Mirror differences: INFp-IEI and ENFj-EIE

[Beautiful sky]

Thats a given

The difference is that IEI's are much more diplomatic, while EIE's dramatize more and tell it like it is -if they feel positive emotions, you will know and if they feel negative emotions, you will know. They are more emotion provoking and provocative -trying to get reactions from others, while IEI's usually just try to keep interaction even-keeled and pleasant. They dont rock the boat as much.

What some people dont get is that while EIE's can certainly shit-stir, they're not like a Jersey shore regular, all over the place or vulgar (vulgar in jokes, sure -some of them, but not in the way they carry themselves). They are quite proper, if not a bit haughty.

@Sol can benefit from reading this post

[Beautiful sky]

I read some western socionics fan figured the j/p switch method originally. It sometimes works for INxx types, much less for ISxx types.

I can understand if there are people who test close to J/P and have a hard time figuring out which they are and coming to socionics then discovering that they value Ti (INTj) rather than Ni (INTp) then switching. But there's no certain calculator

[Sol]

I read some western socionics fan figured the j/p switch method originally.

it's Jung's terms, not MBT's special invetion
J = rationality and P = irrationality. other cases are mistyping. or texts with partly wrong MBT's types descriptions
You may compare direct descriptions of J/P (rationa/irrational) dichotomy in MBT and Socionics, - they are identical. In books and tests. It has different link to functional model, but not description itself. So if you was typed correctly as J by MBTI, then you can be only rational in Socionics.
The mess with other notation like INTJ=ILI goes from the strange idea than different functional model of introverts in MBT means more, than when they say dichotomies. Meanwhile MBT's type 4-letter notation describes only dichotomies.
Luckily MBT uses MBTI as main typing way, wich has no functions mistake. So MBT's types is most correctly unambiguously understand as ENTP=ILE, INTJ=LII, - from both point, theoretical and practical. Without exceptions.

[Tigerfadder]

it's Jung's terms, not MBT's special invetion
J = rationality and P = irrationality. other cases are mistyping. or texts with partly wrong MBT's types descriptions
You may compare direct descriptions of J/P (rationa/irrational) dichotomy in MBT and Socionics, - they are identical. In books and tests. It has different link to functional model, but not description itself. So if you was typed correctly as J by MBTI, then you can be only rational in Socionics.
The mess with other notation like INTJ=ILI goes from the strange idea than different functional model of introverts in MBT means more, than when they say dichotomies. Meanwhile MBT's type 4-letter notation describes only dichotomies.
Luckily MBT uses MBTI as main typing way, wich has no functions mistake. So MBT's types is most correctly unambiguously understand as ENTP=ILE, INTJ=LII, - from both point, theoretical and practical. Without exceptions.

Ya in socionics j/p is about if your lead element is a preciving or judging one. In MBTI it is if your first extroverted element is preciving or judging one. MBTI totally discrimination introverts.

[Sol]

Ya in socionics j/p is about if your lead element

J/P in Socionics and even on Mars is dichotomy, with identical to MBT direct description. How you link it with others things - is other theme.
Only if MBT would used as main instrument not dichotomies, but wrong functional model, then there was practical sense to use "switching". And anyway, when MBT identifies correctly type according to MBTI and their types notation - it will always be same to Socionics types dichotomies as INTJ=LII.

[Tigerfadder]

J/P in Socionics and even on Mars is dichotomy. How you link it with others things - is other theme.

Its jung rational vs irrational

[Sol]

Its jung rational vs irrational

As was said above, rational/judging and irrational/perceiving are Jung's terms for same things, and they have same direct description in MBT and Socionics. A human correctly typed as J in MBT can be only rational type in Socionics.

[Aylen]

*deleted*

Post was open to misinterpretation so I deleted it. I will send it to anyone who is curious about the content. Just pm me.

[Myst]

it's Jung's terms, not MBT's special invetion
J = rationality and P = irrationality. other cases are mistyping. or texts with partly wrong MBT's types descriptions
You may compare direct descriptions of J/P (rationa/irrational) dichotomy in MBT and Socionics, - they are identical. In books and tests. It has different link to functional model, but not description itself. So if you was typed correctly as J by MBTI, then you can be only rational in Socionics.
The mess with other notation like INTJ=ILI goes from the strange idea than different functional model of introverts in MBT means more, than when they say dichotomies. Meanwhile MBT's type 4-letter notation describes only dichotomies.
Luckily MBT uses MBTI as main typing way, wich has no functions mistake. So MBT's types is most correctly unambiguously understand as ENTP=ILE, INTJ=LII, - from both point, theoretical and practical. Without exceptions.

I think ILIs that go as INTJ in MBTI, etc, use a definition of J/P slightly different from Rationality/Irrationality.

[Sol]

on left - IEI, on right - EIE


on left - IEI, on right - EIE

[golden]

Thats a given

The difference is that IEI's are much more diplomatic, while EIE's dramatize more and tell it like it is -if they feel positive emotions, you will know and if they feel negative emotions, you will know. They are more emotion provoking and provocative -trying to get reactions from others, while IEI's usually just try to keep interaction even-keeled and pleasant. They dont rock the boat as much.

What some people dont get is that while EIE's can certainly shit-stir, they're not like a Jersey shore regular, all over the place or vulgar (vulgar in jokes, sure -some of them, but not in the way they carry themselves). They are quite proper, if not a bit haughty.

I don't know about you, but my own provocations tend to have a point. Seeing how people react when provoked lets me assess them better. Then I know how to proceed.

[Beautiful sky]

.

I don't understand why people do beauty videos

[bolong]

Feel compelled to comment here bc Maritsa has done a good job of confusing and misleading everyone. Two things in particular-

EIEs like to flirt

No, they do not. They are not spontaneous enough to be elegant at flirting, and it is important to them that they appear elegant to others. LSIs appreciate the lack of flirting, the ability to keep an exuberantly positive emotional atmosphere going without resorting to flirting (which is used more often by ethical creatives but they can get away with it) is the single greatest thing the EIE brings to the LSI.

It's possible that young and silly EIE girls(edit: and boys) will talk a lot about flirting, and "plan" to do it soon, but that is bc they can't do it.

Which leads to

EIEs do not cause drama within a group

Absolutely, completely wrong. EIEs cause drama within a group pretty much immediately, and constantly. They can't help it, they are sensitive, easily offended, jealous, competitive; as an extravert they cannot hide it very well; and as Fe-ego the way they express themselves will always be melodramatic even if they don't want to be.

I don't think, however, that most of the people in a reality show are EIE. Very few will be, the others might be xSFx trying to replicate the holier-than-thou and superior hysterics of EIE for the audience at home.

EIEs save themselves from all these seemingly negative traits bc they take themselves SO. SERIOUSLY. They see themselves a certain way to begin with, and they need to ALWAYS BE SEEN THAT WAY, to themselves and to others. This leads them to commit acts of heroism and self-martyrdom, it gives them enough influence over the span of their lives to be a part of the "power group" (LSI, SLE, EIE, LIE, ILI, SEE), but it can also be their downfall. If you find yourself being terrorized by an EIE, remember that last bit.

[ScarlettLux]

Feel compelled to comment here bc Maritsa has done a good job of confusing and misleading everyone. Two things in particular-



No, they do not. They are not spontaneous enough to be elegant at flirting, and it is important to them that they appear elegant to others. LSIs appreciate the lack of flirting, the ability to keep an exuberantly positive emotional atmosphere going without resorting to flirting (which is used more often by ethical creatives but they can get away with it) is the single greatest thing the EIE brings to the LSI.

It's possible that young and silly EIE girls(edit: and boys) will talk a lot about flirting, and "plan" to do it soon, but that is bc they can't do it.

Which leads to

Absolutely, completely wrong. EIEs cause drama within a group pretty much immediately, and constantly. They can't help it, they are sensitive, easily offended, jealous, competitive; as an extravert they cannot hide it very well; and as Fe-ego the way they express themselves will always be melodramatic even if they don't want to be.

I don't think, however, that most of the people in a reality show are EIE. Very few will be, the others might be xSFx trying to replicate the holier-than-thou and superior hysterics of EIE for the audience at home.

EIEs save themselves from all these seemingly negative traits bc they take themselves SO. SERIOUSLY. They see themselves a certain way to begin with, and they need to ALWAYS BE SEEN THAT WAY, to themselves and to others. This leads them to commit acts of heroism and self-martyrdom, it gives them enough influence over the span of their lives to be a part of the "power group" (LSI, SLE, EIE, LIE, ILI, SEE), but it can also be their downfall. If you find yourself being terrorized by an EIE, remember that last bit.

Wow this is actually spot on, yet also terrible hahaha. What's with the "power group" thing though - do go on.

[Adam Strange]

Wow this is actually spot on, yet also terrible hahaha. What's with the "power group" thing though - do go on.

It is this: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ss-Competition

[wacey]

"power group" (LSI, SLE, EIE, LIE, ILI, SEE), but it can also be their downfall.

I observe ESI didn't make the cut. Would it be possible to please understand why?

edit: found my answer, no worries:

if you're asking why Alpha isn't discussed at all, it's because in the context of this article, Alpha types are "peripheral" - along with Deltas, IEI, and ESI.

instead what is discussed is the significance of the "Volitional triad" (LSI, EIE, SLE) and the "Pragmatic triad" (SEE, ILI, LIE). according to Gulenko, these six types are the ones who dominate the center of struggles for power, "from the geopolitical stage down to the level of a mediocre company."

the remaining 10 types of the "periphery" are more more prone towards cooperation rather than competition, not usually staying in the fight to obtain "central positions in society" for long.

if you're asking for the reason why does Gulenko not consider Alpha to be among the types who tend to be at the center of struggles for power, i can't know for sure.

based on the content, i'm sure Gulenko wrote this article based on practical observation of the types in society (both contemporary and historical), but theoretically i'm thinking it's because Alphas are Judicious; their Se-devaluing might make them more prone to be less interested in the power & influential status that comes with occupying "central positions in society".

Glam^

[maniac]

on left - IEI, on right - EIE


on left - IEI, on right - EIE

Dont forget

[Sol]

Tyra Banks - INTP
Tila Tequilla - INFP

[maniac]

Tyra Banks - INTP

nooooooooooooooooooooooo

[Myst]

No, they do not. They are not spontaneous enough to be elegant at flirting, and it is important to them that they appear elegant to others. LSIs appreciate the lack of flirting, the ability to keep an exuberantly positive emotional atmosphere going without resorting to flirting (which is used more often by ethical creatives but they can get away with it) is the single greatest thing the EIE brings to the LSI.

Seems like you know mainly EIE-Fe's and LSI-Ti's.

Absolutely, completely wrong. EIEs cause drama within a group pretty much immediately, and constantly. They can't help it, they are sensitive, easily offended, jealous, competitive; as an extravert they cannot hide it very well;

You have an overly narrow stereotype of FeNi. This is one manifestation of it, sure, but just one. It depends on other non-socionics factors and the situation too.

EIEs save themselves from all these seemingly negative traits bc they take themselves SO. SERIOUSLY. They see themselves a certain way to begin with, and they need to ALWAYS BE SEEN THAT WAY, to themselves and to others.

This part is sensible enough.

[GuavaDrunk]

(snip)

Which leads to

Absolutely, completely wrong. EIEs cause drama within a group pretty much immediately, and constantly. They can't help it, they are sensitive, easily offended, jealous, competitive; as an extravert they cannot hide it very well; and as Fe-ego the way they express themselves will always be melodramatic even if they don't want to be.

I don't think, however, that most of the people in a reality show are EIE. Very few will be, the others might be xSFx trying to replicate the holier-than-thou and superior hysterics of EIE for the audience at home.

EIEs save themselves from all these seemingly negative traits bc they take themselves SO. SERIOUSLY. They see themselves a certain way to begin with, and they need to ALWAYS BE SEEN THAT WAY, to themselves and to others. This leads them to commit acts of heroism and self-martyrdom, it gives them enough influence over the span of their lives to be a part of the "power group" (LSI, SLE, EIE, LIE, ILI, SEE), but it can also be their downfall. If you find yourself being terrorized by an EIE, remember that last bit.

Want to point out the assumption that no EIE will have (regardless of motive) a) self-awareness, b) any kind of distance from their own perception, and as a corollary c) self-control. Besides, do you really think that anyone, any type, interested in really controlling a social environment would not learn at least a modicum of self-control with regards to emotional self-expression (if not internal feeling)? What a crucial strategic error that would be, I mean *really.*

Secondly, and cattily, emotional maturity much?

Continuing on a facetious note, simple reactive shouting, drama, bullying and abuse of people is just *bad style* and much too easy to get taken down for.

[Beautiful sky]

@Starfall @golden @Aylen @darya

In all the times that I have expressed all of my feelings none of you ladies have tried to control me or refrain me in any way. Thank you for being genuinely understanding. With that being said what do you think about Guavas post

[darya]

There actually is a big difference between how seriously an EIE and IEI take themselves. EIE's are among the types who take themselves most seriously. Humour and (sometimes self depricating) jokes shouldn't be taken at face value, there's a very specific way EIE's want to be seen as -depending and appropriate on a context and people ofc (EIE's get very pissed if someone contradicts the view of themself they are trying to project - for example, if in a certain context they're claiming to be an asshole it will piss them off if the other person says they are really a sweetheart). Imo IEI's are much less proud and more flexible when it comes to their ego.

EIE's image and how they act with different people is much more varied - most IEI's are like caught within themselves, like they cant escape their inner world (looking kinda melancholy and self absorbed

Edit: Both EIE's and IEI's can be seen as arrogant, but IEI's are more arrogant about their knowledge or some kind of mystical insights they supposedly have (can look like a LII ILI mix) and EIE's have arrogance on their personal importance (proudness). IEI's also (generally) present themselves as vulnerable, EIE's as tough.

[Beautiful sky]

@darya yes I can see the difference in the temperament Ej more linear with regard to external and internal

[Myst]

@darya yes I can see the difference in the temperament Ej more linear with regard to external and internal

The base/creative subtypes modify that tho', so EIE-Ni is different from EIE-Fe in quite a few aspects.

[Sol]

The base/creative subtypes modify that tho'

there are no subtypes in normal Socionics. those theories are baseless fantasy

[Myst]

there are no subtypes in normal Socionics. those theories are baseless fantasy

What do you call normal Socionics? Just Model A?