This is theoretically how I have perceived a conversion ... from the test I have done it appears to be accurate, but I am in the process of building more evidence, which should be available soon.
Socionics braintypes conversion chart
This is theoretically how I have perceived a conversion ... from the test I have done it appears to be accurate, but I am in the process of building more evidence, which should be available soon.
There's aspects of functions that are both left AND right brained, thus the concepts of functions is a bit bloated ontologically in this regard, in regards to the fact that it can't be reduced to a single area of the brain.
For instance, Ni both inspects things linearly and holistically, thus producing a stark contrast.
Perhaps some functions can be reduced to particular areas of the brain, or at least to particular _hemispheres_ of the brain, but it is a but a folly to attempt to attribute all of them so specifically to certain parts of the brain.
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
I'd also like to point out that McNew swithed around the J/Ps for introverts from what BrainTypes claims. I'm not so sure about that, because I identify a lot with the ISTPs he types while not so much with the ISTJs. That leads me to believe that his ISTP is equivilant to an SLI, so the SLI is right-brained just like the ISTP is.
I would not quite call it "folly" necessarily, unless you like to call all theories "folly." My current attempt was to make an appropiate conversion, but other than that I may or may not disagree with you.
It is switched around because I theorized that is how it would be "converted," not because I am conflicting with the theory.Originally Posted by Rocky
Which reminds me ... if I get a bunch of people in here jumping on me for theorizing again, I am not going to be happy.
"Which reminds me ... if I get a bunch of people in here jumping on me for theorizing again, I am not going to be happy."
I'm jumping on you simply because I don't think it can be done, and I believe I gave a reason why. Criticism's a good thing.
"To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."
Yes, but telling an ENTp something can not be done is exactly equivalent to saying "Go get 'EM tiger." So, I would not be so quick to make judgements.
I improved the chart, it did not include everything it should have before.
The current chart definitely looks like an interesting theory. The corralation with subtypes sounds like something worth investigating. Something that I really like is that you has not imposed a rigid rule that tells us that "all judgers are inevitably left brained".
Yeah, I am doing some more test on this and collecting more data, but what I have seen so far looks very promising and there is definatelly a correlation there. If not what I have now, probably very very close to this.
If you're interested in learnig more about braintype stuff...
http://braintypes.com/fbg.htm (Mag. Q & A)
http://braintypes.com/eeg.htm (Science)
http://braintypes.com/btistudy.htm (Science)
http://braintypes.com/news_in_brief.htm#bradley (News)
http://braintypes.com/ainge.htm (Story)
(I don't understand anything in the second two links, but it looks good.)
Revisiting BrainTypes.
Hey there. I know it's been awhile since we've discussed this.
I have decided to bring this up again since no one seems to understand the concept. I will try and explain it more clearly and have brought visuals.
http://www.roxwel.com/prefs/atthedri...edscissor.html
The above link is to a music video by At the Drive-In (One Armed Scissor). The leader singer in that group is Cedic Bixler (ISFP), who we can see as an excellent example of the all important (to Brain Types) Sensing Feeler type (gross-motor demonstration). Watch this movie carefully. I have it on DVD, so I was able to slow it down, frame by frame, and note the distinctions. Watch how very different (even odd) his movemets may seem to you (as long as you are not SF).
For example, you can see him rise straight up from a squating postion, holding a water bottle, 'til his arm is well above his head, then he hurls the bottle down in a caterpult-like action with his entire body. Notice how, on his way up, he pushes all the way with the maxium force of his tippy-toes, with his arms do little actual motion aside from "following" the rest of his body. Then, on the way down, his legs start to dive down initially with his upper arms "trailing" behind. Now, try and mimic that motion. You can't if you are not SF.
There are other good demonstrations in this video. When he dances around the stage, he bounces from one area to another, like his is leaping. Again, he drives his entire body forward with the power of his toes, and legs. Sometimes, it seems like his arms are just flapping around, not moving at all. Again, you try and do that one.
He also enjoys tossing the microphone around, spinning, then catching it. Note the distinguished movements again. Sometimes, when catching the mic, he will crattle it, sort of like a basket catch (i.e. Willie Mays). Other times, he will reach for it above his head (similar to the bottle thowing move). He pushes up again, starting from his feet, though to his arms, in a smooth, full-bodied motion. Have you tried that one? I think you get the idea.
Here's another video.
http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/video/twib/index.jsp
This one is about baseball. Just scroll down to Aug. 20, 2005, and click on the one that says, "Author Jonathan Niednagel discusses baseball players brain types".
The first thing that you should notice is the demonstration of two ESFPs; Barry Bonds and Albert Pujols. They, like ISFP Cedric Bixler, have those "oddball", distinctive, SFP movements (lower body first). They show clips of the two sluggers side by side. Notice how when they swing, they are almost "sitting" on their lower body, with the arms moving very little. If you look carefully, you can see how the two are similar.
Others shown are ISTPs Ted Williams, Hank Aaron, and Cal Ripken Jr, ESTP Pedro Martinez, and INFP Derek Jeter.
Thanks. Any comments?
I think studying body movements in detail is terrific. I have noted movement patterns among people of the same type. But I am skeptical of the idea that Brain Types and Socionics are the same typology.
If you are claiming that they are,
1) do they recognize any sort of relationship/interaction patterns at all similar to socionics?
2) what are their type distribution statistics?
Well, no. The defining point in soiconics is the interactionsd between people/types (A+B = C). The defining point in BrainTypes is the actual physical movements (If A does this, then they are B). So they can't be the "same". However, that doesn't mean that they can't line up. If both of them have their stuff right, then they should agree. And I know of people in socionics who have tried to make descriptions of what some types' movements are. Guess what? They still fit within the BrainTypes theory. For example, I believe it was Gulenko, described the SEE (ESFP) as looking like it almost "walks on water" and things like that (hopefully someone who can still get on the Russian site can fit the section in which they describe the movements for the types). His description sounds like he is talking about those "gross motered" SFs the BrainTypes guy describes and I showed above. So, you can already see connections if you look for them.
Nothing specific. They don't give any real numbers. They have only mentioned some general things, such as types like INTP and ISTJ are fairly uncommon, but ENTP is probably most common. They also claim that about 25-30% of people are Introverted, and there are slightly more Sensors than Intuitives.2) what are their type distribution statistics?
I found something. This is a description of the SEI (ISFP, like I showed above).
"Note of editorial staff.
Attention! Until now in sotsionike there is a large problem because the authors of the different theories of subtypes so did not agree about the general terminology. There exists as the minimum of 3 theories of 32 subtypes (authors of present article, V.V.Gulenko and Ye.S.Filatovoy). In each of these theories the type is divided into two subtypes, as the authors consider, with the "intensive" first or second function (i.e. for example logico- intuitive introvert it can be "logical" or "intuitive" subtype). Problem in the fact that each divides type in in own way own way, and here terms are used the same. We request to consider this with reading of article.
We focus attention on the fact that also the pseudonyms of types all the more subtypes, used in this article, they are not in sotsionike conventional.
Sensory- ethical introvert: MEDIATOR, ISFP
Usually SEI they have the soft benevolent view, variable and expressive; first quick, carefully is rapid entire noticing, first now and then not blinking, attentive, then suddenly playful and sly. This view does not penetrate deeply, then the internal emotional state of man reflects well.
The mimicry of face is moderately living, the smile cordial, natural, which corresponds to situation and mood, sometimes somewhat coquettish. Face frequently rounded, eyes and mouth with the conversation can resemble letter "o". The large features of face are softened by the expression of softness and kindness.
The manners of the behavior OF SEI are modest and elegant, although at times unexpectedly acquire the nuance of the familiarity, which is expressed first in the affectionate touchs to the collocutor, then in the whipping gestures. There is a tendency toward the completeness. It dresses BY SEI with the taste, it loves accessories. Motions confident, unconstrained, flattened, the noses of feet with walking frequently dilute to the sides.
HEDONIST
Sensory subtype seems calm and soft in the contact of people. Loves rest and comfort. Khozyaystvenen is practical. He tries to do everything with the refined taste. It is frequently occupied as the hobby by any artistic distributions. It is benevolent, tactful and nenavyazchiv, by its presence it pacifies others. He tries to sympathize, soak by council. It loves to speak about its sensations, it attentively questions collocutor about his matters. It is sluggish in the behavior and it is leisurely in the conversation, it slightly extends words, with difficulty it sometimes formulates thoughts. Even if it suffers tongue twister, it does not hurry with the end of conversation. It can for long and thoroughly speak about one and the same. Constantly confidence it smiles, it nods by head into the sign of support. It has lazy, smooth motions, refined, elegant gestures. It walks only waddle, or by "duck" gait. Nedemonstrativen, but its clothing and accessories sometimes attract attention of those surrounding.
GARMONIZATOR
Ethical subtype - living, emotional and free in the contact of people. Easily draws together distance in the contact, willingly the beret of collocutor for the hand, he speaks compliments. Its freedom bears the nuance of familiarity. Shyness can be changed by observations in the witty form. Irony and "podkalyvaniya" easily pass in the serious and valid tone. Frequently it jokes and it speaks even unpleasant things with smile in order not to offend man. Predupreditelen is thoughtful.
It is impatient and restless. Times it is quick tempered, but is easily appeased nezlopamyaten. It is usually optimistic, oars and fervid. It loves to obtain and to provide pleasures. It frequently makes to people compliments and render different services. It knows how to raise mood, to encourage. It seems by serene person, since it usually hides its experiences from the strangers. He speaks rapidly, confidently, now and then categorically, with imperative intonations. View in it rapid, entire noticing, at times "shooting", now and then significant. The motions are confident, are elegant, but a little irregular."
...and the below were by Gulenko...
"ISFps often have a characteristic stout or chubby, rounded figure. They often have short legs and a bouncy gait, giving the impression of a big springy ball. Their faces are usually smooth and round without any obvious projections. In moments of passionate conversation they can often swallow air like a fish. When ISFps try to explain things, they can move their eyebrows considerably."
...
"The lower part of ESFps faces often seems heavy. When walking or moving some ESFps may create the impression that they are walking through water. Ironically this applies mainly to more slender ESFps. Their larger, heavier counterparts are usually far more agile and nimble."
At least this is something.
I want to mention one more thing about how BrainTypes fits for me. In the second movie above, he shows video of Ted Williams, and mentions that he is ISTP. Interestingly enough, Ted Williams looks exactly like me (especially considering movements). Before I really understood this BrainTyping thing, I was already thinking that we were probably the same type, not realizing how similar our "movements" were or that he was already typed as ISTP. I wish I had a video of myself to show you. If I do get one up, I'm sure to post it here so you can compare.
Okay, it sounds like at best there may be 50% overlap. We still can't treat these two as the same typology, and I don't agree that they "should" necessarily line up. If we force them to line up, we will have to mess up at least one of the typologies.Well, no. The defining point in soiconics is the interactionsd between people/types (A+B = C). The defining point in BrainTypes is the actual physical movements (If A does this, then they are B). So they can't be the "same". However, that doesn't mean that they can't line up. If both of them have their stuff right, then they should agree. And I know of people in socionics who have tried to make descriptions of what some types' movements are. Guess what? They still fit within the BrainTypes theory. For example, I believe it was Gulenko, described the SEE (ESFP) as looking like it almost "walks on water" and things like that (hopefully someone who can still get on the Russian site can fit the section in which they describe the movements for the types). His description sounds like he is talking about those "gross motered" SFs the BrainTypes guy describes and I showed above. So, you can already see connections if you look for them.
Nothing specific. They don't give any real numbers. They have only mentioned some general things, such as types like INTP and ISTJ are fairly uncommon, but ENTP is probably most common. They also claim that about 25-30% of people are Introverted, and there are slightly more Sensors than Intuitives.2) what are their type distribution statistics?
I'm not objecting to your brain types definitions. I think they are interesting, and the idea of a body + brain typology is promising. But in crucial moments ("borderline cases") they will go with their criteria, ignoring information interaction, and in crucial moments socionists will stick to information interaction, ignoring physiological factors (including the various physical descriptions that you read about on the web). So these two different emphases will get you to two different places, despite the seeming similarities.
This sounds like that Kurt Godel and incompletedness therom stuff we were talking about.
What I'm saying is that if they are both true to reality, then they should coincide. Wouldn't that be something? If you could predict relationships between people using the socionics system, but without needing to observe their interaction first because you knew their types before hand with BrainTypes?
How about the example, again, of the musicians I posted above? Singer Cedic Bexlir (ISFP) and guitarist Omar Rodrigues (ESTP). It has been said of them that, although they like each, they have a hard time trying to work together. They have trouble "comprimising". Doesn't this sound like an illusionary relationship in socionics?
And there are other examples, although they would be hard to understand if you are not familiar with the sports (since he does a lot of athletes). One I can think of is a duality in baseball; Alex Rodriguez (ESTP) and Derek Jeter (INFP). These two have been known to be best friends in the league, even when they were on competing teams. Now that they are on the Yankees together, you can see the closeness even more. Alex might lift Derek up after a game, giving him a big hug, they pat each other on the back as they walk by, there are no ego probems between them, etc... (And yes the BrainTypes guy has also typed them as ESTP and INFP, though probably not knowing of socionic relationships and only his system).
If they truly coincide, then we have to go tell ... (forget his name) that he's typing many people wrong, and that we can come in and fix everything. Or he could come into socionics and tell us we've got our type proportions a bit off, and he can help us fix everything.What I'm saying is that if they are both true to reality, then they should coincide. Wouldn't that be something? If you could predict relationships between people using the socionics system, but without needing to observe their interaction first because you knew their types before hand with BrainTypes?
I'm afraid this is like Methodism and Presbytarianism, or any two Protestant religions. I mean, they're both about the same thing, aren't they? Then let's just combine the two...
All I know is that I'm not an NFP for Braintypes. I'm an anomaly, it doesn't correlate.
What do you mean? How do you kow?All I know is that I'm not an NFP for Braintypes
I can't speak well, intonation tends to be inappropriate for the intended meaning, stutter, periods of muteness, poor pronunciation even in my first language, tongue-tied over consonants, poor manipulation of language, poor comprehension of language. Problems with even articulation in wind instruments (it's good that I've moved over almost entirely to baroque music because one can justify inequal note values).What do you mean? How do you kow?All I know is that I'm not an NFP for Braintypes
Gross-motor skills are fluid but very poor, fine motor skills are a fair bit better (but hand dominance is confused).
Oh... but did you know that these are qualities he associates with the IxxPs?
... the thing about NFs is that they are supposed to be more flexible/pliable...
Really? I missed that. The BrainTypes sight is poorly organisedOh... but did you know that these are qualities he associates with the IxxPs?
In what way?... the thing about NFs is that they are supposed to be more flexible/pliable...
It's just that you can't expect Ti types to explain everything.
... and...(Perceiving)
Right “R” :
synthetic, holistic, universal, adaptable, multiple, graceful, artistic, spatial adeptness—peripherally, etc., pattern-skilled, sufficient solution, welcoming of interruptions, skilled at drawing and sculpting, spatial and visual logic, play-oriented
(Judging)
Left “L”:
analytic, divisible, local, ordered, sequential, mechanical, detailed, speech-skilled, exact solution, resistant to interruptions, skilled at reading and writing, numerical and verbal logic, work-oriented
As for NFPs, they are generally considered the most "acrobatic" types.--Expressing language through conversation/speech (activated by Brocas [left anterior forebrain]). In general, Extraverts speak more and louder than Introverts. (Nurturing, environment, and genetic variances also affect speech patterns; thus explaining most speech differences among Extraverts [and Introverts].)
... and one more thing...Yet, they’re also adept with motor skills, able to coordinate gross and fine motor movements better than other Types. The left-brained NFJs coordinate the 2 muscle groups methodically and the 2 right-brained NFP’s synchronize the gross and fine motors with fluidity and grace. This demonstrates why ENFPs are the top figure skaters and divers in the world. Some NFP’s have included Kristi Yamaguchi and Michelle Kwan, golf’s Tiger Woods and David Duval, basketball’s Kevin Garnett, and diving’s Greg Louganis.
By looking at the major differences within people from a Brain Type perspective rather than a personality or psychological type, we believe you’ll better understand why people with the same BT can look so different at times (though not so much with their motor skills). Can you see why two INFP Brain Types with the same sex and age can be very different from one another in “personality” or “psychological” makeup—if their life-long environments have been opposite? Suppose one INFP was raised in a Republican and Introverted family, and the other INFP had Democrat and Extraverted parents. One INFP graduated from medical school and is now an M.D., and the other INFP works at the car wash, having dropped out of high school. How much do you think their personality or psychological types would differ? Obviously, these two INFPs would have radically distinct personalities. Now let’s suppose you tried to explain to someone that these two INFPs had the same “personality” or “psychological” type. Your audience would think you’re possibly nuts or that you have no ability to see the noticeable persona differences between the two.
But let’s suppose you understood Brain Types and could adequately explain the INFPs’ inborn similarities. Simplistically stated, you could explain, yes, one is fairly outgoing and the other is reserved (based upon opposing environments), but notice how they are both energy conservers—not expenders, neither is a pushy or a take charge person, but rather they are both good listeners. Though their educational and literary experiences are quite opposite, they both are conceptual/iNtuitive people—they’re poetic in how they communicate though one has much richer diction. They both focus on the forest, not the trees. Fascinatingly, they are both very kind and sensitive to others—yet the Republican, or is it the Democrat, is much more emotional—quick to vent pent-up feelings. And lastly, they both are easy-going, not often argumentative or dogmatic; they’re very much go-with-the-flow.
Their facial expressions are warm and sort of timid; neither dresses in an orthodox way. And what I find most amazing about these two is that I’ve seen them both play tennis and golf. Their swings are very fluid and smooth, almost like silk. It’s also apparent they have very good body flexibility; I couldn’t believe how far their shoulders turned in their golf swings—especially back swings. They both used more of their arms and upper body swinging through the ball than the torso and lower body like some other people do. They’re both quite wristy in fact. (Refer to “Your Key to Sports Success” for further INFP inborn physical skills.) They also get very focused when they play. Though they show good sportsmanship and extend much deference, they don’t like to lose or play poorly; actually for being as nice as they are, it’s sort of surprising to see their levels of intensity.
As for the spirit of that last quote I just want to say
THIS IS WHAT I KEEP TELLING YOU PEOPLE!!!
(That was directed at my parents, I must get them to read that)
I think I have a new test.
Take a chair and find a wall or door you can lean on. Put the chair in between you and the wall, and make sure you are in a good position to lean your head against the wall. If you do that, then your chest should be parellel to floor, and you should be able to hold onto the chair with two hands.
Now, try and stand up.
(I can't do it).
If you notice when you do try and stand up, you are putting a lot of pressure on your legs (which need to be the dominanting movement). In other words, I think the people who can really do this are the SFs.
I'm bringing this up, because it is something I noticed in my Chem class. We had a bunch of the students try and lift up the chair, but only two of them actually did it (and they did it quickly too). The rest of us just looked silly.
Try it.
is the back of the chair on your side or the wall side?
I hear that most people can't look straight forward while climbing up and down a ladder, and I can easily do this, as well as my boss, who is also an SF.
No... more like, the back of the chair is in your left (or right) hand, and with seat of the chair in your other hand.
If it were the other way, the back of the chair would knock into your chest.
so you grab the chair with one hand on the top of the back of it and the other on the seat?
I don't think I'm doing it right.
I must not be doing it right either because I found no difficulty lifting the chair and my torso upright. Are you sure you meant a chair and not a couch?:wink:
Topaz
The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.
Yeah, I've read the test and I can not get what it is I am suppose to do ... give us a visual or something, please.
My legs are strong as well, but I still can't do that EASILY. I think that anyone can do the movement with some effort.Well, I also got really strong legs from seven years of gymnastics and other sports. I'm still better at the hands/forearm thing, though.The fact that Kraus can do this test correctly negates the importance of this test in a Socionics sense. Cuz it's kinda clear she is a BetaExtrovert, and that means she ain't SF. Perhaps in brain types, but...
Maybe I'm an exception. I've got superior full-body strength!
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
It's only hard when your upper body is parrel to the ground and bent over at a 90 degree angle. Of course anyone can lift a chair if they aren't fully bent over.
As for Herzy, she said it was difficult at first, but it then came later. If I tried really hard, I could eventually get it (just not the first time I tried). And this is by no means cut and dry, BUT it seems rather difficult for non-SF types, so it's more of an indicator.
EDIT: I should mention that if you don't feel your weight shift to the balls of your feet (as opposed to being on the heels like normal) then you are not bending forward enough.
Yeah, quit explaining and make a drawing or something ...
.
Isn't that supposed to be impossible for everyone due to something with the imbalance of one's center of gravity?
Or something like only women can do it?
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
That's sort of what they said (something with bigger hips), but I don't believe it, because I saw one guy and one girl do it (and no one else). Both I previously thought were ESFP. The girl was the bitchy-fashion-police-ESFP,
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote