Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Ipersonic

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Ipersonic...

    So my buddy showed me this personality site he found called "ipersonic" (ipersonic.com)- seems to have gained a decent bit of popularity. I explored the site a good bit and did a google search on it; it basically looks to have the same Jung theory basis as socionics/mbti (though ultimately closer to mbti it would seem)- seems to be "revamped" a bit, however.
    A particular point of interest to socionics followers might be the system's romantic relationships basis, which poses some strong differences as compared to socionics type relations. For example an ipersonic "DI" (socionics infp) is matched up "best" with an ipersonic "DR" (socionics estj- conflictor). On the other hand, socionics duals are predicted to have only mediocre relationship prospects. Other romantic relationships predicted particularly good by ipersonic (based on matching ipersonic types to socionics types) are: relationships of benefit, look-a-likes, contrary relations, and quasi-identical relations.

    Any particular opinions on the matter or anyone know anything more? Could romanticism be something to consider as changing the very nature of type relations (even in time) as defined by socionics?
    Curious about your opinions.
    (P.S.- the theory is said to have been "based on three years of research".)

  2. #2
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    HERESY!!!!

    BURN 'EM!!!
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hahahaha. Well we should burn 'em all then, to be fair.

    I get a flamethrower.

  4. #4
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Basically, you need to wind up with your identical (your soul mate) or your conflictor (oppositely attractive). I don't even see the rationale there.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  5. #5
    JohnDo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    LII-IEI
    Posts
    638
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just another MBTI test with different type names. Those tests work good for some people and completely fail for others...

    Why do they recommend "conflict relations"? Because tests are not accurate...

    Just forget about tests...

  6. #6
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A Person View Post
    (P.S.- the theory is said to have been "based on three years of research".)
    well we know that that is a lie then.

    Since official MBTI once 'reasoned' that the best match was someone with the opposite jungian dichotomies. INFP and ESTJ.

    Though they actually did checked that, and they saw they were completely wrong. And from that moment they have never tried to make a relationship theorie based on mbti.

    I once wrote to another site who claimed to have researched etc and told them that socionics claimed otherwise. I got the most amateuristic astrology based answer from the sitebuilder that I have given up debating with that kind of amateurs.

    Socionics is correct. The rest is 'talking out of their asses'. You'll find out yourself soon enough when dating your conflictor :-)

    But this is just part of the world, the internet is full of bullshit. Actually there's more bullshit then truth, so it takes a keen eye and 'test it yourself mentality' to filter it out.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    well we know that that is a lie then.

    Since official MBTI once 'reasoned' that the best match was someone with the opposite jungian dichotomies. INFP and ESTJ.

    Though they actually did checked that, and they saw they were completely wrong. And from that moment they have never tried to make a relationship theorie based on mbti.

    I once wrote to another site who claimed to have researched etc and told them that socionics claimed otherwise. I got the most amateuristic astrology based answer from the sitebuilder that I have given up debating with that kind of amateurs.

    Socionics is correct. The rest is 'talking out of their asses'. You'll find out yourself soon enough when dating your conflictor :-)

    But this is just part of the world, the internet is full of bullshit. Actually there's more bullshit then truth, so it takes a keen eye and 'test it yourself mentality' to filter it out.

    Yeah, I tend to agree with you, though I was just curious what people would say. I've observed a good deal of socionics relations "in action" (was pretty into this long ago, so I've had a while)... and though I don't think socionics relations necessarily always pan out as stated in theory, I do certainly think they're the most accurate I've seen.
    It's also supposedly an "award winning test"... which cracks me up, as there really seems to be nothing new.

  8. #8
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A Person View Post
    Yeah, I tend to agree with you, though I was just curious what people would say. I've observed a good deal of socionics relations "in action" (was pretty into this long ago, so I've had a while)... and though I don't think socionics relations necessarily always pan out as stated in theory, I do certainly think they're the most accurate I've seen.
    It's also supposedly an "award winning test"... which cracks me up, as there really seems to be nothing new.
    yeah it's probably commercial shit, or some guy who wants to sound interesting.

  9. #9
    wants to be a writer. silverchris9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,107
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    well we know that that is a lie then.

    Since official MBTI once 'reasoned' that the best match was someone with the opposite jungian dichotomies. INFP and ESTJ.

    Though they actually did checked that, and they saw they were completely wrong. And from that moment they have never tried to make a relationship theorie based on mbti.
    Give the j/p switch, don't the first and second functions technically line up as they do in socionics? That is, since an ESTJ has the same ego functions as a socionics LSE and an INFP has the same ego functions as a socionics EII, doesn't that make the MBTI reasoning correct, or at least matching with socionics?
    Not a rule, just a trend.

    IEI. Probably Fe subtype. Pretty sure I'm E4, sexual instinctual type, fairly confident that I'm a 3 wing now, so: IEI-Fe E4w3 sx/so. Considering 3w4 now, but pretty sure that 4 fits the best.

    Yes 'a ma'am that's pretty music...

    I am grateful for the mystery of the soul, because without it, there could be no contemplation, except of the mysteries of divinity, which are far more dangerous to get wrong.

  10. #10
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silverchris9 View Post
    Give the j/p switch, don't the first and second functions technically line up as they do in socionics? That is, since an ESTJ has the same ego functions as a socionics LSE and an INFP has the same ego functions as a socionics EII, doesn't that make the MBTI reasoning correct, or at least matching with socionics?
    yeah, but mbti doesn't use functions to produce types. They really mean an ESTJ and INFP, only they say the INFP person has INFJ functions, which he ofcourse has not.

  11. #11
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Took it and read it. Doesn't sound very consistent.

  12. #12
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

Posting Permissions

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