View Poll Results: How do these descriptions correspond to Socionics types?

Voters
21. You may not vote on this poll
  • Scientist to INTj, Thinker to INTp

    8 38.10%
  • Scientist to INTp, Thinker to INTj

    13 61.90%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 100

Thread: Scientist and Thinker: INTj or INTp?

  1. #1
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default Scientist and Thinker: INTj or INTp?

    Removed at User Request
    Last edited by Pied Piper; 10-26-2010 at 11:54 PM.

  2. #2
    when you see the booty Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    everywhere at once
    Posts
    8,449
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    lol I was about to do what you explicitly asked us not to do

    The trouble with these sorts of descriptions is that they're made with those stereotype words in mind, like "possibilites" and "theory". I mean, those kinds of words appear in pretty much every type description, so I can't really see how they can be avoided. Another trouble is that both types are made out to be extremely E5, which doesn't allow for much variability within the types.

    Even so, thinker sounds definitively INTj. "What things could be turned into" reminds of the idea of Ne being equatable to "permutation". The search for "absolute truth" seems like something I've seen in several Ti egos.

    That whole paragraph about "people not understanding scientists" seems like it's trying to come across as Fe PoLR, but that could just as easily apply to a mentally unwell INTj. However, since the thinker one sounds much more INTj than not, that leaves INTp for the scientist.
    "And above all, watch with glittering eyes the whole world around you because the greatest secrets are always hidden in the most unlikely places. Those who don't believe in magic will never find it." -Roald Dahl

    http://forum.socionix.com/
    It's pretty cool

  3. #3
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Scientist: ENTj
    Thinker: INTj/INTp

  4. #4
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beyond the blue horizon
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    13,088
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Scientist: Te-LIE
    Thinker: Ti-LII (Alpha NT)
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  5. #5
    Bananas are good. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The Rift
    TIM
    C-EIE, 7-4-8 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,632
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Scientist: LIE , ILE
    Thinker: LII , ILI

    Can I say which MBTI type is which, or will it ruin the surprise?
    What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.

    Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).

    For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.

    -Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov

  6. #6
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  7. #7
    Bananas are good. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The Rift
    TIM
    C-EIE, 7-4-8 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,632
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Scientist: INTJ
    Thinker: INTP
    What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.

    Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).

    For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.

    -Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov

  8. #8
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Case for INTP (The Thinker) as INTp(The Observer)

    I'll start you guys off with 3 examples. Make sure you check them in all four descriptions to make sure I'm not slipping anything past you. If I feel generous later with my apparently scarce knowledge of the truth, I'll provide more convincing examples from elsewhere on the Personality Page or Wikisocion (or some other socionics) website. The Personality Page portion of these 3 only refer to the paragraphs on the OP. I will find other personality page INTX pages for information in the future (with the link provided of course).

    2 additional Descriptions I Referred to:
    Logical Intuitive Introtim - Wikisocion
    Intuitive Logical Introtim - Wikisocion

    Ordering:
    Personality Page INTP
    Wikisocion INTp
    Comments

    They typically are so strongly driven to turn problems into logical explanations, that they live much of their lives within their own heads
    They can spend a great deal of time simply thinking and may appear to live 'in their heads'.
    An exact match; Neither the Scientist Description, nor the Wikisocion LII description mention anything about INTj/J's living in their own head.

    (((The <thinker> has no understanding or value for decisions made on the basis of personal subjectivity or feelings. They strive constantly to achieve
    logical conclusions to problems, and don't understand the importance or relevance of applying subjective emotional considerations to decisions.)))
    (((ILIs analyze situations and make decisions in a very logical and scientific manner. Their reliance on objectivity and accumulation of factual knowledge
    leaves very little room for decisions based on emotional considerations.)))
    (((Another exact match; Nothing Like this is included in the INTj or INTJ profiles. Looks like both systems see the same types of people. )))

    When given an environment which supports his creative genius and possible eccentricity, the <thinker> can accomplish truly remarkable things.
    With their often unusual perceptions, they may come across as unreachable, esoteric eccentrics.
    In both the INTP and ILI descriptions the type is described as eccentric. This again, shows up nowhere in the INTJ or LII descriptions.

