New socionics test- this one gives subtypes

[RSV3]

What does this question here answer?

15. Which description fits you best?

I am quite effective at dealing with fast-changing situations and find that stable environments become boring.

I am quite effective when operating in a stable environment and will often struggle dealing with constantly changing situations where large amounts of new information are coming in.

This question is one of the questions designed to test for rationality/irrationality. It will usually take more time for rationals to adapt to changes in their environment where as irrationals will usually respond with more alacrity.

[717495]

So irrationals are basically sensors? I'm not a sensor, I don't think.

[RSV3]

So irrationals are basically sensors? I'm not a sensor, I don't think.

No, irrationals lead with a perceiving element so their initial absorption of information is not hindered by a requirement it be screened (or judged) first before it can be accepted. Rationals, otoh, lead with a juding element, thus the fact that they need to judge the information before accepting it slows down the rate it can be absorbed.

[717495]

Okay. That clears up my question. I knew what you meant, I just wanted you to explain it in more detail because I think the question should be reworded in some fashion. "Effectively dealing with fast-changing situations" makes it seem like its asking if I'm good at working in a kitchen. Dealing with a situation, vs accepting it. I think dealing can mean accepting, but its likely to get misinterpreted by some people.

[RSV3]

Okay. That clears up my question. I knew what you meant, I just wanted you to explain it in more detail because I think the question should be reworded in some fashion. "Effectively dealing with fast-changing situations" makes it seem like its asking if I'm good at working in a kitchen. Dealing with a situation, vs accepting it. I think dealing can mean accepting, but its likely to get misinterpreted by some people.

Yeah, I hear ya. Most of the questions can probably be reworded to some extent or another. Thanks for the suggestion.

[jason_m]

I didn't think they were badly worded at all. Each time I've taken it I answered each question as best as I could. Maybe I should make a desktop capture video and explain how I'm answering each question or something like that.

I don't think the problem is really with you OR the test. The problem is that socionics is open to interpretation. While most (reasonably accurate) interpretations are probably correlated, it becomes difficult to create any test that can capture the precise essence of the functions. For example, I read into the questions, and I would be neither Ti nor Te valuing. I don't think the interpretation of these functions is wrong; I have simply been forced to come up with some mild variations of these functions in order to have a coherent system in which I can type myself. A single test simply can't account for all interpretations.

Jason

[xkj220]

I would remove the temperament question (the one with the graphs). Why? Because subtypes screw that question up. Also, I'm not really sure that correlates that well. Especially the variation of energy levels during the day. Most intuitives I know, regardless of their types and temperament, tend to be "night owls".

Btw, this is not completely true, based on my observations:

Increased expression of one function (1) suppresses the opposing intradichotomy function and (2) suppresses the opposing intrablock function (and vise versa).

You have a sort of a "pool" of energy; you can allocate this energy to any IM element you wish. Allocating it to one in particular strengthens both of the IM elements in the axis (Ni-Se, for instance).

[717495]

Yeah, I agree about that graph. It's also a very hard question to answer, as I would put both IJ and IP since I'm in between, and likely IJ because the graph makes it look like they're the lowest energy type. Look to Expat's model perhaps, which you are probably familiar with, or to some temperament descriptions.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...mperament.html

Anyway, these things aren't that big of a deal. There's always something that needs to be tweaked.

[Park]

If you (or anyone else) have any specific questions about the test, feel free to ask me (pm or on the thread).

What are these two supposed to measure?

You are hesitant to make quick decisions, preferring to gather as much relevant information as you can before making a decision.

vs


You are capable of making decisions with little information, being confident that the little info you have will be sufficient.

I love helping take care of the ones I love. Whether it's providing emotional support or a comfortable atmosphere, my friends and family will always come first in my life. I care about how I look but comfort usually comes first.

vs

I put a lot of effort into maintaining my relationships and place a lot of value on them. I help those I care about to achieve their goals through motivation and encouragement. I care about how I look and often enjoy unique styles that help me stand out from the crowd.

[717495]

And what does this question answer?

19. Which statement fits you best?

You believe there is one correct view of reality, that exists without regarding to one individual's own judgment or perception.

You believe that there may be multiple views of reality, which depend and are defined partly by each viewer's personal judgment and perception.

I've heard some people use that in context of Ni vs Ne and I think that is wrong, but I'm not sure what your intention was.

[marooned]

And what does this question answer?

19. Which statement fits you best?

You believe there is one correct view of reality, that exists without regarding to one individual's own judgment or perception.

You believe that there may be multiple views of reality, which depend and are defined partly by each viewer's personal judgment and perception.

I've heard some people use that in context of Ni vs Ne and I think that is wrong, but I'm not sure what your intention was.

yeah, I answered the Ne one when I answered that question because I honestly just can't see only one reality... or one truth... etc.

[RSV3]

Thanks for the input everyone.

[717495]

I think some should give a nice detailed example, if that is possible, such as #17. I honestly don't know what its asking, realistically, and I don't think most people will know how to answer it.

[RSV3]

Me and my Ti. I think I'd do better with a test where quadra was determined first.

You might be right about that. Assuming the right quadra could be determined initially, it should thereafter be very easy to determine which club the person was in.

[717495]

The way you test objectivist actually sounds much like the LII and Ti. I don't think a lot of these dichotomies are true, even though I relate to much of the material written under objectivist, I don't think it stands as a whole.

[sarinana]

Your socionics type is SEE-1Fi (ESFp).
Other possible types:
IEE (76% as likely as SEE)
ESI (72% as likely as SEE)
EII (65% as likely as SEE)

Quadra: Gamma
Club: Social
Romance Styles:
Primary: Aggressor (68%)
Secondary: Infantile (32%)

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Absurd]

Wow

Your socionics type is LII-2Ne (INTj).
Other possible types:
ILE (89% as likely as LII)
EII (88% as likely as LII)
IEE (77% as likely as LII)

Quadra: Alpha
Club: Researcher
Romance Styles:
Primary: Infantile (84%)
Secondary: Aggressor (16%)

[tereg]

Took it again just to take it again because someone posted results in another thread which prompted me to take it again

Your socionics type is ILI-1Te (INTp).
Other possible types:
LII (85% as likely as ILI)
SLI (80% as likely as ILI)
ILE (76% as likely as ILI)

Quadra: Gamma
Club: Researcher
Romance Styles:
Primary: Victim (70%)
Secondary: Caregiver (30%)

Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Ni 35 35
2. Te 40 40
3. Si 15 15
4. Fe 10 10

Vital Block
5. Se 15 35
6. Fi 10 40
7. Ne 35 15
8. Ti 40 10
IM Pathways
1. Ni-->Te (56%)
2. Si-->Te (24%)
3. Ni-->Fe (14%)
4. Si-->Fe (6%)

Ideal Partner: SEE-1Fi (ESFp)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Se 35 35
2. Fi 40 40
3. Ne 15 15
4. Ti 10 10

Vital Block
5. Ni 15 35
6. Te 10 40
7. Si 35 15
8. Fe 40 10

I haven't forgotten about making a video about how I'm making these decisions. I will. Eventually.

[munenori2]

Teregnigma

Edit: I miss dnd.

[Creepy-male]

Teregnigma

Edit: I miss dnd.

[Gilly]

Your socionics type is IEI-0 (INFp).
Other possible types:
EIE (75% as likely as IEI)
IEE (69% as likely as IEI)
EII (64% as likely as IEI)

Quadra: Beta
Club: Humanitarian
Romance Styles:
Primary: Victim (74%)
Secondary: Caregiver (26%)

Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Ni 37 37
2. Fe 38 38
3. Si 13 13
4. Te 12 12

Vital Block
5. Se 13 37
6. Ti 12 38
7. Ne 37 13
8. Fi 38 12
IM Pathways
1. Ni-->Fe (56%)
2. Si-->Fe (20%)
3. Ni-->Te (18%)
4. Si-->Te (6%)

Ideal Partner: SLE-0 (ESTp)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Se 37 37
2. Ti 38 38
3. Ne 13 13
4. Fi 12 12

Vital Block
5. Ni 13 37
6. Fe 12 38
7. Si 37 13
8. Te 38 12

[thePirate]

the other version was better :/

[ragnar]

I got this:

Your socionics type is ILI-0 (INTp).
Other possible types:
LIE (99% as likely as ILI)
LII (81% as likely as ILI)
ILE (70% as likely as ILI)

Quadra: Gamma
Club: Researcher
Romance Styles:
Primary: Victim (72%)
Secondary: Caregiver (28%)

Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Ni 36 36
2. Te 39 39
3. Si 14 14
4. Fe 11 11

Vital Block
5. Se 14 36
6. Fi 11 39
7. Ne 36 14
8. Ti 39 11

IM Pathways
1. Ni-->Te (56%)
2. Si-->Te (22%)
3. Ni-->Fe (16%)
4. Si-->Fe (6%)

Ideal Partner: SEE-0 (ESFp)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Se 36 36
2. Fi 39 39
3. Ne 14 14
4. Ti 11 11

Vital Block
5. Ni 14 36
6. Te 11 39
7. Si 36 14
8. Fe 39 11

[Suz]

For all you doubters out there:

Your socionics type is IEI-0 (INFp).

Other possible types:
EII (87% as likely as IEI)
EIE (82% as likely as IEI)
IEE (74% as likely as IEI)

Quadra: Beta
Club: Humanitarian
Romance Styles:
Primary: Victim (72%)
Secondary: Caregiver (28%)

Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Ni 36 36
2. Fe 39 39
3. Si 14 14
4. Te 11 11

Vital Block
5. Se 14 36
6. Ti 11 39
7. Ne 36 14
8. Fi 39 11
IM Pathways
1. Ni-->Fe (56%)
2. Si-->Fe (22%)
3. Ni-->Te (16%)
4. Si-->Te (6%)

Ideal Partner: SLE-0 (ESTp)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Se 36 36
2. Ti 39 39
3. Ne 14 14
4. Fi 11 11

Vital Block
5. Ni 14 36
6. Fe 11 39
7. Si 36 14
8. Te 39 11

[Fiandra]

Why on this site psychotypes don't call to as they in original - Robespierre, Don Quixote, Yesenin etc.? I'm surprised by this thing:-) See the full list - Socionics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[717495]

I just edited that list a couple days ago because I thought Huxley needed to refer to Aldous, not Thomas. See how confusing that is? Why should I be typed as another person? Balzac is not exactly the most preferable textual item to place in my signature.

Balzac no feels. Balzac does taxes. Balzac exist only in thought, to be thought.

[munenori2]

hmm, I thought Thomas Henry Huxley is the one they're referring to when "Huxley" is used as a name alias for IEE?

You'd be right. Polikujm is high on jenkem.

[Fiandra]

polikujm, I have in view of, that here they don't refer to as socionic aliases, and are called simply as abbreviations SLE or EIE etc.:-)
I am surprised, because I usually use original names, i.e. I am accustomed to them. Just it (: Thomas Huxley is the prototype of socionic alias.

[MatthewZ]

May as well post mine:

Your socionics type is ILI-2Te (INTp).
Other possible types:
LII (97% as likely as ILI)
ILE (94% as likely as ILI)
SLI (92% as likely as ILI)

Quadra: Gamma
Club: Researcher
Romance Styles:
Primary: Victim (66%)
Secondary: Caregiver (34%)

Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Ni 33 33
2. Te 42 42
3. Si 17 17
4. Fe 8 8

Vital Block
5. Se 17 33
6. Fi 8 42
7. Ne 33 17
8. Ti 42 8
IM Pathways
1. Ni-->Te (55%)
2. Si-->Te (29%)
3. Ni-->Fe (11%)
4. Si-->Fe (5%)

Ideal Partner: SEE-2Fi (ESFp)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Se 33 33
2. Fi 42 42
3. Ne 17 17
4. Ti 8 8

Vital Block
5. Ni 17 33
6. Te 8 42
7. Si 33 17
8. Fe 42 8

[Suz]

Your socionics type is IEI-0 (INFp).
Other possible types:
EIE (75% as likely as IEI)
IEE (69% as likely as IEI)
EII (64% as likely as IEI)

Quadra: Beta
Club: Humanitarian
Romance Styles:
Primary: Victim (74%)
Secondary: Caregiver (26%)

Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Ni 37 37
2. Fe 38 38
3. Si 13 13
4. Te 12 12

Vital Block
5. Se 13 37
6. Ti 12 38
7. Ne 37 13
8. Fi 38 12
IM Pathways
1. Ni-->Fe (56%)
2. Si-->Fe (20%)
3. Ni-->Te (18%)
4. Si-->Te (6%)

Hi identical !!!

[Nexus]

lol RSVp, you were 100% right about me - LSI-0 - I guess you really are an intuitive extrovert...

Your socionics type is LSI-0 (ISTj).
Other possible types:
SLE (78% as likely as LSI)
LII (62% as likely as LSI)
ILE (54% as likely as LSI)

Quadra: Beta
Club: Pragmatist
Romance Styles:
Primary: Aggressor (72%)
Secondary: Infantile (28%)

Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Ti 39 39
2. Se 36 36
3. Fi 11 11
4. Ne 14 14

Vital Block
5. Fe 11 39
6. Ni 14 36
7. Te 39 11
8. Si 36 14
IM Pathways
1. Ti-->Se (56%)
2. Fi-->Se (16%)
3. Ti-->Ne (22%)
4. Fi-->Ne (6%)

Ideal Partner: EIE-0 (ENFj)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Fe 39 39
2. Ni 36 36
3. Te 11 11
4. Si 14 14

Vital Block
5. Ti 11 39
6. Se 14 36
7. Fi 39 11
8. Ne 36 14

[tereg]

I thought about my energy level like on a generic weekend day, which is actually more like the blue line instead of the yellow line. Way more like the blue line, because I tend to lounge around and not really do a whole lot in way of activities and stuff. So, I answered the questions basically the same way, but instead of picking the yellow line, I picked the blue line.

The results:

Your socionics type is EII-2Ne (INFj).
Other possible types:
LII (100% as likely as EII)
ILI (95% as likely as EII)
ILE (82% as likely as EII)

Quadra: Delta
Club: Humanitarian
Romance Styles:
Primary: Infantile (88%)
Secondary: Aggressor (12%)

Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Fi 31 31
2. Ne 44 44
3. Ti 19 19
4. Se 6 6

Vital Block
5. Te 19 31
6. Si 6 44
7. Fe 31 19
8. Ni 44 6
IM Pathways
1. Fi-->Ne (55%)
2. Ti-->Ne (33%)
3. Fi-->Se (7%)
4. Ti-->Se (5%)

Ideal Partner: LSE-2Si (ESTj)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Te 31 31
2. Si 44 44
3. Fe 19 19
4. Ni 6 6

Vital Block
5. Fi 19 31
6. Ne 6 44
7. Ti 31 19
8. Se 44 6

Return to main page.

That question really does weigh a lot.

[Jimbean]

Your socionics type is ILE-2Ti (ENTp).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other possible types:
LSI (95% as likely as ILE)
SLE (94% as likely as ILE)
LII (89% as likely as ILE)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quadra: Alpha
Club: Researcher
Romance Styles:
Primary: Infantile (66%)
Secondary: Aggressor (34%)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Ne 33 33
2. Ti 42 42
3. Se 17 17
4. Fi 8 8

Vital Block
5. Si 17 33
6. Fe 8 42
7. Ni 33 17
8. Te 42 8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IM Pathways
1. Ne-->Ti (55%)
2. Se-->Ti (29%)
3. Ne-->Fi (11%)
4. Se-->Fi (5%)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ideal Partner: SEI-2Fe (ISFp)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Si 33 33
2. Fe 42 42
3. Ni 17 17
4. Te 8 8

Vital Block
5. Ne 17 33
6. Ti 8 42
7. Se 33 17
8. Fi 42 8

EDIT: Most of the last 12 questions had not applied to me, so I did not answer to them.

[mikemex]

I just edited that list a couple days ago because I thought Huxley needed to refer to Aldous, not Thomas.

Both Thomas and Aldous were IEEs. However, they seemed a little different, indeed. I bet Thomas was a Ne subtype (scientifically inclined) and Aldous Fi subtype (more focused on social issues). I identify much more with Thomas than with Aldous, though I can see elements of both in me.

[eunice]

Your socionics type is EII-1Ne (INFj).
Other possible types:
LII (77% as likely as EII)
IEE (75% as likely as EII)
ILE (52% as likely as EII)

Quadra: Delta
Club: Humanitarian
Romance Styles:
Primary: Infantile (82%)
Secondary: Aggressor (18%)

Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Fi 34 34
2. Ne 41 41
3. Ti 16 16
4. Se 9 9

Vital Block
5. Te 16 34
6. Si 9 41
7. Fe 34 16
8. Ni 41 9
IM Pathways
1. Fi-->Ne (56%)
2. Ti-->Ne (26%)
3. Fi-->Se (12%)
4. Ti-->Se (6%)

Ideal Partner: LSE-1Si (ESTj)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Te 34 34
2. Si 41 41
3. Fe 16 16
4. Ni 9 9

Vital Block
5. Fi 16 34
6. Ne 9 41
7. Ti 34 16
8. Se 41 9

[tcaudilllg]

Why on this site psychotypes don\'t call to as they in original - Robespierre, Don Quixote, Yesenin etc.? I\'m surprised by this thing:-) See the full list - Socionics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Because I am not Robespierre. In general the practice of naming things after people is quite misguided and should be used only when a clear descriptor is unavailable.

[Jimbean]

I took the test again and had a simialar result:

Your socionics type is SLE-1Ti (ESTp).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other possible types:
LSI (81% as likely as SLE)
LSE (77% as likely as SLE)
ILE (75% as likely as SLE)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quadra: Beta
Club: Pragmatist
Romance Styles:
Primary: Aggressor (68%)
Secondary: Infantile (32%)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Se 34 34
2. Ti 41 41
3. Ne 16 16
4. Fi 9 9

Vital Block
5. Ni 16 34
6. Fe 9 41
7. Si 34 16
8. Te 41 9

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IM Pathways
1. Se-->Ti (56%)
2. Ne-->Ti (26%)
3. Se-->Fi (12%)
4. Ne-->Fi (6%)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ideal Partner: IEI-1Fe (INFp)
Function Strength (%) Value ( %)

Mental Block
1. Ni 34 34
2. Fe 41 41
3. Si 16 16
4. Te 9 9

Vital Block
5. Se 16 34
6. Ti 9 41
7. Ne 34 16
8. Fi 41 9

[717495]

Thomas Huxley is the prototype of socionic alias.

Well, this is debatable. However I know that there is genuine info for Thomas Huxley being typed as IEE.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request