Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 96

Thread: Both MBTI and Socionics are Correct?

  1. #1
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Both MBTI and Socionics are Correct?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia
    Myers and Briggs added another dimension to Jung's typological model by identifying that people also have a preference for using either the judging function (thinking or feeling) or their perceiving function (sensing or intuition) when relating to the outside world (extraversion).
    MBTI tests are all based on extraversion then. So that means All IPs will be represented with JiPe functions and all IJs will be represented with PiJe functions. These are the function pairs that they relate to with in the world. So then when relating to the inside world, or introversion, all IPs are PiJe and all IJs are JiPe.


    MBTI persona:
    Id-Superego

    Socionics persona:
    Ego-Super Id
    Last edited by EyeSeeCold; 11-16-2010 at 06:31 PM.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  2. #2
    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

    Both MBTI and Socionics (and the concepts backing them up) are artificial and arbitrary. The correct question to ask is not whether they are correct, but whether they 1) have explanatory power, and 2) are useful.
    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

  3. #3
    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 EyeSeeCold View Post
    MBTI tests are all based on extraversion then.
    MBTI functions are flawed. I can think of many more ways of ordering functions, and they would all be flawed. Because only socionics functions are correctly ordered.

    conclusion: ignore mbti functions

  4. #4
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    MBTI functions are flawed. I can think of many more ways of ordering functions, and they would all be flawed. Because only socionics functions are correctly ordered.

    conclusion: ignore mbti functions
    Lol. Yes, I think because the test was originally geared for extraverts, the functions have been, over time, contorted. As they were implied based on behaviors of Jung's observed types, they became kind of meshed together.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    Both MBTI and Socionics (and the concepts backing them up) are artificial and arbitrary. The correct question to ask is not whether they are correct, but whether they 1) have explanatory power, and 2) are useful.
    Agreed.
    Last edited by EyeSeeCold; 11-16-2010 at 06:24 PM.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  5. #5
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ... according to Myers, the type was the result one got on the original test. Over time, she realized introverts usually test the reverse of what she predicted, as in, dominant function determining rationality/irrationality. By then the typology was in commercial use and was never fixed. I don't recall a source for it, and the supposed excerpts there could have been made up, but it's not very likely. Anyway, this got twisted into "p/j swap", whereas it should be function swap, if not a complete redesign. Instead descriptions, functions included, were adjusted to fit the people who tested as types they weren't. Or at least that's how it appears to me.

    There's no way to call any typology "correct", but original MBTI assignment, apart from focusing on increasingly superficial traits, doesn't even work within that system. Whereas in socionics, Jungian functions and dichotomies match. That was a good enough reason for me to give up on MBTI as soon as I've realized it.

  6. #6
    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

    I'm not entirely sure Jungian functions and dichotomies match, actually. In Socionics I'm living proof that they don't match -- I always test ENFp, and I despise . In MBTI tertiary creep/temptation/loops severely fuck with dichotomous arrangements. As for P/J matching better in one system than the other, I actually tried to test that out... for Jungian functions (as interpreted by MBTI analysts), matching a Rational temperament to a Ji dominant function doesn't work in most cases.

    Now, I would suggest myself that for both systems to be more precise they need some modification. Particularly Socionics -- it is much too complicated. For every type trait defined by Socionics to be true of every type all the time you need to cut down some.

    Socionics is the better of the two though, in terms of usefulness. Intertype relations theory in particular is beautiful, though inapplicable to MBTI functions.
    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

  7. #7
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    why do either have to be "correct"?