    Dance, Puppets. Dance!
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  9. #9
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  10. #10
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am quite certain it is Option A. I've been studying this for a while now.

    Convincing people of it unfortunately seems hopeless!

    The problem with using type 'descriptions' is that you will get a ton of confirmation bias ala astrology. You really need to examine the functions to accurately type someone imo.
    /

  11. #11
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  12. #12
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pied Piper View Post
    So basically do you think that what you voted is correct, that PP Scientist = LII and PP Thinker = ILI or you're merely technically correct based on the arguments above? Do you also relate to the description of the Scientist more than to the description of the Thinker?
    Aside from my arguments, yes, I do believe what I voted is correct. Taking the entire descriptions into account, I relate to the description of Scientist more than Thinker. Not only in the paragraphs you posted, but also the Career, Relationship, and Personal Growth pages seem to match me fairly better with INTJ than INTP. There are many similarities, so I can understand people getting confused (at first) but the more you read, the more the differences separate the two to a noticeable degree.
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  13. #13
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pied Piper View Post
    And you claimed that you use functions in typing, so I assume that you used them now, is it your opinion that the Scientist uses Ti and the Thinker uses Te?
    Yes; but I did not 'use' them because there was nothing to examine. There is no person to examine. This is just a 3rd party's perspective on the type.
    /

  14. #14
    High Priestess glam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,388
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Scientist (compared to The Thinker) at many points sounds like a generic NT to me, but if i had to pick i'd say it's moreso Gamma NT, especially ENTj due to the valuing of competence, need for clarity, leadership qualities, and holding others to high standards.

    The Thinker sounds consistently more like an alpha NT due to the focus on idea generation and theoretical possibilities, and moreso like an ENTp... including the self-aggrandizement part

    However, their primary interest is not understanding a concept, but rather applying that concept in a useful way. Unlike the <thinker>, they do not follow an idea as far as they possibly can, seeking only to understand it fully. <scientists> are driven to come to conclusions about ideas. Their need for closure and organization usually requires that they take some action.
    that quote is pretty crucial i think, contrasting the differing focuses on vs.

    so if i were to vote i'd choose "Scientist to INTp, Thinker to INTj", but i don't think the difference is actually that clear-cut... then again this exercise has been useful, forcing me to evaluate my own understanding of the four NT types, and to see that i could probably learn to better distinguish between the alpha/gamma NT mirror pairs...

  15. #15
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  16. #16
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was just expanding discussion, as usual. I could've just said:
    Scientist - LII
    Thinker - ILI
    But that would've been boring. Do you want this to be boring?
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  17. #17
    Bananas are good. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The Rift
    TIM
    C-EIE, 7-4-8 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,632
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Trying to establish clear-cut parallels and contrasts between MBTI and Socionics types is a fool's errand. MBTI types are far too broad and vague to connect to one given Socionics equivalent -- let alone its direct equivalent.
    What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.

    Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).

    For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.

    -Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov

  18. #18
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beyond the blue horizon
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    13,088
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glamourama View Post
    that quote is pretty crucial i think, contrasting the differing focuses on vs.
    Yes. Being driven to come to conclusions when exploring ideas and wanting to implement them practically (and have the effect/usefulness visible) is Te. And that's one of the strongest arguments/reasons for my SLI self-typing.

    I'd be curious to hear how you, as a Te PoLR feel in regards to this.
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  19. #19
    Creepy-Pied Piper

    Default

    Removed at User Request

  20. #20
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I used to argue against these (and many other) MBTI descriptions. I don't think either of them resembles ILI, except maybe in fragments, and that inconsistently, but neither does as a whole.

  21. #21
    High Priestess glam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,388
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Parkster View Post
    Yes. Being driven to come to conclusions when exploring ideas and wanting to implement them practically (and have the effect/usefulness visible) is Te. And that's one of the strongest arguments/reasons for my SLI self-typing.

    I'd be curious to hear how you, as a Te PoLR feel in regards to this.
    hmm, i guess fully understanding something *is* what's useful to me, even if it is not something i visibly implement. when something is understood i can come to "conclusions" and feel secure in my beliefs and understanding, otherwise i often feel unsure or wavering.

    hope that makes sense.

  22. #22
    Park's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Beyond the blue horizon
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    13,088
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glamourama View Post
    hope that makes sense.
    It does, and I relate to what you said. For certain things I am forced to just understand them well and not have them implemented in practice. A great example of this would be college, where I have courses in which I am supposed to learn a lot of theory because I "may" or will "probably" need it in real life, and the only implementation I ever get to do/see is through homework assignments, group projects, problem analysis etc. which is fine and can be amusing, but it's still very isolated from the real world, or a real job, in a way you can't clearly see the practical potential of what you're studying, and the ways in which it can be implemented into a profession where you will use it to work on "real" tasks/problems and actually earn from that.

    EDIT: I'd have no idea how this translates into Socionics, but I guess my need to know how to practically implement my knowledge and perhaps also my eagerness to gather information and "try things out" even before I fully understand something, could be indicative of Te.
    Last edited by Park; 10-24-2010 at 12:25 AM.
    “Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly
    You've done yourself a huge favor developmentally by mustering the balls to do something really fucking scary... in about the most vulnerable situation possible.

  23. #23
    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

    I didn't read the thread to spoil the surprise but what is the thinker, cause that's my twin brother.

  24. #24
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,648
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, if I had to choose, I'd take 'Scientist to INTj, Thinker to INTp'. Of course, there are many things which are right, but most of it is totally mixed and other facts you can actually apply to both types. I wouldn't recommend to link one of these descriptions with a socionics type directly, it would only cause more confusion. Maybe we should throw all these facts together and decide on every single one where it belongs. I think MBTI and Socionics aren't compatible. Unfortunately, people always assume connections because of their similar origin and type notations. After I learned about Socionics and accepted it as the 'better' system of these two, I refuse to make a statement about my MBTI type because I know it won't be precise.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  25. #25
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pied Piper View Post
    I'm gonna post the PersonalityPage descriptions of INTJ and INTP; the poll asks for your understanding, how do these descriptions correspond to the Socionics types?

    Recommendation:
    - ignore the names and functions on PersonalityPage so that you can be less biased - I copy the descriptions excluding those details, so that you can be detached from them;
    - keep the big picture in mind and don't stick to some keyword that you usually use for a Socionics type or function (eg. "possibilities" = Ni, which is used btw in both descriptions).
    I'm replying to this post first, without looking at the other replies, to avoid bias.

    It seems pretty cut-and-dried to me -- the "Scientist" is clearly ILI, and the "Thinker" is clearly LII.

    For example:

    Scientist
    • "However, their primary interest is not understanding a concept, but rather applying that concept in a useful way." -- this is clearly Te>Ti
    • "It is not easy for the <scientist> to express their internal images, insights, and abstractions. The internal form of the <scientist>'s thoughts and concepts is highly individualized, and is not readily translatable into a form that others will understand." -- this is very characteristic of Ni types.
    • "They are the supreme strategists - always scanning available ideas and concepts and weighing them against their current strategy, to plan for every conceivable contingency." -- this is actually a pretty good description of the dialectical-algorithmic cognitive style, as manifested in ILI.


    Thinker
    • "<thinker>s live in the world of theoretical possibilities. They see everything in terms of how it could be improved, or what it could be turned into." -- a decent description of Ego Ne.
    • "They live primarily inside their own minds, having the ability to analyze difficult problems, identify patterns, and come up with logical explanations." -- a decent description of Ego Ti
    • "They love new ideas, and become very excited over abstractions and theories. They love to discuss these concepts with others." -- Ego Ne again.
    • "The <thinker> has no understanding or value for decisions made on the basis of personal subjectivity or feelings. They strive constantly to achieve logical conclusions to problems, and don't understand the importance or relevance of applying subjective emotional considerations to decisions." -- Ti > Fi


    Personally speaking, the "Thinker" describes me pretty accurately, and I don't really relate to the "Scientist" at all.

