Sociability

[Expat]

We often get into the "socionics extroversion is not the same as being socially outgoing" discussion.

In socionics.org there is a ranking of types according to sociability, or "extroversion" in its colloquial usage:

Most sociable types: ESFj, ENFp, ESFp, ENFj

Average: ENTp, ESTp, ENTj, ESTj, ISFp, INFp, ISFj, INFj

Least sociable types: INTj, ISTj, INTp, ISTp

I think this is very accurate, and it's the people in the "average" ranking that tend to get confused with things like "how can I be an extrovert". Their self-perception can go either way.

I know of two ENTjs and one ENFj that had self-perception of introverts, and one INFj that had a self-perception of extrovert.

[snowyc]

excellent summary.

My ENTp mirror friend easily comes across as a "shy extrovert" who is higher up on the scale of social initiating with others then myself.

My INFj business friend is an average "sociable introvert" who perhaps has more spiritual reasons for socialising then I do.

I commonly observe ISFp's as high-end "outgoing introverts" who seem to socialise for more hedonistic reasons.

I am just simply a low-end "outgoing introvert" at the best of times thus noticed as a private guy in a public place who seems reserved and thus hesitant for small talk unless done on my terms.

Ps. Extroverted types do the dragging whilst introverted types usually appear dragged to social events. Either way, like a game of chess (i.e. black or white), a night out can unfold any which way in regard to different psyches.

[Rocky]

I think that there is little substance in that list. I don't tend to think it's accurate at all, really.

Yay for Ti socionics.

[snowyc]

I've seen many ESTp's when out socialising and even though i might get jealous whilst queuing up outside and they can be yapping about stuff and I'm relatively quiet. We all get inside and if we were none the wiser we'd all come across as shy except being an introverted type i'm more likely to have the self-confidence to dance where no-one else dare.

"Outgoing Introverts" give private-public performances especially on the dance floor.

[Expat]

Edit: I do know some pretty sociable ISTjs though. Like at least three semi-talkative ones.

Yeah I agree, they are more sociable than the others in that ranking.

[Gronau]

ISTj least sociable? Maybe I have a bias because of my ISTj country (Germany), but I know many of them and everybody is sociable. They should be at least average.

[snowyc]

Are we confusing sociable as in "one who attends social events" with social orientation as "one who prefers to listen rather then make conversation or vica-versa in a crowd of strangers"?

On the one hand I go out practically every weekend and socalise in the sense of mixing with others. However as an INTj I have low social extroversion in the sense of seldom wanting to make conversation with others and being hesitant to respond if approached by others. I would rather show my physical extroversion by dancing or bopping my head to the music.

Although, being a "regular" at a particular club i guess it's only a matter of time before i come out of my shell and be an "extrovert" in the sense of initiating conversation first otherwise i'm just a timid introvert.

[CuriousSoul]

I think this is very accurate, and it's the people in the "average" ranking that tend to get confused with things like "how can I be an extrovert". Their self-perception can go either way.

I think it is reasonably accurate on average, but there are many exceptions. I think this kind of lists are not very useful since they can easily lead people to be mistyped. Sociability often depends a lot on the situation. I, for example, can appear very extroverted for some time, but it does get tiring in the long run. Similarly you listed ENFPs as one of the most sociable types, and often they are, but there are also ENFPs, also on this Forum who consider ENFP to be the most introverted of the extroverted types; so take it with a pinch of salt.

[snowyc]

Here's a few possibilities in a social environment:

1) Shy Introvert - reserved and unassertive
2) Outgoing Introvert - reserved and assertive
3) Shy Extrovert - expressive and unassertive
4) Outgoing Extrovert - expressive and assertive

It's not even absolute, i can never become an extrovert per se and shouldn't have to. Sometimes my presence has given me attention, i just need to go from 1 to 2 at the right moment and handle myself well rather then be hesitant at the "extrovert distractions" like the loud music or whatever else.

[FDG]

Here's a few possibilities in a social environment:

1) Shy Introvert - a need to be with others: reserved and unassertive
2) Outgoing Introvert - a need to be with others: reserved and assertive
3) Shy Extrovert - a need to be with others: reclusive and expressive
4) Outgoing Extrovert - a need to be with others: expressive and assertive

Uh?

reclusive and assertive are not dichotomical qualities.

[snowyc]

sorry, try again, i was editing it.

