Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: How about this?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    TIM
    ESI 684
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default How about this?

    From my mulling and talking with people and getting the convergent point of various descriptions, this is my discovery:

    One big hole between MBTI and Socionics is the difference between Se and Si. First of all, forget about MBTI functions. MBTI DOES NOT USE FUNCTIONS! Socionics do that. So, with that moved out of the way, here is something to ponder about(the more you think, the more visible it'll get!):

    Some say that it should be compared like this:

    SEE = ESFP
    ESI = ISFP
    ESE = ESFJ
    SEI = ISFJ

    But if you actually stop for a moment and think about it, how about this:

    SEE = ESFJ
    ESI = ISFJ
    ESE = ESFP
    SEI = ISFP

    This could be further proven by static / dynamic reinin(do ESFPs seem static lol? How about ESFJs? ).

    Really, the whole MBTI spectrum is phased when compared to Socionics spectrum due to Myers doing fun things with introverts and shift in Se and Si in socio. This shift is what reconcilles everything. Just something to think about...

    edit: this could possibly be applied only to S types. But still, it's one huge hurdle less!
    Last edited by nondescript; 06-27-2015 at 01:40 PM.

  2. #2
    rob timidly hacim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    personal space station
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    342
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I see what you're thinking, but remember that if they don't use the same functions, then you can't make an accurate conversion. It is best to forget entirely about MBTI, while acknowledging it for introducing Westerners to Socionics.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    TIM
    ESI 684
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hacim View Post
    I see what you're thinking, but remember that if they don't use the same functions, then you can't make an accurate conversion. It is best to forget entirely about MBTI, while acknowledging it for introducing Westerners to Socionics.
    That's just it! Read my OP carefully! I've answered to your only complaint

    And I won't forget about MBTI. I will forget about Berens, DNardi etc diarrhea tho! HATE those clowns!

  4. #4
    rob timidly hacim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    personal space station
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    342
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    But what about Fe and Fi in the SFs? Do they magically change in SFs, while remaining the same in NFs? And Se and Si in STs - I'm not sure you could say LSE=ESTP, for example.

    I SEE (heh) what you've done here, but it doesn't seem like it reconciles everything between the two systems. It's not universally applicable.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    TIM
    ESI 684
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's not. But just as in physics, perhaps there are anomalies? And anomalies deserve their own treatment imo...

  6. #6
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    TIM
    ILI ~ 458 sx/sp
    Posts
    9,877
    Mentioned
    728 Post(s)
    Tagged
    40 Thread(s)

    Default

    So, did you get ESFJ when you took the MBTI test?

    "When I ought to be thinking of heaven he will nail me to earth"

     







  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    TIM
    ESI 684
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen View Post
    So, did you get ESFJ when you took the MBTI test?
    idk, I haven't taken the live official MBTI(the only one I'd trust in). But if it were anything besides ESFJ or ISFJ, I'd be surprised. Keep in mind, those two are every bit as grim and existentialist as SEE and ESI are.

  8. #8
    rob timidly hacim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    personal space station
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    342
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would not use 'grim' or 'existentialist' to describe any of those types, maybe save ESI. Why do you use those adjectives?

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    TIM
    ESI 684
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hacim View Post
    I would not use 'grim' or 'existentialist' to describe any of those types, maybe save ESI. Why do you use those adjectives?
    Because those are impressions they have on me. And I quite obviously can't think otherwise than grim and existentialist...

  10. #10
    rob timidly hacim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    personal space station
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    342
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Probably bad descriptions, but..
    http://www.humanmetrics.com/personality/ESFJ
    http://www.personalitypage.com/ESFJ.html

    Where are 'grim' and 'existentialist' in those? Not that MBTI is a theory to base anything substantial off of, because it isn't, but I don't see anything matching those adjectives. It's also worth noting that ESFJs are depicted as in need of a structured environment, which should theoretically make them correlate more to a Socionics extroverted rational type than anything else.

    Just my two cents. I don't wish to offend your personal Fi understanding. It just doesn't correlate with my personal Ti understanding.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    TIM
    ESI 684
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hacim View Post
    Probably bad descriptions, but..
    http://www.humanmetrics.com/personality/ESFJ
    http://www.personalitypage.com/ESFJ.html

    Where are 'grim' and 'existentialist' in those? Not that MBTI is a theory to base anything substantial off of, because it isn't, but I don't see anything matching those adjectives. It's also worth noting that ESFJs are depicted as in need of a structured environment, which should theoretically make them correlate more to a Socionics extroverted rational type than anything else.

    Just my two cents. I don't wish to offend your personal Fi understanding. It just doesn't correlate with my personal Ti understanding.
    Fair enough! I'll try not to use dramatic epithets anymore. They serve no purpose anyhow.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    TIM
    ESI 684
    Posts
    661
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nondescript View Post
    Fair enough! I'll try not to use dramatic epithets anymore. They serve no purpose anyhow.
    I should just forget about MBTI right?

  13. #13
    rob timidly hacim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    personal space station
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    342
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In my opinion, it should be forgotten once one has a solid understanding of Socionics.

Posting Permissions

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