Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 82

Thread: A huge mess to clean up: Jungian functions & Myers-Briggs

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    State College, PA, USA
    TIM
    SLI
    Posts
    837
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default A huge mess to clean up: Jungian functions & Myers-Briggs

    I went over to PersonalityCafe because it's one of the biggest forums about the Myers-Briggs. I've become a socionics 'convert,' and when I look at them, I feel like they are 'hopelessly lost' and they 'need to be saved.' They're struggling to work with a mess of logical contradictions and disorder, without using the tool of the intertype relations to help them figure out their types. They think that an ISTP's functions are TiSeNiFe, for instance, and as far as I understand, all introverts' functions are set up that way, with a reversal of the perceiving and judging functions, and the opposite in terms of extraversion/introversion than what they should be, and... it's a mess. Help! I'm not very good at evangelizing. I just want to tell them 'But wait! There's hope! Go here and read about socionics instead of wading through all this contradictory crap!'

    If someone started teaching socionics in the United States, there would be an obstacle: the existing belief system. If, for instance, you put up a sign or an advertisement inviting people to learn about socionics, a system of personality types, a large number of people would say, 'But I already know my personality type - I took the Myers-Briggs - what else is there to know? Why should I learn some other "wrong" belief system?' You'd have to catch people who had never heard of any personality typing systems at all, rather than people who already know the Myers-Briggs.

  2. #2
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well the problem with MBTI is that its used by large corporations to appeal to the average person, who by definition isnt very smart. If socionics becomes as big in the west as MBTI is I think democracy could turn into a useless tool, rather than the cutting edge science which it is at this point. You see, Stalinist Russia has turned science into a an idealogy to serve the Soviet government rather than an objective and honest search for Truth, which is why today's Russians are so skeptical of "political" correctness used in MBTI; it reminds them of the communist regime. This could be why socionics emerged as a cutting edge science and MBTI did not; its also why noone in the socionics community likes political correctness(in all areas of life, not just socionics), I think.

  3. #3
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No, not socionics.us. Socioninko.net or Socionics.com.

  4. #4
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,703
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    MBTI wouldn't bother me so much if it had the order of functions right for introverts and if it had an inter-type relations system with quadras. The only plus side of MBTI is that it doesn't have the unnecessary over bloated technical jargon of Socionics. In my opinion, MBTI over simplifies and is inaccurate at times and Socionics over complicates even if it is more accurate than MBTI. I just see the two typology systems as polar opposite extremes.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-4w5-9w1

  5. #5
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, as far as MBTI goes I relate to the type description it gives me pretty darn well, and it makes sense to me to call INTP an Ne user, for instance, in their system because they're P type intuitives, which is the speculation of possibilities without decisiveness. Though it's not good for finding out your intertype relations and has rather uneven type distribution, it seems pretty accurate in of itself as does Keirsey. It's known that in MBTI, N types usually get along a lot better with one another in the long run, and same for Ss.

  6. #6
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HunterX View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Typhon View Post
    No, not socionics.us. Socioninko.net or Socionics.com.
    Why? I thought socionics.us was pretty good.
    mmm I dont recomment it to my friends and such, personally.

  7. #7
    not gonna be around as much anymore
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    C-IEE
    Posts
    1,258
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I came over to Socionics after having spent a good deal of time on PersonalityCafe. I know at least one other person who has done the same (he was actually pretty vocal about Socionics on the PerC forums, which is how I got involved).

    There is hope...
    My life's work (haha):
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/blog.php?b=709
    Input, PLEASEAnd thank you

  8. #8
    Anglas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lithuania
    TIM
    LIE-Ni 7w8 So/Sp
    Posts
    1,354
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    MBTI is a good thing, I think it's the first step to socionics.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I found this site by accident laughing my arse off on some horoscope forum.

  10. #10
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Absurd View Post
    I found this site by accident laughing my arse off on some horoscope forum.
    No you didnt. Dont lie.