  8. #8
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    I'm not entirely sure Jungian functions and dichotomies match, actually.
    I agree. MBTI functions have kind of been meshed together, most likely because of introverts.
    Now, I would suggest myself that for both systems to be more precise they need some modification. Particularly Socionics -- it is much too complicated. For every type trait defined by Socionics to be true of every type all the time you need to cut down some.
    Maybe it is complicated, but the bulk of material leaves a lot of potential.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    why do either have to be "correct"?
    Eh I forget not everyone thinks like me. By correct, I mean neither of the systems are wrong, or useless based on subtle differences.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  9. #9
    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

    I prefer to think of the two systems as separate personality scales useful in different dimensions, and use both together to gain a deeper understanding of individuals (much like using Socionics in tandem with Enneagram). Typing people in both systems I've found that the two, in fact, quite rarely overlap.
    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

  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

    If you've read psychological types of Jung, then you see that he is using dichotomies first, to determine functions next.

    So they are connected.

  11. #11
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    If you've read psychological types of Jung, then you see that he is using dichotomies first, to determine functions next.
    He used extroversion/introversion and the four functions (T/F, S/N). The P/J dichotomy was invented by Isabel Myers to connect Jung's temperaments into coherent types -- but unfortunately she didn't account for the potential consequences (type-wise) of tertiary temptation, and she kind of misinterpreted the impact of function orientation to personality.
    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

  12. #12
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    He used extroversion/introversion and the four functions (T/F, S/N). The P/J dichotomy was invented by Isabel Myers to connect Jung's temperaments into coherent types -- but unfortunately she didn't account for the potential consequences (type-wise) of tertiary temptation, and she kind of misinterpreted the impact of function orientation to personality.
    Okay. So what do you think Jung meant when describing Te and Fe dominants as "extroverted rationals", Ti and Fi dominants as "introverted rationals", Ne and Se dominants as "extroverted irrationals" and Ni and Si dominants as "introverted irrationals"?

    IMO the greatest problem with MBTI - clearly visible with INTJ and INTP, as those two types are probably most common in online communities - is that trying to force-fit Ji and Pi with opposite rationality makes people reinterpret everything about the functions or dichotomies, then argue endlessly about what it really means, each giving their own typing as a "proof". Moving from MBTI to socionics, the agreement and constructive discussion about what elements are is unbelievable.

  13. #13
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Aiss View Post
    Okay. So what do you think Jung meant when describing Te and Fe dominants as "extroverted rationals", Ti and Fi dominants as "introverted rationals", Ne and Se dominants as "extroverted irrationals" and Ni and Si dominants as "introverted irrationals"?
    He was referring to perception and judgment, but that doesn't mean perception and judgment were proper dichotomies -- Myers codified them into such.

    Essentially, Jung didn't invent the types. he just invented the functions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aiss View Post
    IMO the greatest problem with MBTI - clearly visible with INTJ and INTP, as those two types are probably most common in online communities - is that trying to force-fit Ji and Pi with opposite rationality makes people reinterpret everything about the functions or dichotomies, then argue endlessly about what it really means, each giving their own typing as a "proof". Moving from MBTI to socionics, the agreement and constructive discussion about what elements are is unbelievable.
    I'm gonna need you to clarify yourself here.
    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

  14. #14
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    I'm gonna need you to clarify yourself here.
    Which part didn't you understand?

  15. #15
    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 Aleksei View Post
    He used extroversion/introversion and the four functions (T/F, S/N). The P/J dichotomy was invented by Isabel Myers to connect Jung's temperaments into coherent types -- but unfortunately she didn't account for the potential consequences (type-wise) of tertiary temptation, and she kind of misinterpreted the impact of function orientation to personality.
    Jung used rational and irrational, which was translated as judging and perceiving. So he did use the same dichotomies. You probably haven't read Jung.

  16. #16
    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 Aleksei View Post
    Essentially, Jung didn't invent the types. he just invented the functions.
    Types and functions weren't invented, they were discovered. That's something completely different.

  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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Types and functions weren't invented, they were discovered.
    Show me a brain scan. Then show me what areas in that brain scan represent Jung's functions. Then I'll consider them to have been "discovered."

    I'm pretty sure we've had this discussion before.
    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
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Types and functions weren't invented, they were discovered. That's something completely different.
    BAM, Truth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    Show me a brain scan. Then show me what areas in that brain scan represent Jung's functions. Then I'll consider them to have been "discovered."

