general explanation?

[danii92]

ok so im really new to the socionics, i have an understanding of the meyer briggs, i know that the 2 are different. but how and why?

[Beautiful sky]

http://socionics-mbti.blogspot.com/2...-not-mbti.html

MBTI is "how people perceive the world and make decisions"
Socionics is how information is processed

[ConcreteButterfly]

Wikipedia is a good place to start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myer_Briggs

[Aylen]

@Maritsa

That link seems to place a high importance on VI and I'm actually leaning toward dismissing VI altogether. Unless by any chance, you've seen pics of me and believe I am EII instead of IEI based on that? I only ask because 3 people have told me directly I VI EII. Also can you link to a good source of VI information so I can VI myself.

and Hi Danii

Edit: I found the link and can see why people would think that based on the few pics I shared. They definitely don't show me in my natural state since I tense up for cameras. Mystery solved.

[InvisibleJim]

In MBTI people use internet tests and self typing to determine their type and then change it by observing people who act similar to them when they reach a consensus on having the same type.

In socionics people use funny symbols, how they look (vi) and experienced socionists who talk about Model A to determine their type.

Both of these systems claim to understand core character development, when they exclusively gauge behaviour and people who prefer either branch of the tree of jung brand the other tree as incorrect despite there being a surprising amount of disagreement within both systems.

Naturally both of these methods are 100% consistently successful in all settings and constructs and can be used to determine your future wealth at 36 (only) and the number of times you will be eaten by a lion with 59% accuracy.

Barriers to entry are increasingly important as the practical value and complexity of an idea decrease. Accordingly practicioners of both systems have taken to greeting each other with the phrase 'you are mistyped' to imply that they are part of the 'in' crowd and part of an expert knowledge group requiring of similar respect to a Naval Captain or a Sou Chef.

[Aylen]

Naturally both of these methods are 100% consistently successful in all settings and constructs and can be used to determine your future wealth at 36 (only) and the number of times you will be eaten by a lion with 59% accuracy.

But if you want 1000% accuracy..use a Ouija board on the first full moon, in June, to contact Jim Morrison. That is the only full proof method of determining anything...

[InvisibleJim]

But if you want 1000% accuracy..use a Ouija board on the first full moon, in June, to contact Jim Morrison. That is the only full proof method of determining anything...

That is 900% more accurate.

[Aylen]

That is 900% more accurate.

Damn! You logical, mathematic types always spot my percentage errors! I stand corrected. That is why I value Gamma knowledge even though I am scared to ask ya'll questions. Around you I am like the shy kid at the back of the class, timidly raising my hand, in the hopes that no one notices and asks me, "why are you sitting in advanced calculus?" and promptly send me back to remedial math.

[akjohnny]

I think socionics and the myers-briggs are very similar. SOME of the functions are slightly different like types for ex are apparently very technical and mechanical, but in general they are pretty similar as long as you translate them well.

All the extraverted types (Exxx) stay the same in both systems, but with introverted types you flip the last letter. INTP's in the myers-briggs system are INTj's in socionics and INTJ's are INTp's. The two systems differ in that they look at whether someone is predominantly a Judger (judges information and whatever they see or think about) or a Perceiver (where they notice things and experience things, but don't always judge them as right/wrong, logical/irrational).

So! An ESFJ for example is the same in both systems, but all the introverts you which the last letter. It's more complicated then that if you want to get into the details, but thats the basics. you'll probably want to just read the different personality types of people you know and can relate to.

[Capitalist Pig]

That link seems to place a high importance on VI and I'm actually leaning toward dismissing VI altogether.

I don't know why people give VI such a bad rap. VI, as a general concept, is probably the only method of "typing" that is actually backed by research; by that I mean, people are apparently pretty adept at gleaning clues about your personality and compatibility (particularly reproductive compatibility), with or without context from additional cues, by just seeing a static image of your face. Not that the predictions of Socionics or other pop psychology models of personality have been confirmed by the same research.

[Iris]

@danii92 Welcome!

I really like that the different relationships are so defined in socionics. It was helpful to me in my self-typing, and it helps me understand my interactions with other people. Having said that, many factors can contribute to the way the different relationships play out.

For example, I love my SEI sister and never feel supervised by her. But we don't have to work together and she is younger than me. So we just have fun together. So I had to dig a little deeper to be able to visualize how a supervision situation could arise with us.

[Aylen]

I don't know why people give VI such a bad rap. VI, as a general concept, is probably the only method of "typing" that is actually backed by research; by that I mean, people are apparently pretty adept at gleaning clues about your personality and compatibility (particularly reproductive compatibility), with or without context from additional cues, by just seeing a static image of your face. Not that the predictions of Socionics or other pop psychology models of personality have been confirmed by the same research.

I am not sure what you are saying here to be honest but I saw a documentary... something to that effect. I just don't know what to think about it. Judging people's reproductive compatibility based on a static image of the face seems a bit of a stretch to me. It is also said sexual reproduction clues are seen in the shape of a woman's body. It is all very subjective. If I showed two different pics of mine to a hundred different people they would each use whatever criteria they value to judge me. I have had women tell me they look just like me when they look nothing like me. I mean NOTHING like me. But they see it and I don't.

In judging faces I am not attracted to the typical looks people find almost universally appealing. I like exotic or quirky features. I remember a website called "hot or not", it may even still be around, don't know but when my friends and I would rate people I consistently gave people a 4 or 5. Some of the girls who got 8-9 on that site just looked "plain jane" to me...like I could see a dozen of them at a time in any mall in America.

I forgot my point.... I am wondering if certain types are more inclined to claim a person is part of their quadra or not their quadra based solely only on looks. I also think women in makeup, who are smiling, look more extroverted and friendly, than a woman without makeup wearing a neutral expression, who may be just as extroverted and friendly or a smiling introvert may appear extroverted.