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

    Default

    A good Socionics site needs

    a) a test
    b) a set of descriptions

    Www.socionics.com has both of those things (new people can take the test, then read about types). However, not sure how good quality his test and descriptions are. I would rather read some Filatova descriptions or Gulenko information element descriptions or something, because many of the "general" "behavior" ones fit me, like INTJ INTP ENTP, and are difficult to interpret as different types unless there is some easy contrast. This is why Model A is cool because the descriptions will say "versus an INTJ, the INTP doesn't value and this is what he thinks of it, as well as, this is what he thinks of and his dual," but the very beginning talks about his main view . These can be pretty short and sweet, doesn't have to overcomplicate.

  12. #12
    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 Nico1e View Post
    I went over to PersonalityCafe because it's one of the biggest forums about the Myers-Briggs. I've become a socionics 'convert,' and when I look at them, I feel like they are 'hopelessly lost' and they 'need to be saved.' They're struggling to work with a mess of logical contradictions and disorder, without using the tool of the intertype relations to help them figure out their types. They think that an ISTP's functions are TiSeNiFe, for instance, and as far as I understand, all introverts' functions are set up that way, with a reversal of the perceiving and judging functions, and the opposite in terms of extraversion/introversion than what they should be, and... it's a mess. Help! I'm not very good at evangelizing. I just want to tell them 'But wait! There's hope! Go here and read about socionics instead of wading through all this contradictory crap!'

    If someone started teaching socionics in the United States, there would be an obstacle: the existing belief system. If, for instance, you put up a sign or an advertisement inviting people to learn about socionics, a system of personality types, a large number of people would say, 'But I already know my personality type - I took the Myers-Briggs - what else is there to know? Why should I learn some other "wrong" belief system?' You'd have to catch people who had never heard of any personality typing systems at all, rather than people who already know the Myers-Briggs.
    yeah, these are my thoughts for the last 5 years or so...

  13. #13
    So fluffeh. Cuddly McFluffles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    2,780
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nico1e View Post
    They think that an ISTP's functions are TiSeNiFe, for instance,
    ISTP's functions are TiSeNiFe. SLI's functions are SiTeNiFe.

    Also, maybe you should step back a little. It's concerning to hear you utter phrases like "hopelessly lost [and] need to be saved", and "I'm not very good at evangelizing". This is personality theory, not religion. No one is going to burn for adhering to MBTI, nor are they destined to "forever wander in outer darkness". If you think Socionics is superior and that everyone should learn it, fine. Just try to dial down the fanaticism a few notches.
    Johari/Nohari

    "Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."

    Fruit, the fluffy kitty.

  14. #14
    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 Nico1e View Post
    I went over to PersonalityCafe because it's one of the biggest forums about the Myers-Briggs. I've become a socionics 'convert,' and when I look at them, I feel like they are 'hopelessly lost' and they 'need to be saved.' They're struggling to work with a mess of logical contradictions and disorder, without using the tool of the intertype relations to help them figure out their types. They think that an ISTP's functions are TiSeNiFe, for instance, and as far as I understand, all introverts' functions are set up that way, with a reversal of the perceiving and judging functions, and the opposite in terms of extraversion/introversion than what they should be, and... it's a mess. Help! I'm not very good at evangelizing. I just want to tell them 'But wait! There's hope! Go here and read about socionics instead of wading through all this contradictory crap!'
    ISTP functions are TiSeNiFe, and often they aren't when making the conversion (they're about as likely to be though -- my observations so far point to ISTP corresponding best to SLI, with Harmonizing SLE as a very close runner-up). This is because in MBTI, the functions are set up in a manner such that Rational attitudes correspond to the extrovert function, which is the one that's shown to the external world (plus a myriad of other differences in the MBTI and Socionics models of the psyche -- the basic four functions aren't even bloody defined the same). There's no "contradiction" there -- it's just a separate model that happens to use the same nomenclature.
    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

  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

    It's funny, a lot of the kind of people that Nico1e would like to save, are actually responding to her in her thread claiming that she herself is wrong. This is actually what she is so mad about.

    It's simple, there should be an MBTI2 system, in which the functions of the types are the same as in socionics. Then everything is perfect again, no misunderstandings, no discussions.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Typhon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Absurd View Post
    I found this site by accident laughing my arse off on some horoscope forum.
    No you didnt. Dont lie.
    I did. First it was MBTI, then socionics, I just clicked on the links.

  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
    It's funny, a lot of the kind of people that Nico1e would like to save, are actually responding to her in her thread claiming that she herself is wrong. This is actually what she is so mad about.

    It's simple, there should be an MBTI2 system, in which the functions of the types are the same as in socionics. Then everything is perfect again, no misunderstandings, no discussions.
    It's called "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

  18. #18
    silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    TIM
    Ni-IEI sx/sp
    Posts
    3,805
    Mentioned
    317 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nico1e View Post
    They think that an ISTP's functions are TiSeNiFe, for instance, and as far as I understand, all introverts' functions are set up that way, with a reversal of the perceiving and judging functions, and the opposite in terms of extraversion/introversion than what they should be, and... it's a mess. Help!
    That is because MBTI does not assign P/J letters the same way that Socionics does, so trying to correlate them letter for letter makes no sense.

    In Socionics P/J letters are assigned according to whether the type is rational or irrational - whether it is dominant in rational F/T functions or irrational S/N functions. So ISTj is a j because it is dominant in a judging Ti function. In MBTI P/J letters are assigned differently, according to the highest order extraverted function. So ISTP is a P because its highest order extraverted function is Se, perceiving one. MBTI P/J assignments are done according to what is known as Static/Dynamic dichotomy in Socionics. MBTI's Perceiver corresponds to socionics Static type. MBTI's Judger corresponds to socionics Dynamic type. That's all there is to it. If you're coming to Socionics from MBTI you'll know that there is a lot of discussion on MBTI boards about Perceivers (Ji-ego) vs Judgers (Je-ego) and it's really just discussion about differences between socionics Static types vs Dynamic types.

    Quote Originally Posted by Traveler View Post
    MBTI wouldn't bother me so much if it had the order of functions right for introverts ...
    That's actually not a problem with MBTI's assignment of functions, but with Socionics profile assignments. They got them wrong. Dostoyevsky was Ni-Fe ego IEI, Esenin was Fi-Ne ego EII, Balzac was ego Ti-Ne LII, and Robespierre was Fi-mobilizing. Socionics has it assigned the other way around with Dostoyevsky being EII, Esenin IEI, Balzac ILI, and Robespierre LII. So in Socionics the introverted quasi-idneticals have been mixed up, hence the profiles drawn from these historical figures are wrong and don't match the functions that they have been assigned. Whenever socionists try to set up some empirical studies, selecting people according to these mis-matched profiles, often this leads to incongruent results. This periodically leads Socionics community to panic and proclaim that that Socionics is borked, that Model A doesn't work. Compare this with MBTI that has many more empirical studies supporting it.

  19. #19
    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 Ashton View Post
    I prefer the function ordering in Socionics—at least for the 1st two functions—since they preserve the corresponding Jungian temperaments; though I'd rather the tertiary and quaternary functions be ordered more like MBTI, such that ISTp (SLI) = SiTeFiNe.
    And are the SLI's Fi an Ne, conscious or subcounscious functions according to you?

  20. #20
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ashton View Post
    I prefer the function ordering in Socionics—at least for the 1st two functions—since they preserve the corresponding Jungian temperaments; though I'd rather the tertiary and quaternary functions be ordered more like MBTI, such that ISTp (SLI) = SiTeFiNe.
    I also feel in a way more natural to group all valued functions together, but it is irrelevant how you arrange the other three blocks while you keep the same rules of the Model. However if you consider that FiNe is conscious or strong in SLI, then that is not consistent with Socionics.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  21. #21
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Ineffable View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ashton View Post
    I prefer the function ordering in Socionics—at least for the 1st two functions—since they preserve the corresponding Jungian temperaments; though I'd rather the tertiary and quaternary functions be ordered more like MBTI, such that ISTp (SLI) = SiTeFiNe.
    I also feel in a way more natural to group all valued functions together, but it is irrelevant how you arrange the other three blocks while you keep the same rules of the Model. However if you consider that FiNe is conscious or strong in SLI, then that is not consistent with Socionics.
    He doesnt beleive in Model A.

  22. #22
    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 Typhon View Post
    He doesnt beleive in Model A.
    Weird, that's usually a noob thing.

  23. #23
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Typhon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by The Ineffable View Post
    I also feel in a way more natural to group all valued functions together, but it is irrelevant how you arrange the other three blocks while you keep the same rules of the Model. However if you consider that FiNe is conscious or strong in SLI, then that is not consistent with Socionics.
    He doesnt beleive in Model A.

  24. #24
    Marie84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,359
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siuntal View Post
    That's actually not a problem with MBTI's assignment of functions, but with Socionics profile assignments. They got them wrong. Dostoyevsky was Ni-Fe ego IEI, Esenin was Fi-Ne ego EII, Balzac was ego Ti-Ne LII, and Robespierre was Fi-mobilizing. Socionics has it assigned the other way around with Dostoyevsky being EII, Esenin IEI, Balzac ILI, and Robespierre LII. So in Socionics the introverted quasi-idneticals have been mixed up, hence the profiles drawn from these historical figures are wrong and don't match the functions that they have been assigned. Whenever socionists try to set up some empirical studies, selecting people according to these mis-matched profiles, often this leads to incongruent results. This periodically leads Socionics community to panic and proclaim that that Socionics is borked, that Model A doesn't work. Compare this with MBTI that has many more empirical studies supporting it.
    I highly disagree with Dostoyevsky being IEI>EII (I see the Te seeking in his quotes and can't imagine his self-righteous judgements being appeasing to Fi PoLR's)
    Robespierre as LII was rather surprising to me at first, but after watching a series about the Revolution on Youtube a year or so ago, it revealed his Se PoLR (btw search "French Revolution 1/9" on Youtube if you're interested)
    Esenin and Balzac I have no idea about (haven't looked into it really), but I could see how Esenin having been a lyricist poet would stereotype him as IEI alone
    EII INFj
    Forum status: retired

  25. #25
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Typhon View Post
    He doesnt beleive in Model A.
    Weird, that's usually a noob thing.
    And if you don't believe in European tonality then you're not a musician.
    "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

  26. #26
    InvisibleJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Si vis pacem
    TIM
    para bellum
    Posts
    4,832
    Mentioned
    202 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nico1e View Post
    I went over to PersonalityCafe because it's one of the biggest forums about the Myers-Briggs. I've become a socionics 'convert,' and when I look at them, I feel like they are 'hopelessly lost' and they 'need to be saved.' They're struggling to work with a mess of logical contradictions and disorder, without using the tool of the intertype relations to help them figure out their types. They think that an ISTP's functions are TiSeNiFe, for instance, and as far as I understand, all introverts' functions are set up that way, with a reversal of the perceiving and judging functions, and the opposite in terms of extraversion/introversion than what they should be, and... it's a mess. Help! I'm not very good at evangelizing. I just want to tell them 'But wait! There's hope! Go here and read about socionics instead of wading through all this contradictory crap!'

    If someone started teaching socionics in the United States, there would be an obstacle: the existing belief system. If, for instance, you put up a sign or an advertisement inviting people to learn about socionics, a system of personality types, a large number of people would say, 'But I already know my personality type - I took the Myers-Briggs - what else is there to know? Why should I learn some other "wrong" belief system?' You'd have to catch people who had never heard of any personality typing systems at all, rather than people who already know the Myers-Briggs.
    Yes but also no.

    Both socionics and MBTI follow directly from Jung; there isn't any real confusion other than the poor 'fuzzy' descriptions MBTI provides. The briggs typing is based on the 'dominants opposite' being the inferior on jungs conclusions. This is actually a fair summary in terms of how the ego and id are separated in socionics but ignores the projection aspects of the super-ego/id that are elevated in the psyche.

