Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Socionics Fi vs Jungian Fi

  1. #1
    Psycho Candy OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    The Clouds
    Posts
    28
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Socionics Fi vs Jungian Fi

    How would you compare/contrast these, including the way inferior Te is supposed to manifest (mainly referring to Fi in the EII, hence posting in this sub-forum)?
    4w5 sp/sx MBTI INFP (Fi Ne)

  2. #2
    ■■■■■■ Radio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,574
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    All Jung-like personality systems, aside from minor differences in naming convention and interpretations, are referring to the same phenomenon. Forest > trees, etc.

  3. #3
    ■■■■■■ Radio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,574
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I should warn you though that "function" (socionics IEs) definitions don't translate well between the two systems, e.g. Ni/Si in MBTI overlaps with Fi/Ti in socionics, MBTI Te is often synonymous with socionics Se, etc. This includes JCF, which is structurally the same as MBTI, and suffers from exactly the same problems except the people involved in "understanding JCF" are deluded, pretentious and dishonest about it's explicative power. At the very least MBTI identifies behavioral traits correctly, so you could use it to chart the changes within yourself over a period of time (think Big 5), whereas JCF is thoroughly invested in over-intellectualizing a piece of turd.

    I don't think socionics is without its flaws but I'll leave them up for another thread. Stick with broad terms like N, S, F, T and their relations with one another, and you should be fine. These are fairly consistent between all systems; it only goes to shit when they're split into their I/E components.

  4. #4
    Mermaid with Stellar views SyrupDeGem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    All about dat heart, no trouble.
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,472
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    They are really quite different Orangeappled, though the two systems are often compared i find the descriptions of functions to be very different between them.

    I did make a post about this in a nother thread not so long ago.


    Lemmi think...quick rekkie of brain storage dept.46231
    I do believe that socionics Fi mainly concentrates on the relationships between people & interpersonal relationships.
    Whereas MBTI Fi has a greater focus on an individuals value systems and own set of (internally focussed) morals. Ofc they overlap but i think this is the main gist.

    Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.

    In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.

    When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.

    So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.

    InvisibruJim

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    They are different. Stating they're similar and at the same time expounding their differences like it has been done in this thread won't work.

    EDIT: I would stick to what you find fitting better and what you can identify with first and foremost and then build something out of it, not vice versa. And when that overlaps with Socionics, great.
    Last edited by Absurd; 02-12-2013 at 06:09 PM.

  6. #6
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ashton View Post
    It's the same thing.
    Correction: it SHOULD be the same thing.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  7. #7
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    http://psychcentral.com/classics/Jung/types.htm

    Excerpts from The Introverted Feeling Type

    "Primordial images are, of course, just as much idea as feeling. Thus, basic ideas such as God, freedom, immortality are just as much feeling-values as they are significant as ideas. Everything, therefore, that has been said of the introverted thinking refers equally to introverted feeling, only here everything is felt while there it was thought. But the fact that thoughts can generally be expressed more intelligibly than feelings demands a more than ordinary descriptive or artistic capacity before the real wealth of this feeling can be even approximately [p. 491] presented or communicated to the outer world. Whereas subjective thinking, on account of its unrelatedness, finds great difficulty in arousing an adequate understanding, the same, though in perhaps even higher degree, holds good for subjective feeling. In order to communicate with others it has to find an external form which is not only fitted to absorb the subjective feeling in a satisfying expression, but which must also convey it to one's fellowman in such a way that a parallel process takes place in him. Thanks to the relatively great internal (as well as external) similarity of the human being, this effect can actually be achieved, although a form acceptable to feeling is extremely difficult to find, so long as it is still mainly orientated by the fathomless store of primordial images. But, when it becomes falsified by an egocentric attitude, it at once grows unsympathetic, since then its major concern is still with the ego. Such a case never fails to create an impression of sentimental self-love, with its constant effort to arouse interest and even morbid self-admiration just as the subjectified consciousness of the introverted thinker, striving after an abstraction of abstractions, only attains a supreme intensity of a thought-process in itself quite empty, so the intensification of egocentric feeling only leads to a contentless passionateness, which merely feels itself. This is the mystical, ecstatic stage, which prepares the way over into the extraverted functions repressed by feeling, just as introverted thinking is pitted against a primitive feeling, to which objects attach themselves with magical force, so introverted feeling is counterbalanced by a primitive thinking, whose concretism and slavery to facts passes all bounds. Continually emancipating itself from the relation to the object, this feeling creates a freedom, both of action and of conscience, that is only answerable to the subject, and that may even renounce all traditional values. But so much the more [p. 492] does unconscious thinking fall a victim to the power of objective facts."