    I'm pretty sure we've had this discussion before.
    You don't need a brain scan to discover an obvious phenomenon of human nature. Quit being a tool. Just because you are not aware enough to pick up on the types doesn't mean you need to exclaim they don't actually exist.
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  19. #19
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Types and functions weren't invented, they were discovered. That's something completely different.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crispy View Post
    BAM, Truth.
    Get a room you two.

    Quote Originally Posted by Crispy View Post
    You don't need a brain scan to discover an obvious phenomenon of human nature. Quit being a tool. Just because you are not aware enough to pick up on the types doesn't mean you need to exclaim they don't actually exist.
    I can pick up on collections of traits which correspond to given types. I do not have to logically connect that to those types being naturally-occurring phenomena, as for that to occur it must be established that there are specific brain reactions that cause people to behave that way. Hence, I demand a fucking MRI.

    By the way, more ad hom. You really should learn to debate properly.
    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

  20. #20
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    Get a room you two.
    I can pick up on collections of traits which correspond to given types. I do not have to logically connect that to those types being naturally-occurring phenomena, as for that to occur it must be established that there are specific brain reactions that cause people to behave that way. Hence, I demand a fucking MRI.
    No, you know how to think up a truck-load of bullshit conceptions about type and slap them on a giant list with 10% accuracy. You've done it a million times. If you decided to focus on quality > quantity of typings, you might actually get somewhere with this theory.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    By the way, more ad hom. You really should learn to debate properly.
    "Real Debate Etiquette" is overrated and boring. You won't see me crying over ad hominem cause I don't bitch over nothing.
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  21. #21
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Crispy View Post
    No, you know how to think up a truck-load of bullshit conceptions about type and slap them on a giant list with 10% accuracy. You've done it a million times. If you decided to focus on quality > quantity of typings, you might actually get somewhere with this theory.
    I can always learn which traits are correct and which aren't assuming I'm wrong. It's still the same thing though: An inventory of personality traits. Not a genetically established template of neurological processing.

    "Real Debate Etiquette" is overrated and boring. You won't see me crying over ad hominem cause I don't bitch over nothing.
    Not following debate etiquette is not the same as committing a logical fallacy. For example, if I call you a fucktarded prick right now (which you are), I am violating basic debate etiquette, but my post still has substance. Appealing to my own character, as opposed to the content of my post, however, is a logical fallacy and achieves nothing but making you look stupid.
    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

  22. #22
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I wasn't talking to an audience; I was talking to you. I have no reason to appeal to your character as it's transparent to anyone who reads your posts.
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  23. #23
    Saoshyant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    TIM
    Robot
    Posts
    141
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmm, Aleksei, remind me how you are a Fe-dominant again? I get a big kick out of your self typing. Almost as strange as Gilly calling himself an ENFj.
    /

  24. #24
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,480
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    I can always learn which traits are correct and which aren't assuming I'm wrong. It's still the same thing though: An inventory of personality traits. Not a genetically established template of neurological processing.


    Not following debate etiquette is not the same as committing a logical fallacy. For example, if I call you a fucktarded prick right now (which you are), I am violating basic debate etiquette, but my post still has substance. Appealing to my own character, as opposed to the content of my post, however, is a logical fallacy and achieves nothing but making you look stupid.
    Aleksei, I understand that Crispy probably wasn't offended and that this isn't a pattern for you, but please keep the vulgar personal assaults to a minimum. Feel free to insult each other however you like in PMs. Thank you.
    It was in the reign of George III that the aforesaid personages lived and quarrelled; good or bad, handsome or ugly, rich or poor, they are all equal now.

  25. #25
    Breaking stereotypes Suz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    On a chatbox diet
    TIM
    IDK
    Posts
    6,470
    Mentioned
    169 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saoshyant View Post
    Hmm, Aleksei, remind me how you are a Fe-dominant again? I get a big kick out of your self typing. Almost as strange as Gilly calling himself an ENFj.
    That would sort of explain all his wacky typings. (not to open a can of worms)
    Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx

  26. #26
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Of course Jung gave the means the dichotomize the types into J/P, but he did not describe exactly what kind of type would result from splitting types by I/E S/N T/F Rational/Irrational. Myers went ahead and dichotomized the types in terms of J/P by the secondary function that Jung mentioned. This was a roundabout way that complicated things as we see them now.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    236
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Types and functions weren't invented, they were discovered. That's something completely different.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crispy
    BAM, Truth.
    So any old neuroscientist can come up with the socionics and MBTI theory on their own?

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    236
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    Not following debate etiquette is not the same as committing a logical fallacy. For example, if I call you a fucktarded prick right now (which you are), I am violating basic debate etiquette, but my post still has substance. Appealing to my own character, as opposed to the content of my post, however, is a logical fallacy and achieves nothing but making you look stupid.
    I've given up on doing that...a lot more would get understood without bad etiquette, but now I just match someone's tone.

  29. #29
    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 Aleksei View Post
    Show me a brain scan. Then show me what areas in that brain scan represent Jung's functions. Then I'll consider them to have been "discovered."
    Nearly everything that has been discovered in psychology has been done without a brainscan.

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    236
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Anyway, perhaps people who say personality theories are "discovered" should rephrase that--the concepts are in one's DNA/brain, but the interpretation and method of organizing those traits is created.

  31. #31
    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 Aleksei View Post
    Both MBTI and Socionics (and the concepts backing them up) are artificial and arbitrary. The correct question to ask is not whether they are correct, but whether they 1) have explanatory power, and 2) are useful.
    +38

    The functions weren't discovered by Jung. They are, like everything else, a human system, a creation of the mind, imposed onto reality. They are partially real, insofar as they are based in reality, and partially nonreal, insofar as they are not perfectly accurate to reality.

    All convention is based on nature; all convention fails nature.
    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.

  32. #32
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Saoshyant View Post
    Hmm, Aleksei, remind me how you are a Fe-dominant again?
    1) I'm very emotional.
    2) I value Fe and Ti above anything else, so it's either this or LII (given that my Sensing elements both suck). Basically, I'm Merry as fuck. I am additionally very adept at producing an Fe-atmosphere. I don't identify with the Spock-like demeanor I've seen actual LIIs display.
    3) Of the two, I identify more as Aristocratic than as Democratic. I tend to judge people as part of a group before I do as individuals, and I tend to look down on people I consider inferior to myself. Alphas make an effort to get along with everybody.
    4) It fits my intertype relations to perfection.
    5) While both my Fe and Ti are very well-developed (making it difficult to pin a type on me -- most people here think I'm Ti-ego because a debate isn't a kind of setting where I'm likely to deploy Fe), my Ti developed later. My first posts on a political forum I used to post in before coming here feature me using a lot of Ti, but in an embarrassingly sloppy manner, which would be fit of either me being an idiot (which I'm not -- I have an IQ in the low 140s), or my Ti being very underdeveloped (as suggestive functions usually are).
    6) Te-role and Si-PoLR. Si: I stay up for days because I wanna see what I can do next, often neglect to eat if I'm doing something exciting enough (Right now I haven't eaten anything since 8 last night -- I should probably eat but I don't wanna get up from here), have zero sense of aesthetics. Te: I try to pretend to be efficient and organized and in control, but it never works out properly. I obsessively keep track of time so I can finish whatever I have to do on time, but I get sidetracked by other more interesting shit and I never get anything done on time. And so on.
    7) The Male EIE description fits me to the T, according to my friends.
    Last edited by Aleksei; 11-19-2010 at 03:07 PM.
    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

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleksei View Post
    1) I'm very emotional.
    2) I value Fe and Ti above anything else, so it's either this or LII (given that my Sensing elements both suck). Basically, I'm Merry as fuck. I am additionally very adept at producing an Fe-atmosphere. I don't identify with the Spock-like demeanor I've seen actual LIIs display.
    3) Of the two, I identify more as Aristocratic than as Democratic. I tend to judge people as part of a group before I do as individuals, and I tend to look down on people I consider inferior to myself. Alphas make an effort to get along with everybody.
    4) It fits my intertype relations to perfection.
    5) While both my Fe and Ti are very well-developed (making it difficult to pin a type on me -- most people here think I'm Ti-ego because a debate isn't a kind of setting where I'm likely to deploy Fe), my Ti developed later. My first posts on a political forum I used to post in before coming here feature me using a lot of Ti, but in an embarrassingly sloppy manner, which would be fit of either me being an idiot (which I'm not -- I have an IQ in the low 140s), or my Ti being very underdeveloped (as suggestive functions usually are).
    6) Te-role and Si-PoLR. Si: I stay up for days because I wanna see what I can do next, often neglect to eat if I'm doing something exciting enough (Right now I haven't eaten anything since 8 last night -- I should probably eat but I don't wanna get up from here), have zero sense of aesthetics. Te: I try to pretend to be efficient and organized and in control, but it never works out properly. I obsessively keep track of time so I can finish whatever I have to do on time, but I get sidetracked by other more interesting shit and I never get anything done on time. And so on.
    7) The Male EIE description fits me to the T, according to my friends.
    You really didn't focus much about Fe at all. Not a word on Ni - unless you stating Ti is a typo. "I'm very emotional" could mean a lot of things, and doesn't correlate with Fe.
    /

  34. #34
    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

    Fe: I smile easily and laugh a lot, I crack jokes all the time in almost any situation and have trouble remaining serious. I'm extremely casual, always have a "hey dude what's up" attitude, even places where I'm supposed to remain serious (like at work). When I'm bored I enjoy fucking with people for sheer lulz. I tend towards exaggeration when it comes to projecting emotions (I never say something was good, unless it was so-so... I say it was GREAT, it was AWESOME, it was THE BEST, or if it was bad it was HORRIBLE, it SUCKED, it was AWFUL). I'm good at acting/simulating emotion, and I love performing.

    Ni: I'm always somewhat uncertain I made the right choice about anything, I like pondering the meaning of things and situations, and how events will unfold -- as such, I'm very into politics. I also have a bit of an alarmist bent, which comes out, again, in political debates.

    "I'm very emotional" essentially all but rules out the other choice (LII), as LIIs are very restrained -- they like a loose Fe atmosphere, but they need the help of EXFj's to loosen up.
    Last edited by Aleksei; 11-19-2010 at 04:09 PM.
    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

  35. #35
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default x

    MBTI focus on "apparent, changing, external" traits
    Socionics focus on "permanent, real, internal" traits
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  36. #36
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    MBTI focus on "apparent, changing, external" traits
    Socionics focus on "permanent, real, internal" traits
    Bullshit. MBTI properly applied focuses on even more deeply internal traits than Socionics does. So deeply internal in fact, that it has almost no explanatory power. That's why I lost interest in it.
    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

  37. #37
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Introverted NFTS?

    or Extraverted FNST?
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  38. #38
    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

    Me? Extroverted NFTS in MBTI, extroverted FNST in Socionics.
    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

  39. #39
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Oh, nvm I got the impression that you were confused about your type.

    Your description of Si PoLR reminds me of an EIE teacher who woke up at 3am and went to bed at 6pm.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  40. #40
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold View Post
    Oh, nvm I got the impression that you were confused about your type.
    Oh, no. I was defending my type.

    Your description of Si PoLR reminds me of an EIE teacher who woke up at 3am and went to bed at 6pm.
    I remember there was a time I was working at a call center when I would stay up till daybreak posting in a political forum on weekends, then Sunday night I basically couldn't get any sleep and I'd crash at work.
    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

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
  •