    The most tragic error is in the belief that the cognitive style models are mutually exclusive and thus one can believe they are 'MBTI' INFJ whilst being socionics SEI for example; socionics is a much more clear typing mechanism and it supercedes the analysis that MBTI performs; therefore one can go back and correct the erroneous typing.

    But yes, the typology in PerC is of a very low quality.

  27. #27
    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 InvisibleJim View Post
    Yes but also no.

    Both socionics and MBTI follow directly from Jung; there isn't any real confusion other than the poor 'fuzzy' descriptions MBTI provides.
    I wonder if you are aware of the fact that MBTI switches functions for introverts.

    This is exactly what the OP is complaining about that people don't get, and you seem to be one of them, like most people...

  28. #28
    InvisibleJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Si vis pacem
    TIM
    para bellum
    Posts
    4,832
    Mentioned
    202 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post
    Yes but also no.

    Both socionics and MBTI follow directly from Jung; there isn't any real confusion other than the poor 'fuzzy' descriptions MBTI provides.
    I wonder if you are aware of the fact that MBTI switches functions for introverts.

    This is exactly what the OP is complaining about that people don't get, and you seem to be one of them, like most people...
    INTp vs INTJ. It doesn't switch functions it switches dichotomies.

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post

    Weird, that's usually a noob thing.
    And if you don't believe in European tonality then you're not a musician.
    are you calling harry partch a musician? truly, i scoff at you; he was a far superior hobo, and on the seventh day petals fell in petaluma; lewis, be dead.

  30. #30
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post

    I wonder if you are aware of the fact that MBTI switches functions for introverts.

    This is exactly what the OP is complaining about that people don't get, and you seem to be one of them, like most people...
    INTp vs INTJ. It doesn't switch functions it switches dichotomies.
    You'e both talking about the same thing.

    Really though, it needs to be said that the functions in MBTI are not always the same as the functions in socionics, either.

  31. #31
    InvisibleJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Si vis pacem
    TIM
    para bellum
    Posts
    4,832
    Mentioned
    202 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Typhon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post

    INTp vs INTJ. It doesn't switch functions it switches dichotomies.
    You'e both talking about the same thing.

    Really though, it needs to be said that the functions in MBTI are not always the same as the functions in socionics, either.
    That's a very fundamental issue regarding that they are supposed to be regardless of whatever certain sources say.

  32. #32
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post
    That's a very fundamental issue regarding that they are supposed to be regardless of whatever certain sources say.
    Suppossed to be what, the same? The way you write things is hard to get but I think I understand you; there is only one Truth regarding the nature of the functions, since they exist on some level of reality(and I use that word loosely).

  33. #33
    InvisibleJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Si vis pacem
    TIM
    para bellum
    Posts
    4,832
    Mentioned
    202 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Typhon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post
    That's a very fundamental issue regarding that they are supposed to be regardless of whatever certain sources say.
    Suppossed to be what, the same? The way you write things is hard to get but I think I understand you; there is only one Truth regarding the nature of the functions, since they exist on some level of reality(and I use that word loosely).
    That's right.

  34. #34
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Typhon View Post

    You'e both talking about the same thing.

    Really though, it needs to be said that the functions in MBTI are not always the same as the functions in socionics, either.
    That's a very fundamental issue regarding that they are supposed to be regardless of whatever certain sources say.
    Wow be thankful, for you are one of the few on this forum who have openly realized this. If only you can convince the rest of the recent MBTI transfers of this fundamental issue. 95% of newcomers have a crazy tendency to think that just because two different authors don't write the same exact definitions, it means their respective functions are MEANT to be different.
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  35. #35
    InvisibleJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Si vis pacem
    TIM
    para bellum
    Posts
    4,832
    Mentioned
    202 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crispy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post

    That's a very fundamental issue regarding that they are supposed to be regardless of whatever certain sources say.
    Wow be thankful, for you are one of the few on this forum who have openly realized this. If only you can convince the rest of the recent MBTI transfers of this fundamental issue. 95% of newcomers have a crazy tendency to think that just because two different authors don't write the same exact definitions, it means their respective functions are MEANT to be different.
    What can you say? I must be a rocket scientist. Or I must simply be able to think and read at the same time! It's pretty evident regardless of perspective, quite simply there are no major step-outs or breaks, merely slightly different perspectives of the same cognitive actions.

    Its due to a single factor, over-label-invested amateur typologists, mostly wearing NT name badges who are mostly in the beta quadra. If they lose the label they fear the loss of an imaginary invested hierarchy surrounding the labels they have chosen. Convincing themselves of very complex 'its clearly different 'solution helps them to ignore a simple, elegant and more to the point 'technical' pragmatic solution due to sentimental attachment.


  36. #36
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What would this technical pragmatic solution be?

  37. #37
    RoadPaveMent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    United States
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nico1e View Post
    I went over to PersonalityCafe because it's one of the biggest forums about the Myers-Briggs. I've become a socionics 'convert,'
    I'm...so proud of you! *sniff*

    Quote Originally Posted by nico1e
    and when I look at them, I feel like they are 'hopelessly lost' and they 'need to be saved.' They're struggling to work with a mess of logical contradictions and disorder, without using the tool of the intertype relations to help them figure out their types. They think that an ISTP's functions are TiSeNiFe, for instance, and as far as I understand, all introverts' functions are set up that way, with a reversal of the perceiving and judging functions, and the opposite in terms of extraversion/introversion than what they should be, and... it's a mess. Help! I'm not very good at evangelizing. I just want to tell them 'But wait! There's hope! Go here and read about socionics instead of wading through all this contradictory crap!'

    If someone started teaching socionics in the United States, there would be an obstacle: the existing belief system. If, for instance, you put up a sign or an advertisement inviting people to learn about socionics, a system of personality types, a large number of people would say, 'But I already know my personality type - I took the Myers-Briggs - what else is there to know? Why should I learn some other "wrong" belief system?' You'd have to catch people who had never heard of any personality typing systems at all, rather than people who already know the Myers-Briggs.
    Yes...socionics offers far more than MBTI. When I got into socionics, I realized what I had commonly looked to MBTI to explain could be explained more thoroughly and helpfully in socionics.

    Plus, there's a lot more prejudice among MBTI fans than socionics fans. Socionics gives you functions you have and functions you seek. It also shows you that others are really just different--not inferior. MBTI, though, doesn't give you functions you seek. The intuitive superiority complex is the most common one. But there are superiority complexes for all dichotomies and all functions.

    Which is another weakness--the dichotomies. You should type yourself based on functions. People spend way too much time fussing over the dichotomies.
    N-EII ~~~ 6>1 sp/so ~~~ INFJ

    No type is smarter, better, more difficult to handle, or harder to be than another.

    Personality theory doesn’t predict what a person will think or do.

    Any type in one theory can be any type in another.

  38. #38
    RoadPaveMent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    United States
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pianosinger View Post
    I came over to Socionics after having spent a good deal of time on PersonalityCafe. I know at least one other person who has done the same (he was actually pretty vocal about Socionics on the PerC forums, which is how I got involved).

    There is hope...
    Did anyone start with TypologyCentral or am I the only one?

    At least it lets you edit posts, unlike PerC...
    N-EII ~~~ 6>1 sp/so ~~~ INFJ

    No type is smarter, better, more difficult to handle, or harder to be than another.

    Personality theory doesn’t predict what a person will think or do.

    Any type in one theory can be any type in another.

  39. #39
    RoadPaveMent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    United States
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CILi View Post
    Have you been here before?
    Shhh!
    N-EII ~~~ 6>1 sp/so ~~~ INFJ

    No type is smarter, better, more difficult to handle, or harder to be than another.

    Personality theory doesn’t predict what a person will think or do.

    Any type in one theory can be any type in another.

  40. #40
    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 RoadPaveMent View Post
    Did anyone start with TypologyCentral or am I the only one?
    Make a poll.
    (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

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
  •