[Creepy-]

Here's a few possibilities in a social environment:

1) Shy Introvert - reserved and unassertive
2) Outgoing Introvert - reserved and assertive
3) Shy Extrovert - expressive and unassertive
4) Outgoing Extrovert - expressive and assertive

It's not even absolute, i can never become an extrovert per se and shouldn't have to. Sometimes my presence has given me attention, i just need to go from 1 to 2 at the right moment and handle myself well rather then be hesitant at the "extrovert distractions" like the loud music or whatever else.

I would argue that IxFps are expressive.

[MysticSonic]

"Yay for Ti socionics. Rolling Eyes"

Wtf are you talking about?

[Raver]

I disagree completely as an ENFp being a sociable type. In fact when I was a young child, I was extremely shy and kept mostly to myself. I'm still like that and usually can't carry on a conversation with someone I don't know very well. However, once I'm comfortable with a person I can be very sociable.

[Rocky]

"Yay for Ti socionics. Rolling Eyes"

Wtf are you talking about?

Trying to categorize things without paying attention to the way they actually work, only the way they "should" work.

[MysticSonic]

You do realize that it's not the fault of an INTj or ENTp though, right? That we're not the sole source of bias within the system?

[Gilly]

Well, actually we are...one of us created the damn thing, MS :wink:

[Rocky]

You do realize that it's not the fault of an INTj or ENTp though, right? That we're not the sole source of bias within the system?

Ehh... Smilingx and Cone might disagree. :wink:

They blame the Alphas for everything.

[snowyc]

Strong Ti will usually try to understand the entire fundamental, visual and logic behind any system of interest even if that includes people and relationships. The understandings can be so complex that they can be unusable even to yourself i.e. knowing so much on a theoretical level that one is simply paralysed by what they know or at least, think they know since it's just a model. I've personally had to go through some un-learning realising that the only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing (Socrates).

It's a bit like University, perhaps created by NTs for NTs and anyone else who wants or believes they need "higher education" which in this day and age can be both a "rite of passage" (perhaps an SP Artisan influence) and a necessity (so we are told by SJ Guardian politicians as a way of reducing unemployment perhaps) rather then mere NT-influenced prestige. Oh well, more meat for the grinder. I find it terribly interesting how different Keirsey Temperaments mutate ideas and concepts for institutions built, arguably, by specific temperaments in the first place.

An INTj "scientist" or "analyst" therefore needs to put his ideas and concepts into a form or context that the rest of society can understand which, in by doing so, may make it clearer for himself. In other words, after accumulating a lot of (potentially useless) data, to keep the "best bits" which should then be enough for a convincing argument and/or "how to" book on relationships say which x number of people in the world will probably relate to, the rest will reject it thus is the nature of human nature and marketing.

Time for a quote:

“Today the network of relationships linking the human race to itself and to the rest of the biosphere is so complex that all aspects affect all others to an extraordinary degree. Someone should be studying the whole system, however crudely that has to be done, because no gluing together of partial studies of a complex nonlinear system can give a good idea of the behaviour of the whole.” -- Murray Gell-Mann

Sounds like a motivational speech that may have got Socionics theory off-the-ground. It all reinforces the idea of discussing several personality typing theories together I believe.

[schrödinger's cat]

This is interesting. I'll give this a shot. Some attempted definitions of extraverted introverts and introverted extraverts...

Gregarious introverts: Love parties and hanging out with people. Sounds extraverted? It isn't really. They'll usually talk to a limited number of people, or they'll hang out with their closest friend(s). They don't really interact with the whole group. And they'll often focus on doing stuff like playing a game, dancing, building the fire for a BBQ... which takes off the "social pressure" a bit. Are often content to just watch the action. If life were a band, they'd be the drummers and bass players.

Reserved extraverts: Love parties and hanging out with people, but for them the experience is so intense that they need time alone afterwards: not in order to regain energy (as an introvert would), but to process their thoughts. Some focus so intensely on people and interactions etc. that they later have to spend some time to get into their own skin again, to "feel themselves" and re-focus on their own view of the world. Plus, while they're with people they're aware of so much information that they later need some time to process it all.

Not-all-that-gregarious extraverts: Focus on the external world and take their energy from it. Classical extraversion. But "external world" does not equal "social interactions". People stuff is exhausting to them, perhaps even pointless. What they focus on could be stuff like organizing a project or discovering new stuff (cities, cars, museums, machines...). When with people, they'll prefer talking about matter-of-fact topics (modern art, or new cars, or the latest project they're doing, or politics, or the news), and they'll try and keep the discussion as matter-of-fact and as un-subjective as they can.

That's all I can think of for now. Perhaps there are more.

[FDG]

The third category is perfect for me!


I think that all ExTx types are into that category.

[Expat]

Yeah, the third category fits me perfectly. That is me.

[Kristiina]

The second category is perfectly me. I love parties, but I'll spend the next day very quietly and I'll think about what I said, what others answered, how others might have seen me, if they got the wrong impression in a certain situation, etc...

[Expat]

The second category is perfectly me. I love parties, but I'll spend the next day very quietly and I'll think about what I said, what others answered, how others might have seen me, if they got the wrong impression in a certain situation, etc...

This is consistent with having as role function, and I can relate to it - although not as much as your post seems to suggest.

Perhaps you're ENTj intuitive subtype.

[FDG]

Perhaps you're ENTj intuitive subtype.

Then I must be logical aswell, since the things that don't ring true for Kristina are the ones that best define my way of living ex. saturated rythm of life.

[Expat]

Then I must be logical aswell, since the things that don't ring true for Kristina are the ones that best define my way of living ex. saturated rythm of life.

*shrugs* Who knows -- perhaps you're just slightly intuitive and Kristiina is at the end of the "scale". Perhaps it's something else. I'm not sure of my subtype, either. I'm certainly not the stereotypical hyper-active logical subtype. Perhaps I'm really split subtype.

[Functianalyst]

In socionics.org there is a ranking of types according to sociability, or "extroversion" in its colloquial usage:

Most sociable types: ESFj, ENFp, ESFp, ENFj

Average: ENTp, ESTp, ENTj, ESTj, ISFp, INFp, ISFj, INFj

Least sociable types: INTj, ISTj, INTp, ISTp

I agree Expat, however do you have them in most sociable from left to right? In the average, I would say the introverted feelers may be more sociable than the extraverted thinkers.

[Expat]

I agree Expat, however do you have them in most sociable from left to right? In the average, I would say the introverted feelers may be more sociable than the extraverted thinkers.

No, I just got that from socionics.org, there was no such ranking.

At first I thought it was mostly accurate, but I'm noticing the problems.

[snowyc]

Defining the dichotomy of Sociability:

so·cia·ble (ssh-bl)

1. Fond of the company of others; gregarious.
2. Marked by or affording occasion for agreeable conversation and conviviality.
3. Pleasant, friendly, and affable.

un·so·cia·ble (n-ssh-bl)

1. Not disposed to seek the company of others; reserved.
2. Not congenial; incompatible.
3. Not conducive to social exchange: an unsociable atmosphere.

If sociable is "left" and unsociable is "right" then what is "forward"?

If Introverted types metaphorically resemble snails with shells on there backs then Extroverted types are like slugs with no such "place of retreat". A dichotomic question then arises, do Introverted types need to come out of their shell more and mingle or do Extroverted types need to find (or build) an inner-sanctum of their own and live a quieter life?

As an INTj, my EGO functions are Ti-Ne which by default we could say produces unsociable (as defined above) behaviour since attitudes of "seeking to understand" and "noticing endless possibilities" respectfully are chief. Of course, that then means that my reasons for being sociable are different - for research and understanding with seldom desire and/or ability to do alien things (from my point of view) like friovolous chit-chat or getting jiggy for no significant reason. Even being under the influence wouldn't make much difference since I can't really become a required type to get what that type may find easier to get. It's then a paradox anyhow that I'm so used to being "me" that i can't percieve being any different in relation to another type which I may, for a time, aspire to be like.

[FDG]

Defining the dichotomy of Sociability:

so·cia·ble (ssh-bl)

1. Fond of the company of others; gregarious.
2. Marked by or affording occasion for agreeable conversation and conviviality.
3. Pleasant, friendly, and affable.

un·so·cia·ble (n-ssh-bl)

1. Not disposed to seek the company of others; reserved.
2. Not congenial; incompatible.
3. Not conducive to social exchange: an unsociable atmosphere.

If sociable is "left" and unsociable is "right" then what is "forward"?

Something like aggressive/submissive, on the y

[snowyc]

Yeah exactly.

That's also an ENTj "enterprising pioneer" answer in dual relationship to an ISFj "supportive guardian".

[Raver]

I would say I fit in the second category among Cat's categories. I like to socialize, but then I feel overwhelmed and need to relax afterwards.

Here is my own system of how each type fits into my own categories:

Natural Development: These types are usually born very shy, but with time become more and more extraverted when they become more comfortable with the world they live in and result in popularity:

Examples: ESTP, ESFP

Mixed Development: These types tend be very shy due to not being part of the norm. They are usually seen as strange around most people and are usually mistaken for being shy. This results in a development of fear. However, once they learn to accept their weaknesses and embrace their strengths, they adapt to become much more extraverted.

Examples: ENFP, ENTP

Adaptabile Development: They are born usually somewhat shy, but not too shy and manage to converse well even at early ages. When they age, they don't become overly extraverted, however they learn to rid themselves of shyness and alleviate fear that other types tend to have:

Examples: ESTJ, ENTJ

People Extraverts:

These types are usually born very extraverted and are rarely shy. They can easily communicate with other people and enjoy doing so. They unlike other types aren't necessarilly fueled by extraverted activities, but simply by people

Examples: ESFJ, ENFJ

Independence: These types tend to nto necessarily fear people and may appear extraverted for this reason, but seek to maintain independence and individuality their entire lives. They seek extraverted stimulation from time to time, but being around people does not interest them.

Examples: ISTP, INTP, ISTJ, INTJ

Outgoing Introvert: These types tend to usually be shy around people, though they do not seek independence. They seek to meet new people and be around them, however extraverted activities do not interest them

Examples: ISFP, INFP, ISFJ, INFJ

Okay, I just made this system on the spot, but I hope it opens your horizons about introversion vs. extraversion.

P.S. I personally believe that extraverted feelers are the least shy people and not introverted feelers. I believe those with strong may appear extraverted, but they tend to be the ones that are most nervous when meeting new people. Also, ENFP's are the shyest of the extraverts, so socionics' system sucks.

[ScarlettLux]

That last post was pretty dern good

[Park]

I love parties, but I'll spend the next day very quietly and I'll think about what I said, what others answered, how others might have seen me, if they got the wrong impression in a certain situation, etc...

I don't know what this might mean but that's exactly what I do after attending a social gathering. Actually, almost every contact I make with a human being goes thru that kind of introspection. Maybe it is really a matter of weak , in my case my PoLR.

[FDG]

Adaptabile Development: They are born usually somewhat shy, but not too shy and manage to converse well even at early ages. When they age, they don't become overly extraverted, however they learn to rid themselves of shyness and alleviate fear that other types tend to have:

Examples: ESTJ, ENTJ

I have actually become more introverted, socially, with aging!

[Eidos]

This is interesting. I'll give this a shot. Some attempted definitions of extraverted introverts and introverted extraverts...

Gregarious introverts: Love parties and hanging out with people. Sounds extraverted? It isn't really. They'll usually talk to a limited number of people, or they'll hang out with their closest friend(s). They don't really interact with the whole group. And they'll often focus on doing stuff like playing a game, dancing, building the fire for a BBQ... which takes off the "social pressure" a bit. Are often content to just watch the action. If life were a band, they'd be the drummers and bass players.

Reserved extraverts: Love parties and hanging out with people, but for them the experience is so intense that they need time alone afterwards: not in order to regain energy (as an introvert would), but to process their thoughts. Some focus so intensely on people and interactions etc. that they later have to spend some time to get into their own skin again, to "feel themselves" and re-focus on their own view of the world. Plus, while they're with people they're aware of so much information that they later need some time to process it all.

Not-all-that-gregarious extraverts: Focus on the external world and take their energy from it. Classical extraversion. But "external world" does not equal "social interactions". People stuff is exhausting to them, perhaps even pointless. What they focus on could be stuff like organizing a project or discovering new stuff (cities, cars, museums, machines...). When with people, they'll prefer talking about matter-of-fact topics (modern art, or new cars, or the latest project they're doing, or politics, or the news), and they'll try and keep the discussion as matter-of-fact and as un-subjective as they can.

That's all I can think of for now. Perhaps there are more.

A good definition for myself would be:

Big Talk Extraverts: Love hanging around with people, but can't stand the small talk. They want to be able to get to bigger and better things in conversations. Highly enthusiastic, energetic and very talkative, they love a good debate or argument where they can share their ideas. They prefer talking about matter-of-fact topics (modern art, or new cars, or the latest project they're doing, or politics, or the news). Usually experience teaches these extraverts that too much Big Talk upsets people. As such, they learn to remain more reserved in conversations, especially in group settings. These people may have periods of introversion if they fail to find adequate stimulation for too long.

[implied]

[Creepy-]

People Extraverts:

These types are usually born very extraverted and are rarely shy. They can easily communicate with other people and enjoy doing so. They unlike other types aren't necessarilly fueled by extraverted activities, but simply by people

Examples: ESFJ, ENFJ

I wouldn't say they are rarely shy, but even the shy ones do seem rather more communicable than most other types. Their nervous energy seems to be manifested in cheerfulness so maybe they don't look shy until you look closer?

Outgoing Introvert: These types tend to usually be shy around people, though they do not seek independence. They seek to meet new people and be around them, however extraverted activities do not interest them

Examples: ISFP, INFP, ISFJ, INFJ

I don't think so... I don't talk to anyone I don't know very well IRL unless they talk to me (because I am not interested in making friends etc.), and it takes me a very long time to get used to people so I don't willingly subject myself to this unless they seem extremely special. It's draining and stressful (and I get annoyed at myself because I'm too cheerful when I'm stressed). I'd rather watch from a distance.

[Functianalyst]

Not-all-that-gregarious extraverts: Focus on the external world and take their energy from it. Classical extraversion. But "external world" does not equal "social interactions". People stuff is exhausting to them, perhaps even pointless. What they focus on could be stuff like organizing a project or discovering new stuff (cities, cars, museums, machines...). When with people, they'll prefer talking about matter-of-fact topics (modern art, or new cars, or the latest project they're doing, or politics, or the news), and they'll try and keep the discussion as matter-of-fact and as un-subjective as they can.

Mixed Development: These types tend be very shy due to not being part of the norm. They are usually seen as strange around most people and are usually mistaken for being shy. This results in a development of fear. However, once they learn to accept their weaknesses and embrace their strengths, they adapt to become much more extraverted.

Examples: ENFP, ENTP

Schrödinger's is a definite, but Y&C's example here also resonates with me in a haunting way.

[FDG]

This is interesting. I'll give this a shot. Some attempted definitions of extraverted introverts and introverted extraverts...

Gregarious introverts: Love parties and hanging out with people. Sounds extraverted? It isn't really. They'll usually talk to a limited number of people, or they'll hang out with their closest friend(s). They don't really interact with the whole group. And they'll often focus on doing stuff like playing a game, dancing, building the fire for a BBQ... which takes off the "social pressure" a bit. Are often content to just watch the action. If life were a band, they'd be the drummers and bass players.

Reserved extraverts: Love parties and hanging out with people, but for them the experience is so intense that they need time alone afterwards: not in order to regain energy (as an introvert would), but to process their thoughts. Some focus so intensely on people and interactions etc. that they later have to spend some time to get into their own skin again, to "feel themselves" and re-focus on their own view of the world. Plus, while they're with people they're aware of so much information that they later need some time to process it all.

Not-all-that-gregarious extraverts: Focus on the external world and take their energy from it. Classical extraversion. But "external world" does not equal "social interactions". People stuff is exhausting to them, perhaps even pointless. What they focus on could be stuff like organizing a project or discovering new stuff (cities, cars, museums, machines...). When with people, they'll prefer talking about matter-of-fact topics (modern art, or new cars, or the latest project they're doing, or politics, or the news), and they'll try and keep the discussion as matter-of-fact and as un-subjective as they can.

That's all I can think of for now. Perhaps there are more.

A good definition for myself would be:

Big Talk Extraverts: Love hanging around with people, but can't stand the small talk. They want to be able to get to bigger and better things in conversations. Highly enthusiastic, energetic and very talkative, they love a good debate or argument where they can share their ideas. They prefer talking about matter-of-fact topics (modern art, or new cars, or the latest project they're doing, or politics, or the news). Usually experience teaches these extraverts that too much Big Talk upsets people. As such, they learn to remain more reserved in conversations, especially in group settings. These people may have periods of introversion if they fail to find adequate stimulation for too long.

This is good stuff. I agree profusely.