    [Edit: Having read the other posts in this thread, I do agree with what some people said, that the Scientist description could be more of a generic Gamma NT description. It doesn't describe a lot of IP-specific traits.

    Out of curiosity, Pied Piper, I know you don't self-type as either one of these two, but which one do you feel is closer to describing you?]
    Last edited by Krig the Viking; 10-24-2010 at 01:49 AM.
    Quaero Veritas.

  26. #26
    I'm a Ti-Te! Skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    US
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    522
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If you wanted to deliberately argue in a certain direction, you could. However, going by OP and not paying attention to specific details while instead giving attention to the bigger picture of the descriptions, I can offer what I gathered and confidently assert;

    Scientist; I believe the scientist has heavy Te themes with its talk of practical and useful application complimented by directly observed real world knowledge. It's very outwardly focused and logical, i.e. an extroverted application of logic through engineering, the business world, etc. I can't see an ILE being of this type; it has little explicit concern for novelty or impulsive idea generation.
    Stereotypically characteristic of LIE and ILI.

    Thinker; The thinker seems most like Ne with logical undertones. In a search for the word 'new' it came up once in the first description and five times in the second; in the first it simply says the individual is capable of understanding new things, but in the second it shows that there is a passion for generation of new methods, ideas and perspectives. It even says in the closing statement that they are the ones responsible for new thoughts in society on the whole . All around theoretical obsession, persuit of theory and solutions, etc.
    Mostly ILE, also LII-Ne. I've often read that normal LII behavior doesn't actively seek out new things as the ILE does; rather he puts new ideas to use in service of his base function.

    If a consensus is reached, perhaps this will aid me in my self typing. I do relate most to the thinker and less to the scientist, but my analysis above remains untouched by any personal bias of that sort.

  27. #27
    Azeroffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    California
    TIM
    ENTj 3w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,216
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Given the options, I think the scientist is more likely ILI, and the thinker is LII.

    I can see where everyone is coming from as far as LIE and ILE respectively fitting in to them as well.
    3w4-5w6-9w8

  28. #28
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    Silly ILIs. Always wanting to plan, lead, and organize every single thing.
    Disagreed, it is the 'rationals' (Ti, Te, Fi, Fe leads) that want to do this.
    /

  29. #29
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Depends on the person I'd think.

  30. #30
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    Depends on the person I'd think.
    Yea it's tough to generalize a mass amount of types I guess. Planning and organizing just scream 'rational' to me.
    /

  31. #31
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah. Dichotomies seem like the most correlative units and leastly-so correspondent unit of Socionics, so whether someone fits those descriptions, like rationality, perfectly, doesn't insure they're actually that correlated type. And rationality is more about getting to things without checking your internal state. Rationals base their thoughts and actions more on external demand. IM elements, intertype relations, and even VI, when there's a high certainty of correspondence, are definitely more useful.

    Of the people, for instance, who test as INTJ in MBTI, many don't completely fit that Scientist description, but once they're engrossed in the theory they'd like to think they fit aspects they've never considered, a kind of fill-in-the-blank personality. MBTI descriptions have a way of sort of changing people's self-concept to lesser or greater degrees, I've noticed.

    And by the way, I was just joking about ILIs always want to plan, lead, and organize everything. Making fun of all the possible assumed correlations.

  32. #32
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,945
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't feel I can vote, as to say that the two profiles "correspond" with two Socionics types would not be right. There are a significant elements in both profiles which I think go against the grain of either Socionics type, but I suppose the second option is more likely.

    This thread should really be moved to "Other personality typologies" on the grounds that it is discussing how a significantly artificial construct (rather than an aspect of personality) corresponds with Socionics...I'll leave it for now though

  33. #33
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    All of these are pretty distinct examples of Ti or INTj traits in general.

    -Unlike the <thinker>, they do not follow an idea as far as they possibly can, seeking only to understand it fully. <scientists> are driven to come to conclusions about ideas. Their need for closure and organization usually requires that they take some action.

    -<scientist>s are natural leaders

    -When they are in leadership roles, they are quite effective

    -may have little interest in the other people's thoughts or feelings.

    -The <scientist>'s interest in dealing with the world is to make decisions, express judgments,

    -Consequently, they are quick to express judgments.

    -convinced that they are right about things.

    -In these cases, <scientist>s tend to blame misunderstandings on the limitations of the other party, rather than on their own difficulty in expressing themselves.

    -This tendency may cause the <scientist> to dismiss others input too quickly, and to become generally arrogant and elitist.

    -<scientist>s are ambitious, self-confident, deliberate, long-range thinkers.

    -They dislike messiness and inefficiency, and anything that is muddled or unclear.

    -most always highly competent people, and will not have a problem meeting their career or education goals.
    /

  34. #34
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    Yeah. Dichotomies seem like the most correlative units and leastly-so correspondent unit of Socionics, so whether someone fits those descriptions, like rationality, perfectly, doesn't insure they're actually that correlated type. And rationality is more about getting to things without checking your internal state. Rationals base their thoughts and actions more on external demand. IM elements, intertype relations, and even VI, when there's a high certainty of correspondence, are definitely more useful.
    There's probably a language barrier on the fault of myself. When I was using the phrase 'rationals' I was using the term that Jung uses and not using dichotomies.
    /

  35. #35
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just some more of what I found quite obvious descriptions of Ni and INTp traits.

    -<thinker>s live in the world of theoretical possibilities. They see everything in terms of how it could be improved, or what it could be turned into.

    -They are the "absent-minded professors",

    -able to be objectively critical in their analysis.

    -seem "dreamy" and distant to others,

    -<thinker>s do not like to lead or control people.

    -they may become generally negative and cynical.
    /

  36. #36
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,945
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saoshyant View Post
    All of these are pretty distinct examples of Ti or INTj traits in general.
    many of the things you hand-selected could apply to ILIs as well as LIIs, and some are not sufficiently explained.
    EII-Ne
    5w4 or 1w9 Sp/So

  37. #37
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    many of the things you hand-selected could apply to ILIs as well as LIIs, and some are not sufficiently explained.
    Actually some of the statements directly butt-heads with each other. Read Jungs' descriptions of Ti and Ni and then tell that to me with a straight face.
    /

  38. #38
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,945
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't see how Jung is particularly relevant here.

  39. #39
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    I don't see how Jung is particularly relevant here.
    That is unfortunate then. It would help your understanding between Ni and Ti tremendously.
    /

  40. #40
    Azeroffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    California
    TIM
    ENTj 3w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,216
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saoshyant View Post
    All of these are pretty distinct examples of Ti or INTj traits in general.

    -Unlike the <thinker>, they do not follow an idea as far as they possibly can, seeking only to understand it fully. <scientists> are driven to come to conclusions about ideas. Their need for closure and organization usually requires that they take some action.

    -<scientist>s are natural leaders

    -When they are in leadership roles, they are quite effective

    -may have little interest in the other people's thoughts or feelings.

    -The <scientist>'s interest in dealing with the world is to make decisions, express judgments,

    -Consequently, they are quick to express judgments.

    -convinced that they are right about things.

    -In these cases, <scientist>s tend to blame misunderstandings on the limitations of the other party, rather than on their own difficulty in expressing themselves.

    -This tendency may cause the <scientist> to dismiss others input too quickly, and to become generally arrogant and elitist.

    -<scientist>s are ambitious, self-confident, deliberate, long-range thinkers.

    -They dislike messiness and inefficiency, and anything that is muddled or unclear.

    -most always highly competent people, and will not have a problem meeting their career or education goals.
    Actually these traits seem more like LIE. More Te than anything.
    3w4-5w6-9w8

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •