INFJ in MBT is EII in SocionicsOriginally Posted by LSI Stripper
He has T type. ENTP or other
INFJ in MBT is EII in Socionics
He has T type. ENTP or other
Not always. It can't be correlated by function only behavior since INFJ is Ni/Fe in MBTI. It doesn't match up so it is only loosely useful. A lot of the INFP here seem EII and even self type EII. Don't lecture me on videos and incorrect self typings. I am just stating what is.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Always, as a type in MBT is written only by preferences and these preferences are compatible with Jung/Socionics. Practically, preferences are always checked in MBT as this is their main method, hence any mismatch with real EII is caused by wrong typing.
MBT don't type "by function only behavior" in common. And I think they must to use MBTI when say their opinion officially. Practically they don't use only their wrong functional model of introverts. So when MBT say type officially or usually - they checked preferences and could not get other type than EII in case of correct using of their theory.It can't be correlated by function only behavior since INFJ is Ni/Fe in MBTI
There are just a lot of wrong typings and wrong using of theory. The situation with this in MBT is similar to Socionics. Same typology, similar methods -> similar situation.A lot of the INFP here seem EII
Don't ask me to don't use reasonable arguments.Don't lecture me on videos and incorrect self typings. I am just stating what is.There is nothing to say about different types written by preferences. And there is nothing unexpected to see a significant INFP-INFJ mess in MBT typings caused by their mixed descriptions of these types and imperfection of typing skills. In such situation they may easily type a real INFJ not only to INFJ, but significant part to close INFP, besides typing to other types.
So when you see an INFJ typed as INFP by MBT the main reason is wrong typing caused by bad typing skills, as they do preferences check mostly. While INFJ = EII always, from the theory's point of view and MBT's main practical approach.
Last edited by Sol; 04-19-2016 at 12:19 PM.
Glad I checked this again to see the edit. You misunderstood me. Reasonable arguments are better than just saying people are mistyped and videos are needed all the time. I knew you could put more effort into it than that but you don't usually seem to want to.Always, as a type in MBT is written only by preferences and these preferences are compatible with Jung/Socionics. Practically, preferences are always checked in MBT as this is their main method, hence any mismatch with real EII is caused by wrong typing.
MBT don't type "by function only behavior" in common. And I think they must to use MBTI when say their opinion officially. Practically they don't use only their wrong functional model of introverts. So when MBT say type officially or usually - they checked preferences and could not get other type than EII in case of correct using of their theory.
There are just a lot of wrong typings and wrong using of theory. The situation with this in MBT is similar to Socionics. Same typology, similar methods -> similar situation.
Don't ask me to don't use reasonable arguments.
So when you see an INFJ typed as INFP by MBT the main reason is wrong typing caused by bad typing skills, as they do preferences check mostly. While INFJ = EII always, from the theory's point of view and MBT's main practical approach.I agree the descriptions are mixed up. I get both INFJ and INFP on my tests depending on wording;. I can identify really well with some INFJ descriptions (I am not that organized though) and pretty well with most INFP descriptions but the INFP descriptions seem off in some way more than INFJ. I am not that passive. If I mix the two and cut out some parts I would have a decent description of my type. I also have gotten INTP and INTJ on MBTI. I have gotten ENFJ when I thought I was an extrovert (briefly when very young) since I thought going out with friends meant I was an extrovert. I don't recall ever getting ENFP on any test.
I see possibilities but I don't find them to be that important. I am not great at brainstorming as I need more time to think about things and how they fit into the big picture. I am a quick thinker but hate to be put on the spot. I can come up with ideas but what good are they if they can't be implemented with the greatest chance of coming to fruition. That is why I like writing. My characters can achieve whatever task I give them. Real people are not that adaptable. People have potential sure but is it probable, in most cases it is not so I see no reason to tell people what their potential might be if they are unlikely to follow through. I also dislike when people tell me what my potential is because I either already know and am not achieving it or I already know I have no potential in an area they seem to think I do. I hate the term "wasted potential" when it comes to a human being. Everything has some purpose even if it isn't always evident.INFP
Idealistic, loyal to their values and to people who are important to them. Want an external life that is congruent with their values. Curious, quick to see possibilities, can be catalysts for implementing ideas. Seek to understand people and to help them fulfill their potential. Adaptable, flexible, and accepting unless a value is threatened.
I can relate to the daydreaming, spaciness and prone to fantasy in some of the INFP descriptions.
http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-p...mbti-types.htm
So for INFJ, I can see what would serve the common good especially in a group situation. I am conscientious where it matters to me and so are most IEI. I am a decisive person. It might take me longer to finally decide but that is because I don't want to be wrong or make the wrong choice when it is important. Usually I can't rest until I make a decision if it is important. If it isn't important I am not as likely to care and can put it off until a later date or indefinitely until I am forced to choose. I am not sure how the dichotomies fit when it is all broken down. I have spent too much time trying to make the two systems fit and they don't so when you tell someone INFJ is always EII it is misleading since they could be mistyped in MBTI and still be a socionics EII. Your wording is what I had a problem with since it didn't give context.INFJ
Seek meaning and connection in ideas, relationships, and material possessions. Want to understand what motivates people and are insightful about others. Conscientious and committed to their firm values. Develop a clear vision about how best to serve the common good. Organized and decisive in implementing their vision.
I am confident that I am a Ni/Fe > Fi/Ne user and it is apparent to those who know me irl. Yet I can test on the line of j/p in MBTI and so can many people.
Just so you don't misunderstand me, I have no doubt on my type. People have to choose for themselves once they know themselves well enough. That is why I am usually reluctant to get involved in typing threads. I get intuitive impressions like a lot of people but if we all disagree we can't all be right. I am still going to think my intuition is better than yours 99% of the time but there has been a situation or two we actually agreed on a type for a person. Maybe it is was a fluke.
Deductive reasoning does not seem to work as well when it comes to typing. I think inductive reasoning might be a bit better. I am not talking about cognition styles by Gulenko since people can use either even if there is a preference.
Best-fit type is the four-letter type that you think best fits you after you have learned about type, read type descriptions, and had the opportunity to review your MBTI® results with a certified practitioner.*
It is beneficial and ethical for a certified practitioner to assist you in verifying your MBTI results to help you find your best-fit type rather than just giving you the results and telling you what your type is. When you receive your MBTI results in an interactive session with a trained professional, you have the opportunity to ask questions and to be sure that you choose the MBTI type that best fits you.
All too often, the best-fit type decision is a quick pro forma process, in which people either accept their MBTI® results or puzzle briefly about one preference that doesn't "feel" right. However, when people are encouraged to look in depth at their own preferences and to understand the impact of type in all aspects of their lives, the experience of verifying type can be much more rewarding and enlightening.
http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-p...t-fit-type.htm
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
The E/I scale in MBTI is completely independent from the P/J scale (in theory).Always, as a type in MBT is written only by preferences and these preferences are compatible with Jung/Socionics. Practically, preferences are always checked in MBT as this is their main method, hence any mismatch with real EII is caused by wrong typing.
MBT don't type "by function only behavior" in common. And I think they must to use MBTI when say their opinion officially. Practically they don't use only their wrong functional model of introverts. So when MBT say type officially or usually - they checked preferences and could not get other type than EII in case of correct using of their theory.
There are just a lot of wrong typings and wrong using of theory. The situation with this in MBT is similar to Socionics. Same typology, similar methods -> similar situation.
Don't ask me to don't use reasonable arguments.
So when you see an INFJ typed as INFP by MBT the main reason is wrong typing caused by bad typing skills, as they do preferences check mostly. While INFJ = EII always, from the theory's point of view and MBT's main practical approach.
If you score as INFJ on an official MBTI test (or by someone typing you by the four Myers-Briggs dichotomies), you are more likely to be ENFJ than ENFP (because statistically, the probability of getting two scales wrong is less likely than one), which in Model A theory (if INFJ was equivalent to EII; ENFJ with EIE; and ENFP with IEE) would be rather laughable. EIE is quite distinct from EII.
If MBTI and Socionics has a correlation rate of 50-66% (which would seemingly show a “strong” correlation), it would not be because they are “the same”, but because when the MBTI measures for example “Introversion” vs. “Extroversion” on a binary scale, introverted functions in both MBTI and Socionics will correlate strongly with the “Introversion” side of the scale, and similarly, extroverted functions will correlate strongly with the “Extroversion” side of the scale. There is nothing mysterious about that.
However, when the MBTI scores a person as “I” and “J”, it does not mean all MBTI IJs are “IJ temperament”, because not only does the scoring as a “J” type (in MBTI) not tell you if this has an extroverted or an introverted focus, the MBTI actually considers all “IJ” types as “Introverted Perceivers” first, and “Extroverted Judgers” second (this is a failing distinct from the MBTI's inability to distinguish which Jungian functions you actually utilise first and second).
Please type her
SEE?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote