On incompatibility of Socionics and MBTI + Alternative translation of socionics to english

[kiwi0fruit]

Alternative translation of socionics to english + On incompatibility of Socionics and MBTI

This is an alternative translation of one of the braches of socionics to english. My vision of the Jung-Augustinavichiute-Talanov personality model (JAT personality model). But sometimes my vision goes beyond JAT personality model.


Only the main terms were translated and described so this article is a stub. The notable differences are described in the summary.


1 Сontents


2 Summary
3 Jung cognitive functions
4 Aspects as basis in classical socionics vs. Jung cognitive functions as a basis in JAT personality model
5 Types in classical socionics vs. reference types in JAT personality model
6 Types abbreviations with functions
7 On dichotomies, MBTI incompatibility, Big Five


2 Summary


1) All cognitive functions are called kinds of thinking. I like HBDI approach en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herrmann_Brain_Dominance_Instrument .


2) The contradictions between MBTI and socionics are made explicit so the type conversion isn’t possible for introverts.


3) Rational/Irrational names were replaced with Judging/Perceiving as these are more accrurate names: remember Rationalism and it’s attitude to emotional thinking. This also helps make contradictions from 2 more clear.


4) “Tangible-oriented thinking” is used instead of Sensing/Sensory, “Associative thinking” is used instead of Intuition, “Task-oriented thinking” is used instead of Thinking/Logic, “Social-oriented thinking” is used instead of Feeling/Ethics.


5) Standard MBTI acronyms for Jung functions (Se, Si, Ne, Ni, Fe, Fi, Te, Ti) and dichotomies (N/S, T/F) are used for MBTI partial compatibility purpose. Unfortunately there seems to be no way to avoid using standard MBTI acronyms for Jung functions.


6) Standard socionics functions symbols (● ○ ▲ △ ◆ ◇ ■ □) and Victor Gulenko’s 8 latin letters (F, S, I, T, E, R, P, L) were abandoned as inconvenient, unpopular in english community and weird :-)


7) Some differences between types in classical socionics and reference types in JAT personality model are outlined.


8) Some differences between information aspects in classical socionics and Jung cognitive functions in JAT personality model are outlined.


9) The short descriptions of Jung cognitive functions that are consistent (I hope) with JAT personality model are given. These descriptions are sometimes different from understanding of cognitive functions in other branches of socionics.

Read further: http://socionics-news.tumblr.com/post/141190741188