Is my type INFp or INTp?

[Joy]

I agree with everything ScarlettLux said. And there's something else that just really jumped off the screen at me:

Picky, aren't you.

This statement screams Te PoLR > Te ego.

None the less, I'm familiar with the system, despite any superficial changes. You might argue, but I've seen no leaps. The things that are different is the inter type relations, the descriptions, well you know*more to the point, I don't*. Anyway, it's pretty much the same, I'm not a moron, so why did you say what you did?

Aside from the functions (information elements) being defined differently (to the extent of making MBTT definitions useless), the functions (information elements) that make up half of the types are different.

What are an INTP's first two function in MBTT? What are an ILI's first two functions in Socionics?

Also, Socionics is a theory about information processing. MBTT, at least pop MBTT, is more of a personality theory focusing on actual behavior.

Altogether, my time here has led me to believe that those who come here with a lot of knowledge about MBTT are at a severe disadvantage over those who aren't. It only serves to create confusion. Your best bet is to think of the theories as two completely different systems and to forget about MBTT entirely while you're learning about Socionics. Start fresh.

Wikisocion is probably one of the best places to start. Or you could just interact with others here for a little while and your quadra values will become apparent, and from there you can decide what your temperament is and figure out which of the information elements your quadra values are strongest in you.

[Phaedrus]

What are an INTP's first two function in MBTT? What are an ILI's first two functions in Socionics?

An INTP's first two functions are and , and an ILI's first two functions are also and . However, in MBTT they talk about and (without know it of course) in terms of "Ti" and "Ne".

Altogether, my time here has led me to believe that those who come here with a lot of knowledge about MBTT are at a severe disadvantage over those who aren't.

No, it's actually the other way around. Those who have a lot of knowledge about MBTT make far less typing mistakes than those who know only about Socionics.

It only serves to create confusion.

That's simply a totally false statement Those who create confusion are those who say that the MBTT types have no relation to the socionic types.

Your best bet is to think of the theories as two completely different systems and to forget about MBTT entirely while you're learning about Socionics. Start fresh.

That's the absolutely worst approach you can possibly have. Maybe that's why you have been so unable to determine anything for sure regarding your own type for such a long time. People who are saying things like those you are saying here are the ones with the most incorrect understanding of the types. Always.

Wikisocion is probably one of the best places to start.

There is so much total bullshit published there, that a big dose of caution is definitely called for. Not all of it is false, of course, but only those who already know pretty much about Socionics already are able to tell the difference.

Or you could just interact with others here for a little while and your quadra values will become apparent, and from there you can decide what your temperament is and figure out which of the information elements your quadra values are strongest in you.

DO NOT FOCUS ON THE QUADRAS.

[Joy]

Phaedrus, I've known my Socionics type (and not doubted it) for two years. What were you trying to accomplish by bringing it up? Were you hoping I'd be more likely to engage you in a debate if you said something that irritated or provoked me?

I'm not irritated, and I'm not going to debate you. I posted what I did knowing you'd pick apart and refute everything I said and simply not caring. You are free to believe whatever you'd like.

I just wanted to let you know that, because it's quite clear that no good could possibly come from it, I'm going to decline from responding to your points.

[Phaedrus]

Phaedrus, I've known my Socionics type (and not doubted it) for two years. What were you trying to accomplish by bringing it up?

Stating a simple fact and suggesting a possible explanation for the phenomenon that you are posting such a bunch of garbage when it comes to the question which typing methods people should use.

Were you hoping I'd be more likely to engage you in a debate if you said something that irritated or provoked me?

Of course not. Why would I say those things if I would I were interesting in engaging you in a debate. I don't want to discuss these things, I want you to stop posting garbage in the form of a bunch of totally false statements. There are more interesting things we could discuss if you are interested.

I'm not irritated, and I'm not going to debate you. I posted what I did knowing you'd pick apart and refute everything I said and simply not caring. You are free to believe whatever you'd like.

But I don't think that you are free to believe whatever you like. Not in the metaphysical sense, and not in the moral sense. You ought to correct your false views on the matter.

[Lord Java the 3rd]

I agree with everything ScarlettLux said. And there's something else that just really jumped off the screen at me:



This statement screams Te PoLR > Te ego.



Aside from the functions (information elements) being defined differently (to the extent of making MBTT definitions useless), the functions (information elements) that make up half of the types are different.

What are an INTP's first two function in MBTT? What are an ILI's first two functions in Socionics?

Also, Socionics is a theory about information processing. MBTT, at least pop MBTT, is more of a personality theory focusing on actual behavior.

Altogether, my time here has led me to believe that those who come here with a lot of knowledge about MBTT are at a severe disadvantage over those who aren't. It only serves to create confusion. Your best bet is to think of the theories as two completely different systems and to forget about MBTT entirely while you're learning about Socionics. Start fresh.

Wikisocion is probably one of the best places to start. Or you could just interact with others here for a little while and your quadra values will become apparent, and from there you can decide what your temperament is and figure out which of the information elements your quadra values are strongest in you.

You started your post with, "I agree with everything ScarlettLux said." which is quite the humorous comment coming from an NT. That one saying, "Great minds think alike." is completely wrong, great minds differ greatly. One who agrees with completely has lost the use of their minds more abstract facilities.
I'm not saying your not a very bright person, I'm just saying your making the rest of us look bad.

Next paragraph you use the word "scream", which is great, but you must keep in mind its uses. It's not exactly a logical argument, but intended to convenience the minds of people who don't require such.

Alas, you go on to say:

"...What are an INTP's first two function in MBTT? What are an ILI's first two functions in Socionics?..." in reference to the incompatibility of MBTT and Socionics functions... I digress, no wait, that was your bad. You see, that argument points to you not understanding the difference between title and function. The functions are what makes the person work, the title is supposed to be a sort of short hand to name the functions. The title changed in Socionics. Yet again, you continue-->

You stated *not exactly in order here*: "the functions (information elements) that make up half of the types are different." Which is fine, considering your speaking to stupid people. But the problem I have with this crude use of emphasis is that it is addressed to me. *?* What gives? I demand you support your claim that half the functions have changed, where is your proof?

I'm sort of thinking that I should shut up and absorb every thing you say, because I really don't take you offensively. I'm sort of inbetween thinking your doing this for your credit tokens that you'll receive from your leader, and informing me with an invisible reference to your previous trials*emphasis on trials, you smart person you*. I don't know really, why pick apart what you say? You were probably a very bright teenager that got burned out on extasy. I had a very good friend do that, and I could no longer associate with him, because he neglected my warnings when we were kids. He had such a great mind too, I feel such a loss for him, I wish he... I think I'm off topic.

Anyway, I realize I'm an arrogant prick. But not really. I'm actually toying with you people in aggravation. No, I don't mean toying in the sense you might think of. It's more like loneliness coupled with tempting you to think in a similar way to me so that you could see some of the things that I would love to show you. For they are very beautiful, for those who have patience, and the desire to see more.

[Joy]

You started your post with, "I agree with everything ScarlettLux said." which is quite the humorous comment coming from an NT. That one saying, "Great minds think alike." is completely wrong, great minds differ greatly. One who agrees with completely has lost the use of their minds more abstract facilities.
I'm not saying your not a very bright person, I'm just saying your making the rest of us look bad.

Next paragraph you use the word "scream", which is great, but you must keep in mind its uses. It's not exactly a logical argument, but intended to convenience the minds of people who don't require such.

Alas, you go on to say:

"...What are an INTP's first two function in MBTT? What are an ILI's first two functions in Socionics?..." in reference to the incompatibility of MBTT and Socionics functions... I digress, no wait, that was your bad. You see, that argument points to you not understanding the difference between title and function. The functions are what makes the person work, the title is supposed to be a sort of short hand to name the functions. The title changed in Socionics. Yet again, you continue-->

You stated *not exactly in order here*: "the functions (information elements) that make up half of the types are different." Which is fine, considering your speaking to stupid people. But the problem I have with this crude use of emphasis is that it is addressed to me. *?* What gives? I demand you support your claim that half the functions have changed, where is your proof?

