Just a follow up to my other poll.....
Oh and if you're still unsure of your type or there's still a debate over it please don't vote for one of the top two choices.....:)
Are your MBTI and Socionics types same or different?
Just a follow up to my other poll.....
Oh and if you're still unsure of your type or there's still a debate over it please don't vote for one of the top two choices.....:)
Suomea
Yep. It sure is.
This is difficult. Firstly, I don't know my socionics type. Secondly, there have been a host of MBTI types that I've come out as. Take today for example, I came out as ISTJ and INTJ in two different tests. I've typed as ESTJ many a time, as well as ENTJ. I've also come out as an ESTP on one occasion. As for socionics, the types I've considered are SLE, LIE, LSE and, briefly (but not seriously), LSI. In any case, I'm definitely a Thinker, most likely an Extravert, and probably a Judger.
I know enough about it to know that Socionics suits my purposes better. I guess my problem is in separating the pop version of MBTT from the real version. According to the pop version, I would most likely be my quasi or mirror (in Socionics), but perhaps that wouldn't be true in the real version. The whole "messy = P type" thing is the primary issue.
The bottom line though is that it won't do me any good to learn a new theory. I've spent way too much time on typology already.
I put choice three for just such occasions....:)Originally Posted by Ezra
Suomea
And I chose it... as did 40% of those who took the poll.
From what I know and ENFj are pretty much the same in both theories or so I been told.
No, my types are not the same. I am INTP in the MBTI system, and INTj in the Socionic system. I am not debating this.
"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 know that you don't like to debate it, so I don't insist on it. But your statement is still false.
In order to answer this question fairly to Myers-Briggs, I'd have to go more deeply into it than just rely on the apparently available online material. I do not care to do so. I think Myers-Briggs is a dead-end.
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
MBTI INFP and Socionics INFj.
Another false statement.
Another false statement.Why are you so insistent that mbti type *definitely* equals to socionics type? Do you have concrete evidence to support your claim? If not, don't make such a sweeping statement.
Because I have investigated the matter more deeply than probably any other person in the world.Another false statement.
Yes, I have. But I am tired of having to repeat all the arguments over and over again. I have tried to explain the arguments and the evidence many times on this forum. Go through my posts if you are interested. My recent discussion with Danielle in the thread "How often do MBTI types correlate with Socionics types?" is especially relevant if you are interested in the types INFP/INFp and INFJ/INFj.
Umm, since you're tired of repeating your arguments, then don't.Because I have investigated the matter more deeply than probably any other person in the world.Another false statement.
Yes, I have. But I am tired of having to repeat all the arguments over and over again. I have tried to explain the arguments and the evidence many times on this forum. Go through my posts if you are interested. My recent discussion with Danielle in the thread "How often do MBTI types correlate with Socionics types?" is especially relevant if you are interested in the types INFP/INFp and INFJ/INFj.
INTp
sx/sp
It's okay, according to phaedrus, I'm INFj.
My sentiments exactly.
yes they correlate. but socionics is more accurate due to the ordering of the functions.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Maybe you are Joy... maybe... YOU ARE!It's okay, according to phaedrus, I'm INFj.
MBTI INTJ, Socionics INTp.
ILI (Indescribable Lovemaking Inc.)
5w4 so/sx
"IP temperament! Because today's concerns are tomorrow's indifferences!"
Lord Fnorgle's Domain - A slowly growing collection of music, poetry and literature.
Stickam music performances
No. Probably INTP in MBTT, since you seem to be an ILI.
No, for Phaedrus you are an INFJ. He does not play by Socionics rules.It's okay, according to phaedrus, I'm INFj.
And Phaedrus, are you just going to come in here and try and correct everyone's MBTI type? Is it even necessary if they know that you are just going to throw ABCD=ABCd at them? I think that they should be able to figure out your simple logic by themselves.
Johari Box"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
I don't have an opinion on Joy's type.No, for Phaedrus you are an INFJ. He does not play by Socionics rules.It's okay, according to phaedrus, I'm INFj.
Yes, if they are spreading misleading information and/or don't know what they are talking about when it comes to MBTT, I think it is in order to correct them.
Yes, it is necessary.
probably a big difference between those types is that an INTJ is a natural leader.
Are you a natural leader?
No. Definitely INTJ in MBTT, because they are NiTe and I place more weight on functions than what some random person wrote about a type on their webpage. Although thank you for acknowledging that I'm an ILI, at least I don't get the same resistance to that claim here that I do over at Ganin's place.No. Probably INTP in MBTT, since you seem to be an ILI.
Hmm.. depends what is meant by a "natural leader" really. I'm good at organising and administrating resources, although I don't know what I'm like at leading people, I haven't been put in that situation. I'd imagine I would be capable though if I had to.probably a big difference between those types is that an INTJ is a natural leader.
Are you a natural leader?
