EII - INTj - Dostoyevsky -
No, it's not a typo!
It is an eternal swim in the greyland of overlaps. What I gathered earlier is ILI who been Ni- and Se+ which kind of work so that it use Ni to the bone and Se is the flesh. Duals share the same spins, at least in lead and suggestive. IEI is the opposite spin from ILI.
Is there a difference?
I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.
Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If it’s a disease, it’s nobody’s fault. Yay empiricism.
I don't see a difference between the Models themselves.
They order the functions a bit differently, but signs-wise they are the same.
I have looked a bit closer at them, and I believe both are half-wrong actually, haha.
Personally, I go by the signs Gulenko assigns to the IE.
For example, he says IEI has got: +Ni, +Fe, -Ti, -Se etc.
In the models above, it says for IEI: -Ni, +Fe, -Ti, +Se .
As far as I know, there are two different ideas on +/- in Socionics. I cannot remember which is which,
but it seems like those models represent the first idea, and Gulenko's take on it represents the second idea.
Having read Gulenko's work on it, and connected the dots to real-life people (including myself ),
I find Gulenko's take accurate and more valuable.
Gulenko +:- functions.jpg
There are a lot of ones who find wrong even own types, not just tiny hypothetical functions variations.I find Gulenko's take accurate and more valuable.