    "A superficial judgment might well be betrayed, by a rather cold and reserved demeanour, into denying all feeling to this type. Such a view, however, would be quite false; the truth is, her feelings are intensive rather than extensive. They develop into the depth. Whereas, for instance, an extensive feeling of sympathy can express itself in both word and deed at the right place, thus quickly ridding itself of its impression, an intensive sympathy, because shut off from every means of expression, gains a passionate depth that embraces the misery of a world and is simply benumbed. It may possibly make an extravagant irruption, leading to some staggering act of an almost heroic character, to which, however, neither the object nor [p. 494] the subject can find a right relation. To the outer world, or to the blind eyes of the extravert, this sympathy looks like coldness, for it does nothing visibly, and an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces."

    "So long as the ego feels itself housed, as it were, beneath the heights of the unconscious subject, and feeling reveals something higher and mightier than the ego, the type is normal. The unconscious thinking is certainly archaic, yet its reductions may prove extremely helpful in compensating the occasional inclinations to exalt the ego into the subject. But, whenever this does take place by dint of complete suppression of the unconscious reductive thinking-products, the unconscious thinking goes over into opposition and becomes projected into objects. Whereupon the now egocentric subject comes to feel the power and importance of the depreciated object. Consciousness begins to feel 'what others think'. Naturally, others are thinking, all sorts of baseness, scheming evil, and contriving all sorts of plots, secret intrigues, etc. To prevent this, the subject must also begin to carry out preventive intrigues, to suspect and sound others, to make subtle combinations. Assailed by rumours, he must make convulsive efforts to convert, if possible, a threatened inferiority into a superiority. Innumerable secret rivalries develop, and in these embittered struggles not only will no base or evil means be disdained, but even virtues will be misused and tampered with in order to play the trump card. Such a development must lead to exhaustion. The form of neurosis is neurasthenic rather than hysterical; in the case of women we often find severe collateral physical states, as for instance anæmia and its sequelæ."

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Socionics, emphasis is placed on inter-type relations. So, while a Socionics piece may imply the personal neurosis related to the inferior functions, more explicit emphasis is placed on the idea of the "suggestiveness" of Fi dominants to "information" coming from the Te in other people, the greatest suggestibility coming from interaction with Te dominants. Socionics generally emphasizes the role of the super-ego functions in neurosis, as they would be the primary source of neurosis in the context of inter-type, rather than intra-type dynamics.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GemOfTroy View Post
    I do believe that socionics Fi mainly concentrates on the relationships between people & interpersonal relationships.
    Whereas MBTI Fi has a greater focus on an individuals value systems and own set of (internally focussed) morals. Ofc they overlap but i think this is the main gist.
    She wasn't asking about MBTI.

  9. #9
    Local Hero Saberstorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Isle of Man
    TIM
    Robespierre
    Posts
    2,064
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Is this the OrangeApplied of TypologyCentral?
     
    God is most glorified when we are most satisfied in Him.
    - John Piper


    Socionics -
    the16types.info

  10. #10
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    There's no difference. Socionics Fi is based on the Jungian Fi, except Socionics describes Fi much better than Jung.

  11. #11
    Local Hero Saberstorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Isle of Man
    TIM
    Robespierre
    Posts
    2,064
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fi of the MBTI is personal judgements concerning value. It is merciful and often whimsical, and seems to be associated with self-expression.

    Intram Ethics ('round here) is the habits of subjective interpersonal attachment. From these reflexive habits, "Intram Ethics" can serve as a touchstone for many moral judgements. However, moral judgements are not identical to intram ethics.

    As a system of reflexive habits or perceptions it includes notions of courtesy, politness, a sense of honor or duty, and so on. Therefore it appears to lend a "serious" tone to interactions with others.
     
    God is most glorified when we are most satisfied in Him.
    - John Piper


    Socionics -
    the16types.info

  12. #12
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default


  13. #13

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    TIM
    9w1
    Posts
    2,775
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    HOW DID YOU DO THIS
    unholy water sanguine addiction

  14. #14
    Mermaid with Stellar views SyrupDeGem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    All about dat heart, no trouble.
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,472
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    She wasn't asking about MBTI.
    Sure, ok, an oversight on my part.

    From what i remember of my brief discussion and reading of Jungian Fi there was a huge focus on in depth feeling of emotion especially some kind of melancholy for women...yet not expressed, as though hidden by expression but there in the eyes. Thats all i have off the top of my head though (for now), that part stuck.

    Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.

    In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.

    When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.

    So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.

    InvisibruJim

  15. #15
    Psycho Candy OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    The Clouds
    Posts
    28
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I had a realization the other day that socionics INFj sounds like MBTI INFP enneagram 9w1, and INFp sounds like MBTI INFJ e4. So I'm an INFP e4, and I find the behavior/demeanor of the INFj not as relatable, but I also can't get down with NiFe.

    Quote Originally Posted by ArchonAlarion View Post
    In Socionics, emphasis is placed on inter-type relations. So, while a Socionics piece may imply the personal neurosis related to the inferior functions, more explicit emphasis is placed on the idea of the "suggestiveness" of Fi dominants to "information" coming from the Te in other people, the greatest suggestibility coming from interaction with Te dominants. Socionics generally emphasizes the role of the super-ego functions in neurosis, as they would be the primary source of neurosis in the context of inter-type, rather than intra-type dynamics.
    I type myself as a Fi dom from Jung's description. My relationship to Te doesn't sound so much like socionic's description. I interpret Jung to mean we are
    - hyper-critical of ourselves & project that onto others, thinking they are criticizing us when they are not
    - generally feeling a "falling short of" external expectations/standards, resenting those standards, feeling "above it", quietly rebelling against or disregarding some, and conversely beating ourselves up for it

    In terms of Te-dom (mainly the TeSi typ), I've found myself to experience them negatively, with some exceptions. IMO, it strongly reflects how Jung describes inferior Fi in Te-dom (I see their Te through my inferior Te & zero in on their poor Fi too).

    Through my distortions, I'll feel they:
    - are stuck on stupid rules & stereotypes
    - nitpicky
    - think I'm some kind of slacker or rebel (with no foundation for this), and are trying to "squash" me or get me to "fall in line"
    - they are dishonest and/or cutthroat, out for their own gain
    - want people to be like cogs in a machine
    - uptight prigs, but also self-righteous hypocrites

    In socionics, the Fi dom seems to appreciate some guidance from the Te dom and enjoy similar conversations & activities....? Not my experience, I guess. The "suggestiveness" is mostly negative to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Saberstorm View Post
    Is this the OrangeApplied of TypologyCentral?
    Yes...minus the "i".

    Quote Originally Posted by Saberstorm View Post
    Fi of the MBTI is personal judgements concerning value. It is merciful and often whimsical, and seems to be associated with self-expression.

    Intram Ethics ('round here) is the habits of subjective interpersonal attachment. From these reflexive habits, "Intram Ethics" can serve as a touchstone for many moral judgements. However, moral judgements are not identical to intram ethics.

    As a system of reflexive habits or perceptions it includes notions of courtesy, politness, a sense of honor or duty, and so on. Therefore it appears to lend a "serious" tone to interactions with others.
    I note these differences with MBTI & socionics, yes, although I think in MBTI mercy & whimsy is Fi+Ne (the "Ne face" given to INFPs). In Jung's description, Fi seems more about creating value concepts in relation to the human condition, using the self as the prototype. The person tends to only reveal these in response to a violation or indirectly through art/poetry/religion.

    I don't find my Fi to be about judging externals & setting specific standards for others (ie. "politeness"). I'm more focused on creating & refining concepts of what a valuation means to begin with (ie. what does "good" mean?), and then I know it when I see it. I explore a lot of this in fantasy & amplifying my own emotions in private, as well as direct analyzing. Since I prefer Ne, I also tend to see many possible ways in which these concepts can manifest & see different contexts as changing the game, so I am no stickler for protocol. I tend to zero in on the motivation or personal feeling behind something as opposed to "appropriateness" & expecting specific standards to be met.

    I can't really find a socionics type which describes this kind of mindset that also jives with my behavior. My behavior is often serious & reserved because I don't often find contexts where I can be myself easily. Ideally, I like banter & wit, but also serious, indepth discussion that's philosophical or analytical. I like to explore ideas & emotions. I'm also really intense & much of what's in my head is only appropriate for a creative outlet because it might be melodramatic or too complex for everyday chit chat.

    The main reason I am interested in socionics is the intertype relations bit, which isn't found so detailed in other typology systems.
    As far as self-growth, enneagram probably suits me best in identifying my ego distortions.
    4w5 sp/sx MBTI INFP (Fi Ne)

  16. #16
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, she sounds normal to me. I wonder what's the matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I had a realization the other day that socionics INFj sounds like MBTI INFP enneagram 9w1, and INFp sounds like MBTI INFJ e4. So I'm an INFP e4, and I find the behavior/demeanor of the INFj not as relatable, but I also can't get down with NiFe.
    Jung's descriptions of Ni and Fe sound in a lot of ways similar to E9--correlated but not exactly the same. The Fi description doesn't particularly sound like any type except it goes hand-in-hand with E4 and E6. However, the moment you take into consideration types with their inferior and auxiliary thought processes, ie. being comprised of all four quadra values instead of one or two, can you sense these motivational shifts to the other side, which is why I wouldn't rule out Gamma simply because you may believe it's strictly preconditioned to something it's not. All types are capable of intuition and feeling. As Saberstorm notes, types in Socionics are positioned on a relational/communicative axis. They're not stereotypical representations of personalities like they are in MBTI, so your debate between the two NFs doesn't mean much. I have various examples, like my ENFj father who fits so stereotypically into an SP, moreover ISTP, role in MBTI. I don't trust an understanding of Jung's functions as they pertain to the MBTI model, even by Lenore Thomson, and comparing INFPs to INFjs isn't the way to do this. If you do spend more time here with people who know the types then you will get closer to understanding the general answer.
    Last edited by 717495; 03-14-2013 at 06:33 PM.

  17. #17
    Local Hero Saberstorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Isle of Man
    TIM
    Robespierre
    Posts
    2,064
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In Socionics, intertype relations should trump your own opinion of your type. For example I used to think I was an ILI. However, I hate SEEs, and they hate me. The SEE would normally my dual! I am not an ILI because the intertype relations do not mix. If you hate LSEs you cannot be their dual. I think you are not an EII. Let me explain.

    (THIS IS NOT A POD-LAIR RETYPING of ORANGEAPPLED!!!)

    In Socionics, you have a ring of strength. As an EII, your ring of strength is going to be Ni, Fi, Ne, and Fe. That is a ring of strength shared with the IEI. The IEI is called your quasi-identical because they have the same "ring of strength." Are you an IEI?

    Let me elaborate:

    Information elements (stuff like ni, fi, and so on) are assigned a "dimensional" strength: 1 through 4. The dimensionality describes how far you can project or perceive the information with clarity.

    A) If you cannot use the information in real time, it is a "one dimensional" weak function. They are sources of vulnerability and suggestion. Both the EII and IEI have one dimensional Te and Se.

    B) If you can use the information in real time, it is two dimensional "normative" but none-the less weak function. They are either used as a defensive tool to mask the real you around people you do not trust or know, or they are used as a source of motivation and amusement. The two dimensional functions of the IEI and EII are Ti and Si.

    C) Some strong functions can be used in a creative (but situational manner) - so they are called 3D functions. This means they tend to need a specific trigger to emerge, and thus work in tandem with a 2D mobilizing function or with an even stronger 4D function. 3D functions do not follow normative rules, but are free form in their expression. The 3D functions of the EII and IEI are both Ne and Fe.

    D) Other strong functions can also be used with complete mastery. They control all psychological triggers. Mastery furthermore extends your perception with these functions into the future. These are called 4D functions. A master function never feels threatened by another person. A person possesses complete confidence in their use. They are used as the fundamental tool used to accept other kinds of information from the world. They also are relied upon to understand ongoing developments in the future. Thus, both IEI and EIIs accept and interpret new information with Fi and Ni –

    E) Now, back to you. One of these 4D functions is your ID’s “demonstrative” function. ID functions are used to express anger, rebellion, ambition, and "one-up-man-ship." They are ‘the you’ that you think you are, but that you subdue around others because you are too righteous in its use. The ID functions are used to eliminate information that you view with contempt.

    F) Your view of Te sounds like you are using Fi to destroy it. That is Fi demonstrative. That is how Fi in the ID operates. That is a demonstrative use of Fi. That means in Socionics, you are a person with creative Fe. You are either SEI or IEI.

    G) The type descriptions are not perfectly correct. There is a subtyping system in Socionics that allows for easy modifications of the core type description to fit you. What is important is intertype relations, not the subjective recognition of yourself in the type description itself.

    YOU MIGHT BE IEI

    @OrangeAppled
    Last edited by Saberstorm; 03-11-2013 at 09:09 PM.
     
    God is most glorified when we are most satisfied in Him.
    - John Piper


    Socionics -
    the16types.info

  18. #18
    Local Hero Saberstorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Isle of Man
    TIM
    Robespierre
    Posts
    2,064
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also, polikujm might be right, in that you might be using Fi to express creative Se - and thus engage and change Te users rather than avoid them. Do you want to "avoid" Te users or "transform" them? ESIs seem to want to control other people's Te - like a rich guy's wife would!
    Last edited by Saberstorm; 03-13-2013 at 03:06 AM.
     
    God is most glorified when we are most satisfied in Him.
    - John Piper


    Socionics -
    the16types.info

  19. #19
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Berlin
    TIM
    LSI 5w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,421
    Mentioned
    144 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    How would you compare/contrast these, including the way inferior Te is supposed to manifest (mainly referring to Fi in the EII, hence posting in this sub-forum)?
    Jungian Fi stresses negative aspects above all : vanity, coldness, potential for manipulation, self-centredness, orientation of libido towards to ego etc. It's obviously the lens of a non-Fi dom and a non-valuer. Dunno if Jung was LII-Ti or IEI-Ni 9, but his view of Fi looks a bit paranoid and denigrating to me. Kinda inner intensity unrelated to any external object, devalues objective reality, ahem.
    Socionics Fi, although it derives from pretty much the same ideas, is a bit more balanced, but at the same time it endows this function with a slightly too pronounced interpersonal side. Imo it's more intra-personal.
    MBTI Fi was fine by me (basic understanding of function as orchestrating an internal set of values... not whole profiles and stereotypes).
    Last edited by Amber; 05-02-2015 at 11:07 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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