Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: New to Socionics - Would greatly appreciate input on sociotype

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default New to Socionics - Would greatly appreciate input on sociotype

    Hello everyone.

    I have been studying functional MBTI/Jungian cognitive functions for a while and know my cognitive type according to that system. I’d like to expand my scope by learning about Socionics. What I’ve read so far has impressed me.

    What I’ve gathered on Socionics so far seems to point me in a certain direction regarding my type, yet I am hesitant to draw any conclusions without getting additional input by people familiar with the system. Therefore, I’d highly appreciate your opinion regarding my most likely sociotype/subtype.

    I have compiled some information regarding myself:
    - I predimoninantly rely on internal insights to make sense of the world. Every now and then, I experience strong Aha-moments – moments of inner clarity, when things just click and coalesce into one single insight. I live for these events.

    - My worldview can shift in an instant due to a very strong, sudden realization. Although certainly not an everyday occurrence, this has happened several times. How I think or feel about the realization in question is irrelevant; my psyche accepts the insight as being true due to its very existence (which has occasionally been painful not to say deeply disorienting). Consequently, my perception of reality has significantly changed over time; it seems fluid, although not indiscriminately so. I don’t seem to have as stable a notion of reality as I believe to observe in most others.

    - I use emotions to affect/move others. My emotions tend manifest externally.

    - I strive to express/communicate my inner “visions” so that they touch/affect other humans. My preferred pathway of communication is verbal: mostly writing, followed by speaking. I regularly fail to communicate my internal “visions”, partly probably due to my own inability to verbalize them, but also because they seem hard to relate to: often abstract, complex and weirdly evanescent, they carry meaning that almost seems reluctant to be passed on.

    - Writing seems to have come naturally to me, not however speaking. I tend to speak briefly and often not fluently, especially when I haven’t had the opportunity to previously reflect on what I am speaking about. My inner monologue flows much better.

    - I tend to procrastinate. Often, I know quite well what to do but lack the energy to act.

    - I would consider myself introspective but not very consciously perceptive regarding my own emotions.

    - I am generally very yielding. I only tend to stand my ground when someone challenges my inner “insights”.

    - I would consider myself rather non-judgmental. I don’t seem to have a strong (moral) filter based on which I judge others.

    - What roots me in (consensual) reality is interacting with others. Dealing with other people grounds me and prevents me from losing touch and completely dive into my inner world.

    - I seem to use sensory information/details unconsciously to develop an abstract internal model of the world.

    - I feel threatened by thinking based on external/material evidence. I do however very much appreciate consistency and coherence and like to analyze things. Consequently, I have little interest in science but a lot in philosophy mostly. I value science but I don’t have the mind for it.

    - I tend to get along with most people. I do however struggle regularly with people who tend to focus on and push thinking based on external evidence and have a focus on the concrete. I find no common ground with them and often feel pushed around by them. In two words: fundamental incompatibility. According to functional MBTI, these people share in common their preference for Te-Si (ESTJ). I try to avoid them. When I have to deal with them, I try to say as little as possible and generally hide my thoughts as best as I can. I know it won’t go well if I express myself more freely.

    - I love learning. I vastly prefer a solitary, explorative, theory-focused, self-directed style of studying. When trying to understand something, I first need to grasp the underlying principles; I almost can’t memorize specifics without already having constructed a larger conceptual framework within which to place them.

    - My main interests are first and foremost spirituality, second psychology, and to a lesser degree philosophy.

    - I perceive myself as decidedly more “vision”-driven than value-driven, although values can mean a lot to me. But if a value conflicts with a “vision”, the “vision” takes precedence. I have a deep inner drive to be loyal to my vision(s).

    - I’m introverted. Socializing, while enjoyable, drains me and I love to and need to withdraw to refuel. I also by far think best when alone.

    - In interactions I tend to adapt to my interlocutor. I cannot hide my preference for the “abstract” plane; having to listen to details and concrete content quickly drains me. I also tend to quickly disengage when someone starts rambling; I am not good at processing long speeches. I seldom make definitive statements and mostly merely suggest or ask (mostly ask).

    - I am seldom present; most often, I am mentally somewhere else (predominantly in the future or just envisioning imaginary situations; rarely, I think of past events). Staying in the present moment drains me.

    - I often do not make eye-contact for long periods of time; it distracts me.

    - People sometimes comment on my eyes, which I find interesting as I tend to avoid eye contact. It seems I give off the impression of having a distant yet intense gaze.


    Any input would be greatly appreciated.
    Last edited by Lenos; 11-13-2013 at 04:25 AM.

  2. #2
    kadda1212's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Hessen, Germany
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    660
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, I think I know what you think about your type.

    On the same time, I think I've read most of this before. Seems like you're mostly quoting descriptions you've read somewhere else. Would be nice to listen to your own descriptions. Nevermind... :/
    Love is like an energy, rushing in, rushing inside of me...

  3. #3
    DaftPunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Alps
    TIM
    SiTe 6w5 sp/so
    Posts
    730
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kadda1212 View Post
    Well, I think I know what you think about your type.

    On the same time, I think I've read most of this before. Seems like you're mostly quoting descriptions you've read somewhere else. Would be nice to listen to your own descriptions. Nevermind... :/
    Nevertheless it says something about a person. I couldn't imagine i.e a ST or NT type writing something like that unless he's trolling.

    I also think that she's at least valuing Ni in ego block or hidden agenda so IEI, EIE and ESI are left. I also think that she thinks she's IEI

  4. #4
    kadda1212's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Hessen, Germany
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    660
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaftPunk View Post
    Nevertheless it says something about a person. I couldn't imagine i.e a ST or NT type writing something like that unless he's trolling.

    I also think that she's at least valuing Ni in ego block or hidden agenda so IEI, EIE and ESI are left. I also think that she thinks she's IEI
    Yes, seems to be IEI.
    Love is like an energy, rushing in, rushing inside of me...

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thank you everyone for your responses.

    I may have created the impression I copy-pasted what I wrote. I did not. These are my descriptions. The insinuation they may not be mine actually hurt me somewhat, although I understand why it was made. I would never copy something like that. I care about this and it is authentic. This is my life. In drafting my description, I filtered for relevance via my existing typology understanding (mostly functional MBTI, a little Socionics). I suspect this may account for my description possibly appearing contrived. I have absolutely zero intension to troll. My request is sincere and I apologize if I have caused a wrong impression.

    I'd like to get feedback from people knowledgeabe with socionics in order to minimize the risk of mistyping. I attempt to take extra care; I've encountered too many MBTI mistypings not to. I know functional MBTI quite well, but Socionis is different. I appreciate the differences and would like to avoid my functional MBTI understanding interfering with accurately typing myself in Socionics. I'd honestly find it presumptuous of me to type myself with firm persuasion in a complex system I am still learning the basics of. I do not care about labels, my interest lies in finding my correct sociotype.

    I'm grateful for any input and welcome questions if deemed relevant in determining my type (or out of curiosity).

    Kind Regards
    Lenos

    P..S. According to functional MBTI, I am Ni-Fe, clear Ni dominance (INFJ).
    P. P.S. Not that it's relevant, but I'm male. ;-)
    Last edited by Lenos; 11-13-2013 at 01:58 PM.

  6. #6
    kadda1212's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Hessen, Germany
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    660
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I didn't want to hurt you. Sorry. But I think you understood what I meant. It doesn't leave mich room for interpretation, because when I read what you wrote I automatically see: Ni - Fe - some Ti - little Fi - problems with Te and Si... xD
    Don't be angry now. I sometimes make stupid comments.
    Love is like an energy, rushing in, rushing inside of me...

  7. #7
    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

    I still think we should have a 'people who think they are' IEI quota, such that one needs to leave for another one to enter the forum. The only good thing is we aren't overrun with shitty ILEs as well.

  8. #8
    kadda1212's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Hessen, Germany
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    660
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleJim View Post
    I still think we should have a 'people who think they are' IEI quota, such that one needs to leave for another one to enter the forum. The only good thing is we aren't overrun with shitty ILEs as well.
    I also fall into that category, I know. :/
    Love is like an energy, rushing in, rushing inside of me...

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @kadda1212: No need to apologize. In my view, your suggestion I may have "borrowed" my description was not stupid but reasonable. You didn't anger me at all. Your remark just stung a little bit because I value authenticity (even online).

    Yes, I drew the same conclusions you did regarding my functions. However, as I said, I am not very familiar with Socionics yet and try to proceed with caution. I've noticed some variation in certain function description (Fi - Fe for instance). That said, IEI does to fit best and explain several aspects of my psyche I previously found confusing, for instance, my seeminlgy irrational dislike of Te (and Te-Si users) which MBTI doesn't account for.


    @All:
    I specifically did not mention my MBTI type and the sociotype(s) I personally consider most likely because in my opinion, what I think regarding my type is irrelevant. What matters is how my brain actually processes information as (hopefully) evidenced in the form and content of my writing.

  10. #10
    kadda1212's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Hessen, Germany
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    660
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lenos View Post
    @kadda1212: No need to apologize. In my view, your suggestion I may have "borrowed" my description was not stupid but reasonable. You didn't anger me at all. Your remark just stung a little bit because I value authenticity (even online).

    Yes, I drew the same conclusions you did regarding my functions. However, as I said, I am not very familiar with Socionics yet and try to proceed with caution. I've noticed some variation in certain function description (Fi - Fe for instance). That said, IEI does to fit best and explain several aspects of my psyche I previously found confusing, for instance, my seeminlgy irrational dislike of Te (and Te-Si users) which MBTI doesn't account for.
    Ok.
    I had the same problem with the Fi and Fe descriptions, when I started with Socionics. Well, actually most of the MBTI functional descriptions are a bit wishy-washy.
    Love is like an energy, rushing in, rushing inside of me...

  11. #11
    Glorious Member mu4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mind
    Posts
    7,966
    Mentioned
    568 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    IEI is good. I like IEI's welcome to the forum. ^_^

  12. #12
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lenos View Post
    Thank you everyone for your responses.

    I may have created the impression I copy-pasted what I wrote. I did not. These are my descriptions. The insinuation they may not be mine actually hurt me somewhat, although I understand why it was made. I would never copy something like that. I care about this and it is authentic. This is my life. In drafting my description, I filtered for relevance via my existing typology understanding (mostly functional MBTI, a little Socionics). I suspect this may account for my description possibly appearing contrived. I have absolutely zero intension to troll. My request is sincere and I apologize if I have caused a wrong impression.

    I'd like to get feedback from people knowledgeabe with socionics in order to minimize the risk of mistyping. I attempt to take extra care; I've encountered too many MBTI mistypings not to. I know functional MBTI quite well, but Socionis is different. I appreciate the differences and would like to avoid my functional MBTI understanding interfering with accurately typing myself in Socionics. I'd honestly find it presumptuous of me to type myself with firm persuasion in a complex system I am still learning the basics of. I do not care about labels, my interest lies in finding my correct sociotype.

    I'm grateful for any input and welcome questions if deemed relevant in determining my type (or out of curiosity).

    Kind Regards
    Lenos

    P..S. According to functional MBTI, I am Ni-Fe, clear Ni dominance (INFJ).
    P. P.S. Not that it's relevant, but I'm male. ;-)
    You give all the info that makes it easy to see: plainly IEI . So it can appear as if you already know. But I think "P' preference, as they call tt in MBTI, keeps you taking in new information, being open to re-evaluate if you are right on your ideas, when it seems to others you have plenty ideas/knowledge to know right now...

    As to MBTI functions, I don't know, but my guess is that their system of categorizing functions is off somehow.. Often it would seem that MBTI people who used the function-approach were mis-typed. I would find that out "backwards" - thinking, they seem not quite "x" type, and then finding out they typed with the function approach. That's just an observation I have made but don't have an understanding of why that is. I prefer using MBTI preferences to type, and looking at the total personality portrait and total person kind of holistically and determining from that mishmash, and type emerges clear to me often. It seems that the resulting personality portrait choice is more accurate to the person, IMO. And also then the MBTI/Socionics match-up is more likely to be consistent. At least it seems that way to me. I wonder if you have observed the same?

    In Socionics, you can look at the Model A for INFj and the Model A for INFp and the distinctions are clear how very differently they use the functions.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Invisible Jim:
    I still think we should have a 'people who think they are' IEI quota, such that one needs to leave for another one to enter the forum. The only good thing is we aren't overrun with shitty ILEs as well.


    Oh, and I was hoping the INFJ virus to not have metastasized. My condolences. I endorse punishing who ever concocted the INFJ holy person archetype and I'm at least half-serious on this.




    @kadda1212:
    I had the same problem with the Fi and Fe descriptions, when I started with Socionics. Well, actually most of the MBTI functional descriptions are a bit wishy-washy.
    Ach so. Fi ist mir sowieso ein Rätsel: on the one hand, I have a hard time understanding it consciously, on the other, I feel drawn to and influenced by Fi or what I believe to be Fi.

    As for MBTI function descriptions generally: It appears the clarity heavily depends on the author. I appreciate the more fuzzy approaches, provided they seem still accurate. I find they complement more technical, concise descriptions nicely.


    @hkkmr:
    IEI is good. I like IEI's welcome to the forum. ^_^
    Thank you. Much appreciated.


    @eliza Thompson:
    You give all the info that makes it easy to see: plainly IEI . So it can appear as if you already know. But I think "P' preference, as they call tt in MBTI, keeps you taking in new information, being open to re-evaluate if you are right on your ideas, when it seems to others you have plenty ideas/knowledge to know right now...
    Thank you - I think you captured it very nicely. Even if I'm positive or "convinced" of something, I almost constantly reappraise my stance -- this can sometimes result in seemingly unneccessary questioning or even painful self-doubt and self-correction. Over the years, I've come to realize, accept and to a degree even appreciate that my cognition just seems to work this way; I can't change it. What seems certain one moment may have to be revised later due to additional information. I sometimes experience moments of clarity/insight which then serve as a stepping stone until I climb the next step (or have to retract my steps, or fall down the stairway and have to start completely over. I just very much enjoy learning (as long as it is self-directed and preferably a complex subject). It's wonderful.

    I suppose, my prefered way of trying to understand the world reflects in how I have approached typology: I started out with standard MBTI (dichotomies), went on to reading some Jung, then returned to the MBTI 4 cognitive functions model, then discovered the Enneagram, learned about John Beebe's 8 functions model and now decided to dip my toes into Socionics. I enjoy approaching something complex (like cognitive functions) from different directions in order to refine my understanding. I absolutely do aim for synthesis but have found proceeding multi-perspectively seems to work best for me.

    One major reason I'm trying to make as sure as possible I type correctly is that what has proven by far most useful to me in learning and expanding my understanding human cognition is introspection. Knowing my likely sociotype will hopefully allow me to compare what I observe within myself with what Socionics states.


    As to MBTI functions, I don't know, but my guess is that their system of categorizing functions is off somehow.. Often it would seem that MBTI people who used the function-approach were mis-typed. I would find that out "backwards" - thinking, they seem not quite "x" type, and then finding out they typed with the function approach. That's just an observation I have made but don't have an understanding of why that is.
    Based on what I've seen, I'd assume that many factors contribute to the frequency of mistypings.
    - Popularity: dichotomy MBTI is simple to understand and most tests test for letters, not functions. On the other hand, a system like socionis by virtue of being less approachable seems to attract an audience on average more interested in the underlying mechanics of type.
    - Collective "sanctification" of some types (yes, INFJ for instance) making people want to be a certain type.
    - Psychological phenomena like the Forer effect, subjective validation etc.
    - Lack of interest in making the effort required to gain a working understanding of typology models. etc.

    The human psyche seems so complex that its study requires to proceed diligently, carefully, softly even and with a readiness to engage depth. In my opinion, if someone decides to not take typology seriously, letter MBTI seems absolutely fine and unproblematic. If however, typology is to serve as a basis for understanding self and other, it has to be approached with due reverence. I sometimes suspect that many of the issues result from taking typology seriously yet not appreciating the subject matter and not making the effort its study necessitates.

    My main gripe with the standard MBTI system is that it seems to evaluate and place functions quantitatively rather than qualitatively, creating an order based on how frequently a function manifests or how proficiently is it used. I much prefer the qualitative approach employed by Beebe and Socionics which appears more in accordance with Jung, and much more important -- with reality. I also find it highly questionable how much value MBTI tends to place on vague descriptions instead of functional analysis and - much worse - the tendendy to use non-neutral descriptions the proliferation of which I think has been instrumental in creating the myth of saintly types like ... INFJs. Quite frankly, in my view, the "INFJ phenomenon" highlights quite illuminatively the downfalls of the standard MBTI system (or that which passes for MBTI online): type bias (better/worse etc.), focus on descriptions and the ugly results of self-confirmation bias. I appreciate Socionics for employing a qualitative approach (how is a function used/related to?); including all 8 cognitive functions; striving for neutrality; introducing new concepts etc.

    I do like all systems based on Jungs cognitive typology I've come across so far. Each one offers a different perspective.

    I prefer using MBTI preferences to type, and looking at the total personality portrait and total person kind of holistically and determining from that mishmash, and type emerges clear to me often. It seems that the resulting personality portrait choice is more accurate to the person, IMO. And also then the MBTI/Socionics match-up is more likely to be consistent. At least it seems that way to me. I wonder if you have observed the same?
    We seem to use similar approaches. When I try to type other people, it almost never works by consciously taking them apart cognitively. I do apply this method and it yields clues, yet almost invariably, when things do come together, it happens without conscious dissection: things just suddenly click and I see a "archetype" emerge - how the functions of a person work in unison to create a personality type. I "know" their type.

    I'd speculate Ni(-Fe) provides me with an abstract framework of reference for personality archetypes, Fe and Se allow me to pick up on emotional and sensory details/cues in the moment. I'm fairly certain my accuracy is mainly determined by how precise and accurate a picture of type I have compiled internally.

    Irrespective of its precise mechanics, each time such an aha moment occurs, it sends a slight shiver down my spine.
    Last edited by Lenos; 11-13-2013 at 11:17 PM.

  14. #14
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hkkmr View Post
    IEI is good. I like IEI's welcome to the forum. ^_^
    Which ones aren't good?



  15. #15
    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

    Hi Lenos. The consensus seems to be IEI. How do you feel about that?

  16. #16
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,314
    Mentioned
    205 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Eliza Thomason
    Please do not bring your issues with me into someone else's personal thread.
    I have reported your post, and requested it to be moved out.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa View Post
    Hi Lenos. The consensus seems to be IEI. How do you feel about that?
    Hi Maritsa.
    IEI corresponds with what I considered most likely. Based on the Socionic general type description, I regarded EII as a second possibility, but looking at the Socionics breakdown of cognitive functions and their role, IEI seems to fit much better . And it confirms me in probably typing correctly as Ni-Fe in functional MBTI as it seems to me that since the functions denote essentially the same psychologic processes in both systems, coinciding typings especially relating to the egoic functions indicate accuracy.


    Assuming an IEI type, I am now trying to determine my subtype. How would you suggest I go about this (beyond observing my internal processing)? And have I given off any indication which subtype may be more likely?

    Any input greatly appreciated.
    Last edited by Lenos; 11-15-2013 at 12:10 AM.

  18. #18
    DaftPunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Alps
    TIM
    SiTe 6w5 sp/so
    Posts
    730
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lenos View Post
    Hi Maritsa.
    And it confirms me in probably typing correctly as Ni-Fe in functional MBTI as it seems to me that since the functions denote essentially the same psychologic processes in both systems, coinciding typings especially relating to the egoic functions indicate accuracy.
    More or less. Si/Se is for example pretty different described in Socionics and MBTI. MBTI descriptions describe more the letter combination E/I, S/N, T/F, J/P in a Kerseyan way. Probably you also noticed that INFJ descriptions resembles often INFp descriptions.

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaftPunk View Post
    More or less. Si/Se is for example pretty different described in Socionics and MBTI. MBTI descriptions describe more the letter combination E/I, S/N, T/F, J/P in a Kerseyan way. Probably you also noticed that INFJ descriptions resembles often INFp descriptions.
    Yes. Although MBTI INFJ descriptions strike me as a bit of a mixture of Socionics INFp and INFj (which is not that surprising given that MBTI tends to glorify INFJs and ascribe to them all kinds of positive, special traits).

    I have little love lost for descriptions usually. As a broad guideline to help narrow down possible types, they can work but I often find them unduly simplifying the complexity of a type, especially by not accounting for intratype variance and, as you mentioned, often merely taking into account dichotomies rather than actual cognitive functions.

Posting Permissions

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