I'm sort of thinking that I should shut up and absorb every thing you say, because I really don't take you offensively. I'm sort of inbetween thinking your doing this for your credit tokens that you'll receive from your leader, and informing me with an invisible reference to your previous trials*emphasis on trials, you smart person you*. I don't know really, why pick apart what you say? You were probably a very bright teenager that got burned out on extasy. I had a very good friend do that, and I could no longer associate with him, because he neglected my warnings when we were kids. He had such a great mind too, I feel such a loss for him, I wish he... I think I'm off topic.

Anyway, I realize I'm an arrogant prick. But not really. I'm actually toying with you people in aggravation. No, I don't mean toying in the sense you might think of. It's more like loneliness coupled with tempting you to think in a similar way to me so that you could see some of the things that I would love to show you. For they are very beautiful, for those who have patience, and the desire to see more.

Yep. you're definitely Fe/Ti, most likely IEI. Ti makes sense for a Hidden Agenda for you. Most of this post was complaining about the lack of Ti in my post.

[Joy]

Oh yeah, and when I said "half the functions" I was talking about all of the introverted types. Here's one example.

INTP: Ti and Ne
ILI: Ni and Te

It doesn't really matter though, but MBTT Ni, Ne, Te, and Ti are not the same as Socionics Ni, Ne, Te, and Ti. MBTT Te, for example, is more like Socionics Ti + Se than it is Te.

I have no interest in expanding upon any of this in discussion with you, but there are plenty of people on the forum who would be more than happy to provide you with explanations that you're be happier with. Try posting some questions in General, What's My Type, Alpha, or Beta and you'll have much better luck than the responses you're getting here in Gamma. In fact, most of the responses in your threads haven't even been from members of Gamma in the first place.

[crazedrat]

Joy... I know this person in real life, he is ILI. It is stupid to think you would know better then he would, what type he is. I mean really, that is stupid. Think about it. Do not say anything. ............................. Thought about it yet? Yeah. Keep thinking........ k.




Moving on.
MBTI & socionics functions are describing the same phenomenon. The phenomenon exists, we devleop language to describe it. There are not two seperate universes, where MBTI belongs to one, and socionics belongs to another. If you have a problem reconciling the two, it is more likely due to your inability to change linguistic context in your mind.
From what I understand the socionic functions were derived from Jungs work, as were the MBTI functions. More then that, I have read both and have no difficulty seeing the two side by side.

Most of what I see here is you yelling "function alert!" - "hey, Ti spotted in sector blah blah blah" ... well, each type displays each function... in different ways.
More then that, a function can look like another function... in a particular context. Te to Ni can look like a Fe impression.. where an array of Te statements is displayed in a coherent effect. The difference is in the way the information develops / transforms; where you seem to have more of a one dimensional "function alert!" way of identifying things.
A function is not a state of information, it is a transformation of information from one state to another. Hence the word function. K?
The issue is more complex then you give it credit.

Now, for effect, I am going to repeat myself.... that way i know you get it.
A function is not a state of information, it is a transformation of information from one state to another.
K, now's the part where you, Joy, think about that............................... and think about it. K? Good.


You see, you have a tendency to ignore 95% of what is said, and focus on 5% of what is said... This is something I've seen more than a few LIEs do before.
This creates a "god dammit, I have to repeat myself AND say twice as much as before" effect on those talking to you.
It seems like it is one of the flaws of a LIE thinking style.
There's also alot of confirmation-bias in what you say. Example "yeah, you're complaining about my lack of Ti. This means... you have Ti hidden agenda!"
Anyway.. the point of all this is: please stop trying to dominate the universe with your opinion.. it's like someone spreading shit all over the walls of my living area. It makes me anxious- I feel like I either have to spend a long time cleaning up all the shit.. (yeah, it does take forever) or just leave the room. But I can't sit here with shit all over the walls. And that is what your mouth spews- it is shit. So please stop

[Joy]

Joy... I know this person in real life, he is ILI. It is stupid to think you would know better then he would, what type he is. I mean really, that is stupid. Think about it. Do not say anything. ............................. Thought about it yet? Yeah. Keep thinking........ k.




Moving on.
MBTI & socionics functions are describing the same phenomenon. The phenomenon exists, we devleop language to describe it. There are not two seperate universes, where MBTI belongs to one, and socionics belongs to another. If you have a problem reconciling the two, it is more likely due to your inability to change contexts linguisticly.

Now, for effect, I am going to repeat myself.... that way i know you get it.
A functio nis not a state of information, it is a trnasformatio nof informatino from one state to another.
K, now's the part where you, Joy, think about that............................... and think about it. K? Good.


You also have a tendency to ignore 95% of what is said, focus on 5% of what is said... This is something I've seen more than a few LIEs do before.
Well, they're the least intellectual NT type for a reason I guess.
Anyway.. the point of all this is: please stop trying to dominate the universe with your opinion.. it's like someone spreading shit all over the walls of my living area. It makes me anxious- I feel like I either have to spend a long time cleaning up all the shit.. (yeah, it does take forever) or just leave the room. But I can't sit here with shit all over the walls. And that is what your mouth spews- it is shit. So please stop

I hadn't planned on opening this can of worms here and now, but since you've addressed me specifically I should probably respond. And my response is that I don't think you're ILI, either.

And no, it is not because of this post. I actually mentioned this to someone earlier today in an IM conversation.

Joy (5/4/2008 9:36:26 AM): and crazedrat
Joy (5/4/2008 9:36:33 AM): probably not ILI

And:

Most of what I see here is you yelling "function alert!" - "hey, Ti spotted in sector blah blah blah" ... well, each type displays each function.
More then that, a function can look like another function... in a particular context. Te to Ni can look like a Fe impression.. where an array of Te statements is displayed in a coherent effect. The difference is in the way the information develops / transforms; where you seem to have more of a one dimensional "function alert!" way of identifying things.
A function is not a state of information, it is a transformation of information from one state to another. K?
The issue is more complex then you give it credit.

I'm not saying that certain types display Ti and certain types don't. I'm saying that Lord Java the 3rd gives a strong impression of valuing Fe/Ti over Te/Fi.

Ugh. Somehow I knew posting in this topic would be a mistake. All I wanted to say was...

So far I don't see anything that would suggest ILI over a Fe/Ti type, but it's too soon to tell. We'll have to wait and see how your interactions with other members play out.

[Phaedrus]

And Joy just proved crazedrat's point ...

[Elro]

Joy... I know this person in real life, he is ILI. It is stupid to think you would know better then he would, what type he is. I mean really, that is stupid. Think about it. Do not say anything. ............................. Thought about it yet? Yeah. Keep thinking........ k.




Moving on.

Well I'm convinced.

[crazedrat]

What, you disagree? You think its a bad point?.........
Tell me Elro, since you decided to enter into my fucking conversation, the likelyhood in your mind of the following:
1: A person is wrong about their type, yet still knowledgable enough about socionics to seek out this forum
2: This person read every intertype relation, experiences them in real life on a daily basis (probably has family which they've typed..), and didn't notice a discrepancy... where if they had their type wrong, every description should be wrong
3: That someone who can argue functions cannot identify their own function use
4: That you can be sure of a persons type through the limited interaction experience online, enough to rationally upheave and reject said persons assertions of their type in favor of your personal observations
5: That this would all happen twice, with two ILI-Nis (me and Java), both times Joy being the main persecutor

[marooned]

...

[crazedrat]

Joys I.M. conversation seems to have proven everything...
1: arguing with other people about what type ~they~ are = trying to dominate them with your opinion.
2: you said nothing about how a variety of Te impressions arranged in a coherent manner in the name of Ni creates a reactive Fi impression (this is the flow of ILI-Ni information); and how this impression is what you are identifying as "creative Fe"
3: the fact you are also thinking I am not ILI places you as the common denominator in two disputes of this nature, and this further suggests your ability to type ILI is the problem