ILI (Indescribable Lovemaking Inc.)
5w4 so/sx
"IP temperament! Because today's concerns are tomorrow's indifferences!"
Lord Fnorgle's Domain - A slowly growing collection of music, poetry and literature.
Stickam music performances
You do know that MBTT functions are totally different then Socionics functions? So looking at the functions is an error. That's were this whole mess of mbti and socionics comes from. MBTI functions are wrong.
If you are sure you are an NiTe in Socionics, then you are NOT an INTJ in MBTI.
I know that. Maybe I should explain; there's more to this than I've made out here:
Like many, my first experience of personality typing was with MBTI. The BBC did a programme which used a watered-down version of MBTI since obviously it needed to be accessible to the general public. I can't be bothered with the details of how it assessed you (This link has more info), but I tested as the equivalent of INTP in that system. I was 16 at this time I think. At first I accepted it, thinking it fit me. But later on, I had doubts. I suffered with chronic depression around this age anyway, and I felt like I should have been the equivalent of INTJ in that system, but I couldn't justify it to myself at the time.
Move on a year, depression had cleared for reasons irrelevant to this post. I can't remember how, but I learned about the actual MBTI system and somehow knew it related to this BBC system (I must have read it somewhere, I honestly can't remember) and started to study that. I came across the Humanmetrics Jung test which tested me as INTJ. The exact sequence of events around this time I forget, but I remember that, more than anything, I came to identify with the functional makeup of the INTJ more than anything else (i.e. NiTeFiSe etc.). Although in my time studying MBTI I never truly understood how the functions were defined exactly, there was something in the back of my mind always telling me that I was an Ni type. No matter what, I just couldn't accept being any type other than the INTJ, purely because of NiTe.
Fast forward to whenever it was I discovered Socionics, probably about a year or two ago now. I transitioned between the two systems quite a bit, and for a while, believing the whole ABCD=ABCd thing (not ever being aware of an alternative) I believed I was a Socionics INTj. But there was always something amiss about the descriptions, although I couldn't place my finger on it. This all changed when, reading a wikipedia article on Socionics, I read that INTj was Logical-Intuitive Introtim. I initially thought to myself "eh? That's not right" so I investigated further. I can't remember the exact details now, but I started to consider being an INTp, which, the more I detached myself from the INTj profile at Socionics.com, the more I began to accept being INTp as opposed to INTj. Eventually, for reasons I no longer remember, I decided for certain I was INTp. Following this, I felt a strange sense of comfort which lasted about 30 seconds. Like my subconscience was rewarding me for finding the right type.
Later on came the subtype search, for a long time I wasn't sure what subtype I was since I didn't know enough about them to decide. Then at some point, completely out of the blue, I had a nagging feeling in the back of my mind telling me to read the INTp subtype descriptions stickied in the General Discussion forum. I did so, and I can't remember what made me decide, but I felt certain that evening that I was intuitive subtype. Once again I had that strange sense of comfort that I felt when I decided for certain on being INTp, only this time it was even stronger.
Welp, story aside, the prevailing theme through all of this is that, regardless whether or not I knew how to define it, I have always believed, and to date still do (real-life evidence appears to confirm this thus far) that I have dominant Ni. And to a lesser extent, strong Te. This is why I'll always cite INTJ as my MBTI type if it comes up, because even though the functions are defined differently in the two systems, it's the concept of being NiTe that always holds true in my mind. Socionics, IMO and E, is the more accurate one with regards to the functions, so I anchor myself on the Socionics INTp type.
Whew.. apologies for the essay, but I hope that clears things up. I know that many will disagree with my approach to typing myself here (at least with regards to MBTI anyway) but it's what worked for me and what eventually led me to discovering my Socionics type which I consider the truer one.
ILI (Indescribable Lovemaking Inc.)
5w4 so/sx
"IP temperament! Because today's concerns are tomorrow's indifferences!"
Lord Fnorgle's Domain - A slowly growing collection of music, poetry and literature.
Stickam music performances
It clears up a lot.
Of course I have to disagree on the reasoning for your MBTI type. :wink:
But what I can really understand is that you've considered yourself to be an Intuitive person. That's what I've heard once more from another INTP-intuitive. They just know they are Intuitive. I've never felt that very strong.
I'm INFP and have based that on endless studies of the matter. I don't understand Socionics well and in particular the functions. With some help typing myself from people on both forums, I identified with the Filatova INFj description and the Ni sub-type made sense to me. According to one person, I can't be both INFP and INFj. However, until I study more, that is what I'm going with. Many of the descriptions of INFP and INFp seem very different to me.
INFj/INFP
But are they also contradicting? Or is it just a different perspective that is used...
Yes, and the "different perspective" is precisely what confuses people.
Many, or even most INFP descriptions, when they go beyond simple external behavior, and try to go deeper into the person's motivations and priorities, describe a person who resembles more a Fi, Delta person, which is easier for EIIs than IEIs to identify with.
Likewise, many, or even most, INFJ descriptions, when they go beyond simple external behavior, describe a person who's inside "tougher", or at least more admiring of toughness, than EIIs.
So the whole story of concentrating on the bloody 4 dichotomies and ignore the deeper Beta-Delta differences, which is what makes people choose what they do, is simply nonsense.
You can tell by your picture and name. IEI names are normally esoteric, mystical or fantastical, and they're always accompanied by a picture like this:
This:
Or This:
lol infp avatars so true. guess they're just sort of fantasical and dreamy, no?
thots on other types avatars? like there's people who use their real picture, people who use artwork or movie stars, people who use bizarre stuff, people who have er, ahem, slogans....
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Hahaha. I picked mine because I'd just watched Nineteen Eighty-Four. I found the picture amusing. My first avatar was of the prophet Ezra, because I thought it was witty. My second avatar was of the flags at WOMAD festival, because I'd just been to that and I loved the colours of the flags. I've used myself before on a different forum. I definitely think avatar has something to do with type. I just don't know what.
Yes, Expat hits the nail on the head. Few if any INFP descriptions stick to describing external behaviors, and that includes Keirsey, who claims to base his findings solely on observation. The tough, direct, confident, visionary, emotionally expressive INFJ is not something I identify with. Likewise, I do not identify with the dramatic, mystical, confident, visionary, emotionally expressive, "tough/Se admiring" BETA INFp.Many, or even most INFP descriptions, when they go beyond simple external behavior, and try to go deeper into the person's motivations and priorities, describe a person who resembles more a Fi, Delta person, which is easier for EIIs than IEIs to identify with.
Likewise, many, or even most, INFJ descriptions, when they go beyond simple external behavior, describe a person who's inside "tougher", or at least more admiring of toughness, than EIIs.
I abandoned my previous discussion with Phaedrus mainly because I couldn't go anywhere without reference to intertype relations and the Quadras, and there is no MBTT equivalent. So even if I could establish that I am definitely a Delta, I couldn't establish that I am an INFP in MBTT.
In return, I still await the clear, undisputed descriptions of type that Phaedrus has compared and found to be the same between Socionics and MBTT.
I also don't believe that all of the MBTT descriptions of the functions are off. In my opinion, the description of introverted feeling is not really all that different in either system. I identify strongly with both, and don't identify with extraverted Feeling or introverted intuition in either system. Really, really don't identify. On the other hand, I do believe that a number of the other functions are radically different, like introverted sensing.
EII
4w5, sp/sx
No, I can't say I've come across any direct contradictions between any particular INFP and INFp descriptions. Its been a while since I looked at Socioncs though. I entirely reserve any conclusive opinion about this right now because I could only speak from vast ignorance. One thing I recall is a description of INFp that made the person sound like a typical flamboyant gay artist, and I've never seen an INFP description like that...not that an INFP couldn't be a flamboyant gay artist.But are they also contradicting? Or is it just a different perspective that is used...
INFj/INFP
Because he'll always fall back into saying that either the descriptions are badly written or that you haven't understood them - that is, that someone (but never he, the "person who studied this more deeply than any other person in the world") is incompetent. So how can you go anywhere? No one can.
I think a better person to ask this is Jonathan (who hasn't been around much lately), since he also read the official MBTT manuals but he doesn't seem to really care much for this issue going one way or the other. The question is really if those "clear, undisputed MBTT descriptions" are not only more complete, but actually contradict those simpler descriptions available online. If that is the case, then the next question is why that is the case.
Now you were the one to hit the nail on the head.
You might want to read this: http://wikisocion.org/en/index.php?t...g%27s_Typology
Where I make very similar observations to yours.
Basically, both Myers-Briggs and socionics derived their functions from Jung's, but also changing them, to varying degrees. So yes, as you say, introverted feeling is not that different for both systems because they both stayed close to Jung's concept. In the case of sensing, both introverted and extraverted, socionics has changed their definition in relation to Jung's.
My socionics type is SLE.
My MBTI type is ENTJ. So no, they are not the same.
That makes sense to me.
Which proves that both Expat and Ezra are deluded. One of Ezras assumed type is CLEARLY wrong.That makes sense to me.
YOU CANNOT BE AN ENTJ AND AN SLE AT THE SAME TIME. How stupid can you be? Those two types have incompatible temperaments, they have incompatible leading functions, and one is an Intuitive and the other is a Sensor. Time to start using your brain, Ezra.
PHAEDRUS YOU FUCKTARD. MBTI AND SOCIONICS ARE NOT THE SAME THING. THERE ARE NO CORRELATIONS.
You said it yourself.
So how the fuck can you possibly entertain concepts which encompass a method that 'has it all wrong'?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
