want to do. However, life isn't that simple and sometimes you have to do this even if you don't enjoy doing it. Ever since I was young, I have been extremely interested and skilled in Mathematics. In fact, during High School, I managed to self-teach AP Calculus BC and score a five on the AP exam as a Junior. In college, I decided on becoming a Mathematics major and enjoy a very solid first two years with a 4.0 GPA in one of the top institutions in the country for Math. Somehow after those two years, I managed to lose interest in Mathematics and cannot seem to get myself to even do the work and as a result, I managed to get Cs an even a few Fs.

    Perhaps a third thing that prevents me from succeeding is that when it comes to following a scheduling, I am competely incompetent, Luckily I have not been in an incident in which punctuality is of upmost important but I have been reprimanded for coming to work late a few times, and (of course I sometimes come in early but that doesn't invalidate my lateness; the real world just doesn't work that way). I have learned to avoid situations that require punctuality but in my opinion, a better fix is just being able to be consistently punctual.

    Perhaps my weaknesses can be summarized in that I simply lack discipline. My father is an ENTJ and he has qualities that I admire so much. He has tried very hard to pass those qualities into me but without success. I suppose our independence makes it difficult for us to be naturally compliant. Luckily he is supportive and yet forceful enough to prevent my worst traits from making my life run astray. I need to somehow overcome all of these problems and acquire some solid discipline if I am to succeed in life later on. My father is legally blind and possesses other difficult obstacles. Yet in his ENTJness he has managed to accomplish so much such as owning and managing a successful business, that I am such in awe. I suppose the good part of all this is that I do recognize I have personal problems that I must work out.

    Other types have with it takes to achieve their goals, especially, MBTI TJs (Extraverted Thinking types), who can achieve very high goals. However, INTPs have great difficult because they usually set very high goals and do not possess enough "goal-achieving" traits such as persistence.

  25. #25
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I know what you mean.

    I am currently... somewhere in between, a limbo of sorts. It's a lot easier to learn and be good at something in which you are interested, or find useful, etc. I need to recalibrate myself so that I can do what I need to do in order to succeed. I'm a freshman in college, and I see all the oppertunities where I could be making perfect scores, but I haven't taken all of them up yet. I'm working on that, though... ....

    I'm a very.... "inertia" kind of learner, or most everything. Right now, my inertia is leading me towards B grades (this is what I'm feeling, but I haven't gotten any real grades back yet ). But I want that 4.0, and people in my family kind of are hinting at it, too. They would be happy with me getting Bs, or just doing well, but I've always been disssapointed with my grades. I'm a professional student, now, though, so I have to think of it as "doing my job", and other motivational things. I have all the motivation that is neccesary... I have the time, the abilities. I just have to do it.

    I have, fittingly enough (though put there months ago)... this fortune cookie statemet: "Wisdom is knowing what to do next, skill is knowing how to do it, and virtue is doing it". Trite and cliche, but true in my regard. I have to ....... improve.....
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  26. #26
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Actually, if they are an MBTI INTJ they should read that description even if they are a Socionics Logical-Intuitive Intratim.
    You statement rests of the following premise: The MBTI Personality exams are accurate. One of the criticism I have heard about MBTI is that the exams are far from accurate and that the answers are easily affected by the taker's current mood. I believe it is true that how an INTj is in front of a computer is completely different how such a person is in the "real world" because INTjs feel very comfortable in front of a computer. Regardless of this criticism, it is widely accepted that the MBTI Personality exams are not meant to be definitive in that you might be a different type despite the fact that you have been tests as a certain type.
    But your statements rely on being able to infer your MBTI personality type by knowing your Socionics personality type (or vice versa). This is simply an unrealistic way of viewing the situation. If you tested as INTJ in MBTI, you wouldn't go read the INTP advice just because you were a Socionics LII.

    I'm an IEI, I test as INFP in MBTI. The functions certainly don't match between them, and I don't think I'm a Fi-Ne type anway. But reading the descriptions of MBTI types, it is quite clear that I'm not an INFJ, and definately an INFP. So, when directed to advice for MBTI types, I'll read the INFP advice and not INFJ.

    I heard that MBTI measures dichotomies (S/N etc.) rather than the actual functions (Se/Si/Ne/Ni etc.). I don't know how accurate this is, but if it's the case it actually makes more sense for the LII to be an MBTI INTJ - because they are both introverted NT rationals, despite what the functions might say. Rocky brought up this issue here (near the bottom of the page).

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Because people's J/P don't seem to switch, we need to consider the idea that what MBTI measures/considers is different to Socionics, even if it appears to be the same or similar.
    Don't get too stuck on the whole J/P Switching thing. MBTI could have called INTJs, ABCDs and INTPs, EFGHs and my point wouldn't change. I am not attacking the letters, I am attacking the designations. MBTI INTP (or EFGH) is probably the Socionics INTJ type despite what your intuition tell you.
    I'm not stuck on the J/P letters, I was trying to be concise. Take 2...

    Because people who are MBTI TiNe types don't tend to be Socionics TiNe types, we need to consider the idea that what MBTI measures/considers is different to Socionics, even if it appears to be the same or similar.

    That better?

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    But your statements rely on being able to infer your MBTI personality type by knowing your Socionics personality type (or vice versa). This is simply an unrealistic way of viewing the situation. If you tested as INTJ in MBTI, you wouldn't go read the INTP advice just because you were a Socionics LII.
    Why would it be unrealistic? I have mentioned that it is possible that testing conditions are not ideal and that it is easy to get the wrong type from testing. And of course, I am not saying "just because," I am offering a very valid reason why you should read the INTP profile if you were tested as an LII. Quite simply, you should be reading profiles that fit your functions and perhaps if a profile based on those functions do not fit you, then you should seriously consider a few possibilities (this should be completely natural if you are an INTj/INTP). First possibility is that perhaps the profile contains incorrect information, which is highly likely given that this is the internet. Second possibility is that you are really not an INTj/INTP.

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    I'm an IEI, I test as INFP in MBTI. The functions certainly don't match between them, and I don't think I'm a Fi-Ne type anway. But reading the descriptions of MBTI types, it is quite clear that I'm not an INFJ, and definately an INFP. So, when directed to advice for MBTI types, I'll read the INFP advice and not INFJ.
    I browsed a few websites and it appears that your issue is a bit complicated. I am going to assume that you are completely certain that Introverted Intuition is your primary and Extraverted Feeling is your auxiliary given your understanding of the functions. OK, I looked at a few sites and despite the fact that they say that INFJ is NiFe, they don't actually explain how NiFe makes an INFJ. There was one site that did but the descriptions were so vague that I felt that I was reading astrology. I suppose in your case, you have a problem with the profiles being largely inaccurate whereby INFJ profiles no longer fit you, but INFP profiles just happen to fit you because they have enough information that fits you that doesn't really belong in an INFP profile. If this is not the case then there is an alternative explanation...

    MBTI and Socionics have different interpretations of the way functions work. In other words, Socionics Extraverted Feeling, for example, is not exactly the same as MBTI Extraverted Feeling, or the way dominant functions and auxiliary functions work may not be the same. I highly doubt that this the case because this is such a big thing to ignore. I mean, if this is the case, then either Socionics or MBTI (or both) digress from CG Jung's original work on the functions in a significant way and this would be such an important characteristic that it would be noted, which is not what I have seen.

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    I heard that MBTI measures dichotomies (S/N etc.) rather than the actual functions (Se/Si/Ne/Ni etc.). I don't know how accurate this is, but if it's the case it actually makes more sense for the LII to be an MBTI INTJ - because they are both introverted NT rationals, despite what the functions might say. Rocky brought up this issue here (near the bottom of the page).

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Because people's J/P don't seem to switch, we need to consider the idea that what MBTI measures/considers is different to Socionics, even if it appears to be the same or similar.
    Don't get too stuck on the whole J/P Switching thing. MBTI could have called INTJs, ABCDs and INTPs, EFGHs and my point wouldn't change. I am not attacking the letters, I am attacking the designations. MBTI INTP (or EFGH) is probably the Socionics INTJ type despite what your intuition tell you.
    I'm not stuck on the J/P letters, I was trying to be concise. Take 2...

    Because people who are MBTI TiNe types don't tend to be Socionics TiNe types, we need to consider the idea that what MBTI measures/considers is different to Socionics, even if it appears to be the same or similar.

    That better?
    I don't have an authoritative knowledge of MBTI so I can't comment on what MBTI really uses. If MBTI really does use dichotomies only and bear no relation to the functions, then they should not be pinning the functions onto each type because doing so only serves to confuse the profiles. I have raised the possibility that MBTI really doesn't use functions and that the people who write these MBTI profiles really don't know what they are doing and have mistakenly associated the functions with MBTI. Regardless of whether this is the case or not, the functions are on the profile and the system should make sense. In other words, it should be the case that you should be reading a profile matching your functions and if you shouldn't, then what's the explanation.

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Because people who are MBTI TiNe types don't tend to be Socionics TiNe types, we need to consider the idea that what MBTI measures/considers is different to Socionics, even if it appears to be the same or similar.

    That better?
    The reason why I even raised this issue is that I am well convinced that I am an INTj and I do find the INTP profiles fitting me more. I should ask Kirana why she (is it a she??) thinks that she is an INTj. I should also ask why she doesn't find the INTP profile fitting and what is it about the INTJ profile that fits more (these are questions that an INTj naturally raises and I am surprised that she hasn't raised them). INTP and INTJ profiles share a lot in common (more than 50%) and it is really easy to overlook the differences between the two.

    In my opinion, I think the best profile for INTj is this: http://www.intp.org/intprofile.html and this is what convinced me that I am an Socionics INTj and MBTI INTP (To be exact, I was convinced that Ti, Ne, Si, Fe were my functions). I really think that this is a very very good profile and I am really curious whether other INTjs feel the same way, and if not, why not. In the end, maybe we can hold a debate as to whether the other INTjs are really INTjs . Not being an INTj is actually a good thing though because the personality has some of the worst flaws of all types.

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Not being an INTj is actually a good thing though because the personality has some of the worst flaws of all types.
    What?
    I think INTjs have many great qualities and their flaws are no worst than any of the other types. I imagine though that because they are such perfectionists that their flaws might be very frustrating for them to deal with.

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    Not being an INTj is actually a good thing though because the personality has some of the worst flaws of all types.
    What?
    I think INTjs have many great qualities and their flaws are no worst than any of the other types. I imagine though that because they are such perfectionists that their flaws might be very frustrating for them to deal with.
    Hmmm. That's a very interesting perspective and I think you are right. I suppose that INTj are so self-reflective that we just see our flaws in a much worse light than how others see them.

  30. #30
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    I'm an IEI, I test as INFP in MBTI. The functions certainly don't match between them, and I don't think I'm a Fi-Ne type anway. But reading the descriptions of MBTI types, it is quite clear that I'm not an INFJ, and definately an INFP. So, when directed to advice for MBTI types, I'll read the INFP advice and not INFJ.
    I browsed a few websites and it appears that your issue is a bit complicated. I am going to assume that you are completely certain that Introverted Intuition is your primary and Extraverted Feeling is your auxiliary given your understanding of the functions. OK, I looked at a few sites and despite the fact that they say that INFJ is NiFe, they don't actually explain how NiFe makes an INFJ. There was one site that did but the descriptions were so vague that I felt that I was reading astrology. I suppose in your case, you have a problem with the profiles being largely inaccurate whereby INFJ profiles no longer fit you, but INFP profiles just happen to fit you because they have enough information that fits you that doesn't really belong in an INFP profile. If this is not the case then there is an alternative explanation...
    Well, I haven't read an INFJ profile that fits me at all. The INFP and IEI descriptions are actually quite similar a lot of the time. In this light, there's always the chance that the people writing the MBTI descriptions are writing for types with different functions to what they think they do.

  31. #31
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    Not being an INTj is actually a good thing though because the personality has some of the worst flaws of all types.
    What?
    I think INTjs have many great qualities and their flaws are no worst than any of the other types. I imagine though that because they are such perfectionists that their flaws might be very frustrating for them to deal with.
    Hmmm. That's a very interesting perspective and I think you are right. I suppose that INTj are so self-reflective that we just see our flaws in a much worse light than how others see them.


    Every type probably thinks they have the worst flaws, except perhaps for the specimens who think they're better than all other types, lol.

  32. #32

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    Not being an INTj is actually a good thing though because the personality has some of the worst flaws of all types.
    What?
    I think INTjs have many great qualities and their flaws are no worst than any of the other types. I imagine though that because they are such perfectionists that their flaws might be very frustrating for them to deal with.
    Hmmm. That's a very interesting perspective and I think you are right. I suppose that INTj are so self-reflective that we just see our flaws in a much worse light than how others see them.


    Every type probably thinks they have the worst flaws, except perhaps for the specimens who think they're better than all other types, lol.
    Since I am not an INTp, I don't really know what are their flaws but I don't think they really have any that would bother me. I currently have a big problem with motivation and it is almost ruining my life in many areas. As a result, INTp and ENTj have qualities that I so desperately admire and I am willing to sacrifice some of the intellectual abilities of an INTj (INTjs are the most logical and analytical of all types) just for a more successful life and the ability to be free from the self-intellectual bullying of Introverted Thinking that is slowly eating away my sanity. INTjs really don't have all that it takes to succeed unlike ENTj and INTp (and ISTp but I am not willing to give up that much intellectual abilities (I do have an ISTp friend and I do dislike his personality and his decisions do drive me nuts sometimes)). I don't know too much about ESTj though so I am not going to comment.

  33. #33

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    INTjs really don't have all that it takes to succeed unlike ENTj ...
    wym123, I am not sure that anyone has all that it takes to succeed.

    Some people might have certain natural advantages but INTjs have strenghts too and their weaknesses can surely be overcome despite the difficulties.


    On the issue of discipline, I think it can be hard to discipline the self to start out but discipline I find does get easier to exercise with firm committment and daily practice.
    I do not know if it will be the same for you, but one of my greatest source of happiness is when I have succeeded in disciplining myself and staying focused on an issue that was previously causing me fear (linked to procrastination) and frustration.

    I think it helps though to have goals that are actually yours and that you still truly believe are worth achieving.

  34. #34
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wym123
    Since I am not an INTp, I don't really know what are their flaws but I don't think they really have any that would bother me. I currently have a big problem with motivation and it is almost ruining my life in many areas. As a result, INTp and ENTj have qualities that I so desperately admire and I am willing to sacrifice some of the intellectual abilities of an INTj (INTjs are the most logical and analytical of all types) just for a more successful life and the ability to be free from the self-intellectual bullying of Introverted Thinking that is slowly eating away my sanity. INTjs really don't have all that it takes to succeed unlike ENTj and INTp (and ISTp but I am not willing to give up that much intellectual abilities (I do have an ISTp friend and I do dislike his personality and his decisions do drive me nuts sometimes)). I don't know too much about ESTj though so I am not going to comment.
    .......... you're making way too many excuses... It has nothing to do with personality type, it has to do with the ability to use what you've got - I'm speaking in regards to success.

    You speak of people as if they are all exact definitions, projections, of their personality types, and cannot overcome them at all. If that is the case, not only are you narrow minded to an extreme, but you are preventing yourself from any chance of success at all sheerly by stopping befor your start.

    Don't take this the wrong way, but I almost want to say that you need to have some "real life" experience, and grow up from that limited view. I do not believe that you understand how things work in this world, from what you've been saying in some of your posts so far. And don't bullshit about how "oh, I'm an INTj, so I can't do it" - - - you are a human being, first and foremost.

    If you have any specific questions about what I am saying here, let me know, I'll be happy to state my peice.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  35. #35
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I want to say that you are very good at your strengths and very bad at your weaknesses, so you're not rounded at all, just lopsided. That can changed with time, experience, and effort. It's........ it's like you're putting the cart infront of the horse, though. You're using your type to define and limit you, instead of allowing it to be the base for you to build off of.

    Since discovering my types, I have been more comfortable with my limitations in some areas, but that doesn't mean that I completely concede in them. But then again, this is just how I view things. Whatever my type is, I don't want to just be the best "xxxx" that I can be, I want to be the best "UDP" that I can be - the best me. THe best person, human being, etc. A personality type should not be considered a glass sealing.


    But then again, you seem very, very concerned with the whole INTP=INTj aspect, seeking that certainty....... you seem almost scared, in a clingy way, like you need to be reassured of something. Maybe it's just my interpretation, though. I'm getting a strange vibe from you. Maybe you're just a hardcore logical subtype, and you've been banking on it your whole life, so you haven't needed to differ from that.

    (this post is essentially 100% speculation, thoughts tossed out to see how you will react to them, what they mean to you, etc)
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP
    .......... you're making way too many excuses... It has nothing to do with personality type, it has to do with the ability to use what you've got - I'm speaking in regards to success.
    I am not using INTj as an excuse for anything. However, most INTjs are really not naturally motivated people and this is a fact. I never said that I cannot change. I have noticed that I have changed a lot over the years but I still haven't worked out some of the key problems in my life. However, I am sure in time, I will even work those out too.

    But my comment that "INTjs are wired for failure" is a conclusion based on these key premises,
    1. All NTs are endowed with superb intellectual gifts and hence, the potential to achieve a lot.
    2. INTjs, like other NTs, set very high goals for themselves, thinking that they can achieve them.
    3. INTjs however, are not endowed with characteristics, such as perservance and motivation, etc that will enabled them to realize their potential.
    4. without these characteristics, INTjs can easily fail to meet his or her ambitious goals.

    As you can see, they are "wired for failure" because they are wired with such great gifts and with great ambition, but without complementary "wiring" to realize these gifts and ambition. It is almost as if we are set up to fail. But of course, all weakness can be overcome, and it is possible to "manually" do the complementary wiring but that's not the point. I know that perhaps, I sound as if I want everything hand fed to me but that isn't the case. I have been attempting the manual wiring but my Ti and Ne can't help to analyze my failures to notice patterns and draw this conclusion.

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP
    You speak of people as if they are all exact definitions, projections, of their personality types, and cannot overcome them at all. If that is the case, not only are you narrow minded to an extreme, but you are preventing yourself from any chance of success at all sheerly by stopping befor your start.

    Don't take this the wrong way, but I almost want to say that you need to have some "real life" experience, and grow up from that limited view. I do not believe that you understand how things work in this world, from what you've been saying in some of your posts so far. And don't bullshit about how "oh, I'm an INTj, so I can't do it" - - - you are a human being, first and foremost.

    I want to say that you are very good at your strengths and very bad at your weaknesses, so you're not rounded at all, just lopsided. That can changed with time, experience, and effort. It's........ it's like you're putting the cart infront of the horse, though. You're using your type to define and limit you, instead of allowing it to be the base for you to build off of.
    Huh?! ("What the hell is this???")

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP
    But then again, you seem very, very concerned with the whole INTP=INTj aspect, seeking that certainty....... you seem almost scared, in a clingy way, like you need to be reassured of something. Maybe it's just my interpretation, though. I'm getting a strange vibe from you. Maybe you're just a hardcore logical subtype, and you've been banking on it your whole life, so you haven't needed to differ from that.
    Huh!? You are definitely reading EVERYTHING WRONG. I am reasonbly sure that I am an INTP and an INTj and I don't need anyone to convince me for me to believe that (People can dissuade me if they are sufficiently convincing though). When joseph2505 made the post, I decided to share my view that INTjs are INTP, not INTJ, and explained why. But the fact that I was met with opposition, actually made me think that the people in the forums are not INTj. However, my intuition tells me that that might not be the case because a few of you do sound INTj/INTP to me. So then, I just grew curious as to why people are strongly clinging on to the belief that they are INTJ. Perhaps, I am wrong and that not all INTjs are INTPs and that some INTjs are actually INTJs. But then, I don't see why that would be the case and if that is the case, there are major issues with the foundations of the two frameworks.

    Oh and by the way, UDP, if you think you are an INTj, then I think you really don't know your type. Your posts sound very F to me. In fact, one of the ways I can tell is that I get especially confused and disgusted when I see F responses trying to pose as T responses.

    Try this exam: http://www.gesher.org/Myers-Briggs/GW_Test.html
    I would really like to hear your results.

  37. #37

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan
    I think it helps though to have goals that are actually yours and that you still truly believe are worth achieving.
    That's my current strategy at the moment. I think what I need is something I really love and so I am going to see how Computer Science works out. A few months ago, I with my friends talking about our interests in Mathematics and I now come to the conclusion that I am no longer motivated in Mathematics because I wasn't really interested in Mathematics in the first place. I think I was just drawn to it because I really good at it and also mesmerized by its splendor and elegance. Then again, I am actually not sure.

  38. #38
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I will take the test, sure.

    But I don't post in the exact same way all the time. What I wrote does sound more like an F, I'm pretty sure of that.

    However, it my post, to be honest, was based soley on intuition, and not on thought at all. ( )

    I'm not like most in that I post the exact same way all the time. And, for the record, I could have read your posts more thouroughly, but I'm busy with other things, so I just stated my questions and had you answer them.


    .......

    49. In reading, do you prefer
    Biography
    Novels
    50. Do you prefer the entrance to a building
    Small
    Large
    51. At a party are you happier with
    I don't really like your test. I understand that each question is a choice between two alternatives, but sometimes the question is so poor that I would generally select "neither" or "both". It seems very limited. I will finish it though. http://www.socionics.com/advan/tests.html - better tests, in my opinoin. There was another one that someone posted her a while ago... but I don't remember what it was. It was one of the really longer ones.... (anyone remember that?)

    53. Would you rather have friends around
    1 night, alone 6
    3 nights, alone 4
    54. When a person has a wrong idea, do you
    Change the subject
    Try to convert them
    .............

    55. Does a problem seem like a closed room which intuition has to open


    65. Are you unaccountably restless
    From time to time
    Rarely
    ..... what about "frequently", or "often" ? I mean, y or n might be more effective here.

    7. Before a spring landscape, are tou more aware of
    General lines and coloring
    Details of sky, trees, flowers
    ... can't even spell 'you' right...

    69. In reading for information, do your prefer the presentation
    Sustained and thorough
    Many-sided and mobile



    ........ and now the score. You can have fun over the S/N score, if you like

    Your Gray-Wheelwright Type Is: INTP
    Category of Question Total Number of Questions Raw Scores
    E/I Preference

    34
    E=8 I=26
    S/N Preference

    26
    S=13 N=13
    T/F Preference

    21
    T=14 F=7
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    westfield, nj usa
    Posts
    529
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Try this exam: http://www.gesher.org/Myers-Briggs/GW_Test.html
    I would really like to hear your results.
    i just took the test. i don't hold a lot of value to it. many of the answers were both choices. and many of the questions didn't make any sense. some were a delibrate choice - such as a problem needs intuition to solve. that's dumb. it's like praying something will work if you have faith. intuition doesn't solve everything. but anyway i got ISTJ, i've gotten that before, as i go both ways:

    Your Gray-Wheelwright Type Is: ISTJ

    Category of Question Total Number of Questions Raw Scores

    E/I Preference 34 - E=11 I=23

    S/N Preference 26 - S=17 N=9

    T/F Preference 21 - T=11 F=10

    all other tests i usually score as an INTJ, that socion thing had me at INTP (which i'm still not sure what it means). but pretty much, the questions are simply confusing.

  40. #40
    Kristiina's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Estonia, Tartu
    Posts
    4,021
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    wym123 - I do agree with you in most aspects. I have a huge problem with procrastination too, and I feel like I'm always on the verge of failure. I am never good enough and I don't think I have an advantage compared to all of the people who want the same thing as I do. I can't stop pushing myself and I am successful and happy as long as everything goes according to my high-goal plan. As you can imagine, something is bound to go wrong so I have a high risk of falling into depression about 1-2 times per year. (if I fail in one thing, I will be discouraged and might not be able to do the next thing. If I don't notice the change in myself, I might no be able to stop depression.) It's not easy to live like that. I also agree that MBTI types should correlate to socionics types and a long time ago, I argued about it in this forum. It got me nowhere and now I have just seen that there is no correlation. sorry.

    Megan - It's the same with me - the greatest joy is when I do something that I have postponed for a long time. And I do know that my goals are good, but discipline is still just a word. Even simple phone calls are something I have to prepare myself for. I try to discipline myself, but this is a real problem for me.

    UDP - I don't think that I have to act in a certain way because I am INTj. I have had the same success-depression cycle even long before I heard about any types.

    I haven't really learned how to get out of the cycle. The only thing I do know is that I am moving up the hill... My grade point average is raising, I feel better and prettier, my dressing style has improved, I imagine myself doing what I want to do. The problem is that I still live in the future. In stead of feeling happy about my life, I am always worried if I am able to reach the next phase which I have imagined. I wouldn't know it if I was successful. I would always wonder if I can be even more successful in the future. I won't stop until I get the Nobel prize or until it has become obvious that I can't get any more successful.
    EIE, ENFj, intuitive subtype.
    E3 (probably 3w4)

    Cool ILI hubbys are better than LSIs any time!

    Old blog: http://firsttimeinusa.blogspot.com/
    New blog: http://having-a-kid.blogspot.com/

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •