Hello from an LIE!
Hello everyone,
I am Kye,18 years old, 95% sure I am an LIE and have been reading about socionics for some time now. I am also an enneagram 3w4 and I don't believe in mbti.
I want to learn more about socionics as it is practical and growing and helps me understand peole and myself.
My native language is not English so I will also learn a thing or two from you native English speaking fellows ;D
Thank you for your attention. See you guys around!
Welcome, Kye.
My own enneagram type is 8w7 3w2 6w7, and the e3 part is the most troublesome to me, but I know a very successful LIE e3. It will be good to compare notes.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 08-10-2016 at 12:28 AM.
Hello Adam,Originally Posted by Adam Strange
Yes enneagram 3 is troublesome. I just got accepted in university yesterday and choosing which uni along the way, was a very tiresome and stressful process for me as a 3w4. I think causes unhealthy perfectionism.
I have never met an ENTj!
Thank you for your reply
I find that I have an unhealthy preoccupation with social status and the way I appear to others. You could attribute this to having 3 in my enneagram types, or just to me generally being a shallow asshole. In either case, it causes me to place a high value on appearance rather than substance. It has some good parts, in the sense that three's are usually high achievers, but I find that this can often blind me to the best solution.
For example, for years I bought S-class Mercedes. I told myself that they are good in a crash (true) and since I am not a great driver, that I was protecting my family. I drive enough that I have killed two deer and one Bronco with the cars, and I can attest to the fact that they are safe. I also think that they make me look good, which is something that an ENTj can always use help with. However, the cars do not get great gas mileage, and I was spending over $140/week for gasoline. I eventually realized I could buy a new Honda Accord V6 out of the gas savings alone, and then drive free after 4-5 years. When I set aside the desire to look good, I held on to more money.
Another example involves an LIE who, like yourself, is an e3. This guy happens to be a University professor, and he married a woman who is LII and was once his student. (This happens more than you might think.) Unfortunately, she didn't have a PhD, so he wrote her PhD thesis for her, so he wouldn't marry someone who didn't have the requisite credentials (in his mind). In fact, when he found out I was divorced, he told me I should look for someone smart above all other characteristics, because 'at some point, the stories run out".
What he is missing is that in a dual relationship, there isn't a need to entertain each other with stories. Living life together is sufficient. The LIE-LII relationship is called Extinguishment, where each of the halves extinguish the other person's initiatives. This makes planning a life together hell, basically, because whatever you want, the other person is going to not want. This even makes going to the store for milk hell, basically. To him, she is a status symbol more than a partner in life. The two of them can stay married because he works in one state and she works in another, and they see each other briefly on the weekends. Their house is beautiful, and they have two cats, no kids. Cats are a decision you can agree on over a weekend. Kids are not.
There is some information on the forum about correlations between enneagram types and socionics types in post #99 here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-part-II/page3
As you can see, LIE's tend to be either eights or threes. If you test as a three, there are obviously some potential problems to be aware of. I'm primarily an eight, which has its own problems.
As for your never meeting an LIE, well, you might have and not known it. Until you meet a few of them, you won't know what to look for, and there are only about 2-3 LIE's per 100 people. We don't spend a lot of time in public, either. However, you will find higher concentrations of them in uni than you did in high school, particularly if you look in the Business school, in their Finance department.
When you meet them, be aware that LIE's (including yourself) are basically wolves. Two identical types (two LIE's, for example) can exchange information perfectly, but they can't usually help each other with problems, unless one knows the field well and is willing to share. Be aware also that you can get scratched playing with wolves. I didn't realize this at first, and was surprised when it happened. No hard feelings, of course, just hard playing.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 08-11-2016 at 12:00 AM.
Hello!
check your type
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1096450
it's same typology as Socionics, which uses same dichotomies as main typing method and writes types only with dichotomies
Dont mind sol, pretty much everything he says here is bullshit. Welcome
From the point of those whose mind contain bs. Like the ones who instead of logical thinking and facts prefers religious worshiping to charlatans and baseless heresies. And even don't understand correctly own type, like you who has F type.
Also if that Anglas would disagree whith everything I said, like he's lieing here (in common for Fe types stupid exaggeration), then he disagrees with basic Socionics theory and refuses reasonable thinking. As he seems to believe in baseless Reinin's bs and use them instead of normal Socionics, and has troubles with adequate thinking being F type, - both is true in significant degree. Mindless negativism as protective reaction is often for F types, as overcomes the need to think what is hard for them. While when they try to use logical arguments in a dispute those are not hard to refute.
There are a lot of mindless fanboys like him near the typology and near other non-scientific stuff. Fanboys go there for emotions, not for truth. So the most they produce are mindless hysterics and coping stupid bs taken from the ones they've chosen as own gurus on today. Typology is like role-playing game for them, not something about reality what needs objective ways of knowledge.
One of Anglas and their gurus problem is they systematically get worse than average results using normal Socionics. It's one of main reasons they so like baseless exotic theories to rationalize bs they get: subtypes, non-Jungian Reinin's dichotomies, Gulenko's delusions, ... It does not matter for them, that those theories have infinitely lesser weight as logic does not matter for them also. I suppose it's the main reason why hysterical Anglas still thinks himself as T type, - just rationalizes this by some bs not relating to Socionics, like Reinin's traits or something other.
Last edited by Sol; 08-11-2016 at 02:28 PM.
Relax.
Necessary?
It's my way to relax.
Sure. Or he'll feel bad if will try to think about what I say. By keeping eyes shut he avoids disappointments and the need to use the head to understand the truth.
Yes, because socionics≠MBTI. Do you think i hurt his feelings?
No, but you don't really need to stir the pot with incinderary smack talk, eh?Yes, because socionics≠MBTI. Do you think i hurt his feelings?
Hello, new LIE o/
==
It's my way to relax.
Reason is a whore.
I liked to bring truth to the world and brains to the heads. I get fun here.
who are you talking to
I'm on my phone and made a mistake. Let me fix itwho are you talking to
I actually find Reinin's sayings pretty logical and can relate to them well. What is your type?
As information metabolism theories are becoming more popular among people, it is for the best to introduce to them a more complete and more scientific version of it, and not to confuse them with incomplete theories that decrease their trust towards such matters. Mbti is by no means a theory fit for this purpose.
I think it is not just a e3 thing or an ENTj thing to care about our social status and how we appear.
I know an IEE who also does this more than me. A large part of it has to do with parents. For example my parents, LSI and ESE, have always cared very much about what others say and how they view us.
Perhaps I am young and don't have a lot of money but I think I wouldn't buy a car or house for any other reason other than my own and my family's comfort and wouldn't write a PhD thesis for someone to make them some sort of status symbol. But it is extremely important for me that my friends and family are intelligent and understanding. Overall I can't imagine marrying an LII!
I agree totally that he needs a dual partner.
I just receently met an ESI. They are hard to get acquainted with, since they view you from a distance and get closer to you only by time and the LIE's effort. It is painful to watch them being so distant from you because you already know you want to make friends after 5 seconds, but the ESI developes relationships in these stages and makes you wait!
Also with ESIs I care more than anyone how they view me. My mood and decision making process changes when with an ESI. I feel calm and at home. Not hurried and hyperactive which is my usual mode.
About the "going to store to get milk" I have a funny case also.
My EII friend married an LII and they can't agree on their plans so much that it's like living two seperate lives in one apartment. Look-alike relations don't fit very well either. Each thinks the other is making no sense. EII thinks LII is ice cold and emotionless. LII thinks EII is too emotional and illogical.
They also saw eachother briefly on weekends and had no pets or children.
Marriages that happen for reasons such as that end at some point because each of us experience duality and see how much potential our life has for improvement.
Thank you for the link about enneagram. I see some e8 signs in myself also.
Actually I did want to go to business school but for many reasons I decided to become an engineer. I think I might find some LIEs there also but unfortunately not many ESIs.
There can be an interesting attraction between a Te-dom and a Ti-Dom. My LII sister married an LSE, and I have been involved with two LSI. The attraction is between Te and Ti, because together it makes a single thinking whole, and the mind seems to like that a lot. It can be mistaken for a sexual attraction, especially if the two people have compatible erotic attitudes. Of course, there are some other problems in these relationships. The Te-dom is seeking Fi, and the Ti-dom is seeking Fe, and both feel that something is missing.
No kidding, regarding the "hard to get acquainted with" statement. Upon first meeting, you say Hi! and they say No No No NO and they start watching you from a distance. Since their ability to predict the future is not great, they have to accumulate information as it arrives in order to make a decision. They compare what they see right now to what they remember from the past, and if their past is full of bad behaviors, they are comparing your actions to those. There is very little ability there to choose between future possibilities. Therefore, any advancement in the relationship happens at the ESI's pace, as she establishes the fact that she can trust you (or not), based on your actions. Eventually, she is either interested or she isn't, and there isn't a lot you can do about it. So, you just have to hang around and be yourself and wait and see what they decide.
This is probably a good thing, now that I think about it, but it is probably why LIE's have a minor reputation for being easily friendly with women. We don't want to grow old waiting for a No decision.
Yeah, that happens. Nice, isn't it?
Eventually, it becomes addicting. I was visiting a lunch counter once a week for a couple years where an ESI-Fi worked. At one point I realized that I cared more about the time I spent there than I did about my work, or lunch, or any other thing. If I missed a week, it affected my mood in a very bad way, which is how I discovered the problems of being dualized, and then losing that.
That's really why I became interested in Socionics. It seems to be able to predict very, very well what I see in real life.
No, I have never seen an ESI in business school. You are going to have to visit the Nursing school or the Art School for that.
Don't delay in finding one. They tend to marry the wrong guy (not you) early, and their loyalty causes them to stick with the guy, no matter how bad it is, so they are all pretty much out of the pool by age 30.
Edit: Since discovering that you are female, my advice for finding an ESI is a bit different.
I'm going to guess that you lean more toward the Te-subtype, since they tend more to go into engineering, and the Ni-subtypes tend more to go into finance.
If you are Te-subtype, then you will probably be happier with an ESI-Fi. If you are an LIE-Ni, you will probably be happier with an ESI-Se. This is not carved in stone, though, and your individual tastes may vary, and a lot of other factors come into play.
Male ESI-Se types tend to appear at sports events with friends. I have seen them working in jobs that require some physicality and involves the outdoors, like mechanic, trouble-shooter, astrophysicist.
The only male ESI-Fi I have ever met is extremely smart and works for a University and he never goes anywhere. At all. If he is not at work, he is at home. Good luck with that.
So, keep your eyes open at uni.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 08-17-2016 at 01:06 PM.
Actually, on the dichotomies level MBTI and Socionics are pretty close.Yes, because socionics≠MBTI. Do you think i hurt his feelings?
In terms of cognitive functions vs information elements they are definitely not the same though.
Socionics is Jung's typology (like MBT). With some expansion.
Socionics is not more scientific as has not better experimental proof. It's lesser scientific than basic Jung's theory as uses more hypotheses without experimental proof.
Also some hypotheses (related by someones to Socionics) are almost baseless and far from Jung, like Reinin's dichotomies (RD) and subtypes. The ones who use RD are not much better than MBT with its messed introverted types' functional model (happily used by MBT guys only as auxiliary way to type, unlike someones in Socionics which use RD not lesser than Jung's theory).
To confuse and mislead is to refuse that Jung and MBT use same types as Socionics. This refusing sabotages popularization of Socionics and Jung's typology, assists to keeping of incorrect MBT's functional model modification.not to confuse them with incomplete theories
Also Socionics can't be said as "complete theory" as may to have further expansions and editions, including corrections as the current set of its hypotheses has not objective proof.
Almost all here came after MBT, except Russian language speakers. There is no formal problem in using MBT's types notations as MBT is correct there and MBT's notations are comfortable.that decrease their trust towards such matters
The more real problem is to attract the attention to Socionics, to help people switch from MBT. The using of notations with wich people are familiar and don't saying bs about "other types than in MBT" helps a lot.
Its purpose was to use Jung's types, they official claimed this. They practically fit to something reasonable only because still use dichotomies as the main typing method. They fit to the purpose only on this level, while other needs reforming.Mbti is by no means a theory fit for this purpose.
If Socionics sites would have stopped idiocy with misleading MBT users about other types, stopped to mess basic Socionics theory (Jung + model A) with RD and other far from Jung exotics additions, stopped to use physiognomy for typing. Then MBT would get serious problems to exist in the current conditions. Instead of these reasonable actions we see how Socionics artificially prevents migrations from MBT.
Who gets profit from this situation is MBT, not Socionics. So more people stay in MBT where are misleaded in partly wrong core theory, don't get useful expansions to Jung's typology and significant resources which could to follow to Socionics still stay in MBT. Socionics is better, so the main problem today is to give correct information about it to people and limit bs in Socionics. Other problems are not significant compared to this.
How are they different?
For some reason I feel like you are an ESI
Thank you for your adviceThere can be an interesting attraction between a Te-dom and a Ti-Dom. My LII sister married an LSE, and I have been involved with two LSI. The attraction is between Te and Ti, because together it makes a single thinking whole, and the mind seems to like that a lot. It can be mistaken for a sexual attraction, especially if the two people have compatible erotic attitudes. Of course, there are some other problems in these relationships. The Te-dom is seeking Fi, and the Ti-dom is seeking Fe, and both feel that something is missing.
No kidding, regarding the "hard to get acquainted with" statement. Upon first meeting, you say Hi! and they say No No No NO and they start watching you from a distance. Since their ability to predict the future is not great, they have to accumulate information as it arrives in order to make a decision. They compare what they see right now to what they remember from the past, and if their past is full of bad behaviors, they are comparing your actions to those. There is very little ability there to choose between future possibilities. Therefore, any advancement in the relationship happens at the ESI's pace, as she establishes the fact that she can trust you (or not), based on your actions. Eventually, she is either interested or she isn't, and there isn't a lot you can do about it. So, you just have to hang around and be yourself and wait and see what they decide.
This is probably a good thing, now that I think about it, but it is probably why LIE's have a minor reputation for being easily friendly with women. We don't want to grow old waiting for a No decision.
Yeah, that happens. Nice, isn't it?
Eventually, it becomes addicting. I was visiting a lunch counter once a week for a couple years where an ESI-Fi worked. At one point I realized that I cared more about the time I spent there than I did about my work, or lunch, or any other thing. If I missed a week, it affected my mood in a very bad way, which is how I discovered the problems of being dualized, and then losing that.
That's really why I became interested in Socionics. It seems to be able to predict very, very well what I see in real life.
No, I have never seen an ESI in business school. You are going to have to visit the Nursing school or the Art School for that.
Don't delay in finding one. They tend to marry the wrong guy (not you) early, and their loyalty causes them to stick with the guy, no matter how bad it is, so they are all pretty much out of the pool by age 30.
Edit: Since discovering that you are female, my advice for finding an ESI is a bit different.
I'm going to guess that you lean more toward the Te-subtype, since they tend more to go into engineering, and the Ni-subtypes tend more to go into finance.
If you are Te-subtype, then you will probably be happier with an ESI-Fi. If you are an LIE-Ni, you will probably be happier with an ESI-Se. This is not carved in stone, though, and your individual tastes may vary, and a lot of other factors come into play.
Male ESI-Se types tend to appear at sports events with friends. I have seen them working in jobs that require some physicality and involves the outdoors, like mechanic, trouble-shooter, astrophysicist.
The only male ESI-Fi I have ever met is extremely smart and works for a University and he never goes anywhere. At all. If he is not at work, he is at home. Good luck with that.
So, keep your eyes open at uni.I think I am actually LIE-Ni but I do not read a lot about subtypes since I have not mastered the first steps of socionics yet.
The ESI-Se subtype is more attractive to me. And I think maybe it is more attractive to LIE-Te also since they are really outgoing and energetic and can do better with a Se subtype in that sense.
Duality can be dangerous. I know I have met a dual when unlike other times, I can't let go of them easily. For example with other types if our friendship is over I leave and never look back but with a dual they become addvictive and it is not very healthy. So I see why you kept going back there.
I will admit that the ESI-Se subtype is more noticeable, more decorative, more active, possibly more artistically expressive. Sexier, too, in my small experience. However, ESI-Fi have their own advantages. They are less dramatic, more stable, possibly more loyal, and are very resistant to judging people by appearance.Thank you for your advice
The ESI-Se subtype is more attractive to me. And I think maybe it is more attractive to LIE-Te also since they are really outgoing and energetic and can do better with a Se subtype in that sense.
Duality can be dangerous. I know I have met a dual when unlike other times, I can't let go of them easily. For example with other types if our friendship is over I leave and never look back but with a dual they become addictive and it is not very healthy. So I see why you kept going back there.
If you are unsure of your subtype, maybe this will help you decide: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...e=LIE_subtypes
I think these descriptions are pretty good, and the site has some for ESI's, too. http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...e=ESI_subtypes.
Lol I met ESI-Fi males online. So that's another optionOK to be serious, yes the ones I know are quite the homebodies by default but one of them does love to go to his favourite sport events.
Oh and I don't think loyalty depends on subtype or even type. ESI-Se I know is no less loyal than the ESI-Fi's I've known.
The function models in each theory are different and as a consequence the cognitive functions in MBTI are defined differently from how the information elements are defined in Socionics. This is a significant difference in some cases. I'm mainly referring to the J/P idea in MBTI about how this links with the strongest preferred extraverted function affecting the definitions of cognitive functions. Differences in functions as placed for the types also result from how the dominant, auxiliary, tertiary and inferior function positions are not clearly separated from how the non-preferred other four functions would work while Socionics has a model where it precisely places all 8 functions. Beyond the differences in models, a few traits of MBTI cognitive functions are also put together differently for Socionics information elements.
I can concretize more beyond this abstract summary too, of course
Last edited by Myst; 08-18-2016 at 03:56 AM.
MBTI cognitive functions in the orthodox interpretation of them actually are compatible with their dichotomies the way they are defined so yes you can type by them in MBTI if you keep to orthodox MBTI theory. They are just no longer Jungian functions (or Socionics IEs). So MBTI fans that mix in Jungian ideas will mess it up and then yeah it will not match with the dichotomies based typing anymore.
They do use largely the same types but they DO NOT use the same cognitive functions. That j/p switch bullshit does sabotage things tho' lol rightTo confuse and mislead is to refuse that Jung and MBT use same types as Socionics. This refusing sabotages popularization of Socionics and Jung's typology, assists to keeping of incorrect MBT's functional model modification.
Only on the dichotomies level, right?Almost all here came after MBT, except Russian language speakers. There is no formal problem in using MBT's types notations as MBT is correct there and MBT's notations are comfortable.
The problem is of course, X function in MBTI isn't X information element in Socionics. So using the exact same notation is easily misleading.The more real problem is to attract the attention to Socionics, to help people switch from MBT. The using of notations with wich people are familiar and don't saying bs about "other types than in MBT" helps a lot.
And precisely because of this need to reform that system we have a problem - use of the notation of such a system's that needs correction is misleading.Its purpose was to use Jung's types, they official claimed this. They practically fit to something reasonable only because still use dichotomies as the main typing method. They fit to the purpose only on this level, while other needs reforming.
It would still not really be a competitor to MBTI, lol. It needs more than that for that.If Socionics sites would have stopped idiocy with misleading MBT users about other types, stopped to mess basic Socionics theory (Jung + model A) with RD and other far from Jung exotics additions, stopped to use physiognomy for typing. Then MBT would get serious problems to exist in the current conditions.
Ever wondered why Socionics in its current state is such a fertile ground for growing such bs theories?Instead of these reasonable actions we see how Socionics artificially prevents migrations from MBT.
Who gets profit from this situation is MBT, not Socionics. So more people stay in MBT where are misleaded in partly wrong core theory, don't get useful expansions to Jung's typology and significant resources which could to follow to Socionics still stay in MBT. Socionics is better, so the main problem today is to give correct information about it to people and limit bs in Socionics. Other problems are not significant compared to this.
While it is fertile ground for that (hint hint), it won't be a competitor to MBTI.
I agree with you about the subtype but I think a LSI is always more loyal than the SLE!Lol I met ESI-Fi males online. So that's another option
Oh and I don't think loyalty depends on subtype or even type. ESI-Se I know is no less loyal than the ESI-Fi's I've known.
I didn't have time to write before so now I am reading your former post again.
I see how there can be an attraction between a Te-dom and a Ti-dom. My best friend of 4 years, was an LII but our friendship ended over minor misunderstandings. So I think it was not the misinderstandings that actually ended our friendship and we realized that afteall we didn't match as well as we thought we did.
About the ESI's " No No No get away from me" method I must say it gets a bit boring after a while if the relationshio doesn't improve a lot. Since as LIE I like to be in charge of things, this ESI trait is annoyingly attrative.
Although socionics predicts things pretty well and I can't understand people a lot without it, the ESIs I know don't really care about it ot read about it. I wonder why that is since they love to figure out new things about people through their own lense and observations.
After reading more about subtypes, I think I am a Te subtupe. I am in no way calm and considerate specially when I was younger.
For some time I thought I was an ILI which is why I thought since my Ni is well developed, I must be the Ni subtype of LIE but apparently that is not reasonable.
I also have a high sensitivity to sounds, smells, tastes which are all sensory things. For example I get annoyed more than others if there is unnecessary sound in the house or something or someone smells bad. Is that an LIE thing? Are all LIEs like that?!
Also about being boastful when I want to impress the ESI or EII. Is that an LIE thing? I boast about all the information I have about all sorts of things and random facts (Te obviously) but then I feel bad about doing so! Do you do that also?
when you say the cognitive functions in MBTI are defined differently from how the information elements are defined in Socionics, does that mean if we take a single function (lets take Ti as you're Ti-dom or any other function you like) will its definition in socionics be more comprehensive than that of MBTI or vice versa? or is it going to be completely different, if so can you compare them?
I would really appropriate it if you don't mindI can concretize more beyond this abstract summary too, of course
Thanks for the links I found out not only I am a Te subtype, but the ESIs I like are Fi subtype
It'll have some overlap but also significant differences. With socionics also providing a more comprehensive approach.
So to answer in terms of what you were trying to get at, treat the two as different systems.
OK, if you look at one type in MBTI, you can see it's mainly described by the four dichotomies (the "letters"). Then you add the assumption from the J/P tenet to get the functions. For example, ISTP should have Ti-dom then because they are a Perceiver (P) type. As a result, the Ti definitions matching these ISTP descriptions include the Perceiver quality. That means they are no longer focused on defining it as just pure logic. That would be Rational and would think and act differently than a Perceiver (which is largely the same as Irrationality in the jungian or in the Socionics sense). It departs from Jung in that way. From Socionics as well, of course. Now if you look closer, you could see that ISTP does have Ti in some function position and does also have Te actually, etc., but the MBTI function model does not deal with this. Socionics's 8 function model does. Another example of how the MBTI function model is quite crude... the Fe of ISTP is apparently pretty rejected which is put general enough so that it could be seen as the jungian inferior but could also be seen as the PoLR function in Socionics if we look closer for more specifics on how it is rejected.I would really appropriate it if you don't mind
Let me know if this makes it any clearer, if not, feel free to ask specific questions.
Well I agree with you here and actually the reason I moved from MBTI to socionics is the MBTI bad descriptions, but I didn't think of them as different
I thought MBTI wanted to make the description in a way that anyone can understand without having to know anything about the functions, so they can get as many audience (or customers) as possible
while socionics wanted to figure out the different types and describe them in the most accurate way regardless if it would be easy to understand from common people perspective
with this understanding I moved to socionics as an upgraded version of MBTI (where you have to switch j/p)
well I haven't thought about that but you are right they usually describe the inferior function as the PoLR in socionicsNow if you look closer, you could see that ISTP does have Ti in some function position and does also have Te actually, etc., but the MBTI function model does not deal with this. Socionics's 8 function model does. Another example of how the MBTI function model is quite crude... the Fe of ISTP is apparently pretty rejected which is put general enough so that it could be seen as the jungian inferior but could also be seen as the PoLR function in Socionics if we look closer for more specifics on how it is rejected.
Let me know if this makes it any clearer, if not, feel free to ask specific questions.
but what I don't like about MBTI is their grouping of the types why sensors are divided based on p/j while intuitives are divided by t/f?
It's the systems that are different on the level of the function model, not necessarily the descriptions themselves. Though yes, MBTI also has too one-sided descriptions for sure.
Say MBTI description shows "a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h" for a type and Socionics description also shows "a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h" but MBTI claims the dominant function is abef and the auxiliary is cdgh, while Socionics claims the leading ("dominant") function is abcd while the demonstrative function is ef and the creative is gh. And the conclusions drawn from the latter are more sensible.
That's just an illustration of course, hope it helps.
The refinement in Socionics is again not in the descriptions but in the model and its conclusions.I thought MBTI wanted to make the description in a way that anyone can understand without having to know anything about the functions, so they can get as many audience (or customers) as possible
while socionics wanted to figure out the different types and describe them in the most accurate way regardless if it would be easy to understand from common people perspective
with this understanding I moved to socionics as an upgraded version of MBTI (where you have to switch j/p)
That grouping is Keirsey, not MBTI. But yes, many people associate the two. And yeah I don't like Keirsey temperaments either for the same reason.well I haven't thought about that but you are right they usually describe the inferior function as the PoLR in socionics
but what I don't like about MBTI is their grouping of the types why sensors are divided based on p/j while intuitives are divided by t/f?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote