How is MBTI J/P different from Socionics j/p

[Luke]

As a theoretical case, this would need more investigation. So the person is "absolutely sure" of having dominant introverted intuition and extraverted feeling, yet describes herself (I will say "she" for simplicity) in ways that indicate she is not IEI -- what does all of that mean? We'd have to know why she's "absolutely sure" of anything, and why she does not seem IEI. Until we see an actual case, it means nothing, really. As a hypothetical example, it is very simple to conclude that she's simply wrong.

http://www.infjorinfp.com/docs/HolidayTest.htm

Is Vicky Jo describing INFJ as a dynamic or rational type, in your opinion?

[Jonathan]

As a theoretical case, this would need more investigation. So the person is "absolutely sure" of having dominant introverted intuition and extraverted feeling, yet describes herself (I will say "she" for simplicity) in ways that indicate she is not IEI -- what does all of that mean? We'd have to know why she's "absolutely sure" of anything, and why she does not seem IEI. Until we see an actual case, it means nothing, really. As a hypothetical example, it is very simple to conclude that she's simply wrong.



Again, that means nothing - nothing at all - if we don't discuss precisely why some people are typing him as ISTJ, and others, EII. Is the disagreement about types, or is it about history? Etc.

You're absolutely right in terms of looking at individual cases, but that misses the point of what I was saying. Sure, if one person types Lincoln as MBTI-ISTJ and another person types him as Socionics-EII, that doesn't in any way prove that the first person was recognizing aspects of Delta quadra elements and therefore within the functional system of MBTI had to settle on ISTJ. Someone might type people based on all sorts of reasons and misunderstandings. However, there were a number of instances where I've seen these kinds of typings, and that suggests a pattern that's interesting. It doesn't prove anything...merely suggests an avenue of investigation.

Similarly, I wasn't thinking of anyone in particular with the person who considers herself Ni/Fe. Of course the person may just misunderstand, etc. All I was saying is that it's these cases overall that present a greater challenge than cases where, say, someone thinks she's INFJ but really hasn't thought deeply about the functions, and when presented with Socionics, recognizes she isn't IEI and sees no contradiction.

And let's face it...The state of Socionics is very much based on people's perceptions, both of themselves and others. We don't have a lot of statistical data, or if there is such data, it's not discussed on this forum. So if someone thinks very strongly he, she, or someone else is a particular type, and we disagree with that assessment, it's naturally to wonder "why does that person think this so strongly?" It's not necessarily a reason for changing our assessment of the person's type, of course.

[Igxfl]

A lot of you have probably seen this article:
http://www.socionics.com/articles/lim_mbti_soc.html

This really clears up a lot of the j/p vs. J/P stuff to me. I've often thought the J/P of MBTI (=~ Static/Dynamic) often seems to more accurately describe some aspects of type and the socionic j/p others. The difference seems specifically evident in SLI & LII, and shows up in most of the introverts at least a bit. This could be an improved way to look at rationality. Although I must admit, the whole area has always been something of a mess anyway.