INTP/INTj Confuzzled

[Crispy]

Hi, I'm INTP.
I'm INTj though.
But I heard J/P switch was false.
I have studied HELLA MUCH mbti/kiersey/socionics and can distinguish the types in my head quite well but I still haven't fully grasped each individual cognitive process. (Specifically differences between Xe and Xi).

What are my cognitive processes for socio/kiersey (im pretty sure its the same with the switch) and is there any significant difference between mbti-INTP and socio-INTj?

PS: Also am I LII or ILI?

[ArchonAlarion]

If you relate to Keirsey INTP then you are probably INTj or Ti ENTP. Maybe some Beta intovert too.

[Crispy]

No way extroverted.
Here are the 2 descriptions that match me perfectly.
PTypes - Solitary Personality Type (INTP)
Logical-Intuitive Intratim - INTj (The Analyst) (INTj)
I assume this means the cognitive processes of the two are actually the same.
What color is my square and triangle and are there any nameable differences in the 2 types from the 2 theories?

[silverchris9]

You're LII. Maybe you're acting extra LII in those two posts ("are there any nameable differences...", but you're clearly LII. That means your function order would be (white square, black triangle). I'm too lazy to read that PTypes description to see if there's any difference between it and socionics LII.

[ArchonAlarion]

Okay well introversion and extroversion have different denotations in Socionics, first of all.

Secondly, you are probably INTj 5w6.

Note that non-socionics jungian typology has more diversity in type descriptions, than Socionics.



If the cognitive functions are the same, than the difference is "temperament". INTP in most mbti explanations is a better description for Ti ENTp's or Ne INTj's.

[Crispy]

Thanks! I'm trying to type smart cause I'm extra high today

[Crispy]

Ti ENTp's or Ne INTj's.

Is that a split to 32 or more details?

[ArchonAlarion]

Yes its basically a split into 32, but Ne INTj and Ti INTj are still overall "INTj". Its a matter of specification.

and on being high.

[Jonathan]

...
But I heard J/P switch was false...

The interesting thing about this thread is that it begins with this statement "I heard J/P switch was false." But then the people who answered it seem to be from the point of view that it's true..."If you relate to Keirsey INTP then you are probably INTj or Ti ENTP. Maybe some Beta intovert too."

Obviously, the whole reason why people talk about J/P switch is that while most people think a simple 100% mapping between the systems is out of the question, some people lean towards thinking J/P switch is true, and others towards thinking that it's false, and others thinking it's true for certain types or partially true.

So the point is that unless you consider the perspective of who's answering the question, you really can't take any answer at face value.

Without knowing much about you, it's hard to type, but if you identify well with LII descriptions, I guess that lends weight to LII, and linguistic analysis as brought up in thread may be a legitimate tool.

[silverchris9]

Well, one reason why the j/p switch partially works is that for introverts, it makes the mbti ego functions line up with the socionics ego functions. For extroverts, it makes the mbti weak functions line up (more or less) with the socionics superego functions (hence when I had myself typed as an mbti ENFP, trying to figure out how Se was a helpful function for me, and how to make that work with the theory. I'm still almost cool with ) Since people tend to type themselves based on what they think their ego functions are, very often the j/p switch works for introverts, and introverts, I'd imagine, make up a large percentage of the users of online forums.

Anyway, I still vote LII.

[Jonathan]

Well, one reason why the j/p switch partially works is that for introverts, it makes the mbti ego functions line up with the socionics ego functions. For extroverts, it makes the mbti weak functions line up (more or less) with the socionics superego functions (hence when I had myself typed as an mbti ENFP, trying to figure out how Se was a helpful function for me, and how to make that work with the theory. I'm still almost cool with ) Since people tend to type themselves based on what they think their ego functions are, very often the j/p switch works for introverts, and introverts, I'd imagine, make up a large percentage of the users of online forums.

Anyway, I still vote LII.

Of course the J/P switch makes the functions line up. Let's be clear on what the definition of the J/P switch is. The J/P switch is the theory that at least roughly speaking you can map MBTI types to Socionic types by switching J/P for introverts (only). The J/P switch theory doesn't apply to extraverts.

The anti-J/P switch position is that the behaviors associated with the functions are reversed for introverts between MBTI and Socionics, so that for example if a person identifies with Ti/Ne in MBTI, it's not necessarily Ti/Ne is Socionics.

[Jonathan]

Here's a good discusson on the J/P switch:

J/P switch - Wikisocion

[717495]

The J/P switch is a fallacy. The IMs are different between theories, yeah that means Ni and Ni are different, Ne and Ne are different. Only certain types will have a logical chance to switch, and even this chance is not a large one. If you're looking for a correlation between systems, then you're on a never-ending path. The simplest way to figuring out your type is to read Aushra, not drag your finger along some chart.

These sites that try to give you simple step by step approach, like some lame-ass kindergarden school teacher, don't actually care about this theory. They're just trying to make sense of whatever they can to occupy your time and then leave out the rest. It's ridiculous.

From my knowledge, if you're an INTP in MBTI, you are most likely an INTP in Socionics. Some are really an INTJ, or an INFP. I test, self-type, relate, profile INTJ in MBTI, but I'm an INTp here. This isn't rare, but it's less likely. Most MBTI INTJs I know are socionics INTJs.

[ArchonAlarion]

Actually not really.

Many MBTI sites have relatively similar descriptions of the cognitive functions and I've found some to be better than the common socionics descriptions.

The only time that works, polikujm, is when the MBTI site in question is not function based, but trait based (I E N S T F J P rather then Ni, Ne, Fe, etc.)

[717495]

Many MBTI sites have relatively similar descriptions of the cognitive functions and I've found some to be better than the common socionics descriptions.

That is from trying to mold the theories. That is why introverted logic all of a sudden, years later, is exactly the same as MBTI Ti, renamed "Ti," type is renamed "INTJ," and a J/P switch theory is constructed. The reason Russians are interested in MBTI is the same reason we are interested in a Russian theory. One should go to MBTI if they're interested in that.

[Crispy]

The J/P switch works for my understanding of the theory (so far) mostly because it matches up the information elements. As I keep cross checking type by type between MBTI and socio it seems at the very least that each IXXP/J in MBTI would be more attracted to the descriptions of IXXJ/P rather than IXXP/J. What is this Ni and Ne difference and would you consider it significant enough to trump the validity of using the cognitive elements as strong evidence for self-typing?