Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
Are those not traits of the typical Socionic LII? We are known for our regimented lifestyles.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
This is quite possible, yeah. I was guiding myself by the Wikisocion definition of Fi as a vulnerable -- which didn't seem to fit me as well as Se as a vulnerable.
So, ILE is a dick about small details but LII prefers to say "fuck it, close enough" basically? I think I do fit LII better than.- Ti Base sees everything sensible and fitting in a system (like an LII we know would say - "neat"). They prefer to keep the system intact and overlook "small details", usually delaying their clarification for a later time. They are confident and relaxed in Logic, can use Fi, which is their Role function.
- Ti Creative dictates that every piece has to be sensible, regardless whether it fits the system (preferable) or not. They don't overlook details and holes, sticking to them how they come. On the other hand they're not continuously interested in everything to be "correct", just in what interferes with their momentary interests.
Hmm... which of the two is more likely (or highly unlikely) to be an Enneagram 3? I'm certainly a 3w2 -- I love to dazzle and impress, and nothing gives me more pleasure than being complimented on a job well done; although I spent a lot of time on my 9 stress point due to my lack of discipline.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
How is he acting like an (MBTI) Irrational? MBTI J/P dichotomy is based on "Making Decisions" vs "Keeping Options Open" (MBTI myers briggs type indicator), and it seems like he made a firm decision at the expense of his options.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
Removed at User Request
Did he change careers or something completely random, or did he just get a new job later?
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
Removed at User Request
Lol don't worry. There's nothing I could find type wise but I'm glad he has a strong sense of dignity.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
That's interesting -- I came up SLE on a refined Socionics test I took (the only one worth shit I've ever seen IMHO), and then changed one question I had doubts about and came up ILE.
An SLE-ILE combination... that would be LIE, no? I've been actually seriously considering LIE as a type.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Based on my overall impression of you thus far, I would say that ILE-Ti makes sense for you. You don't strike me as an SLE.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Not necessarily. Some of them are extremely energetic. E3 is a lot more common for ILE than LII, as well.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
I'm not exactly hyperactive, but I am rather sanguine.
Yeah I think I'll go with ILE-Ti for now.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
In terms of DCNH ILE-Ti would be either D-ILE or N-ILE; C-ILE would be considered ILE-Ne.
Check these provisionals to see which hypothetical DCNH ILE you are closest to:
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p..._ENTp_-_Seeker
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Well LIE sure fits Enne-3w2 better than ILE does I would think. Remember being either C-LIE or D-LIE makes you a "clearly expressed extrovert" meaning most (75%+) people who meet you should be able to tell you are more extroverted than introverted.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
Removed at User Request
Why am I necessarily a Ti type?
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Removed at User Request
Aleksei, which of these descriptions do you relate to the most? (Ignore the physiognomy portions)
ENTp
INTj
or ENTj
If you relate to the ENTj the most, and you relate strongly to the provisional subtype description, you are probably that subtype as well. But if you relate to INTj or ENTp, then it won't work out.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
I'm back from holiday and I see that aleksei has changed his selftyping?
I thought he was an expert...
So far he's been LII, LIE, and now ILE. Since then he has been sloppily typing characters (With different socionics/MBTI types I might add) to clearly show how much he still needs to learn.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
You're an idiot. That much I know already. Guess there isn't so much I need to learn then...
See, the problem is (confirmed by my last foray into an IM discussion) precisely that the functions have been fleshed out. They're the same at their base, but Socionics functions have enough info on top of their MBTI counterparts to provoke ambiguities. Se for example, has some elements that have traditionally been ascribed to Te, as exemplified by Labcoat's post:
This has nothing to do with how Se is defined in MBTI (and is in fact anathema to the values of most MBTI SPs). Ergo, one cannot interpret that as Se in MBTI unless one uses Socionics functions to type in MBTI -- which would be thoroughly pointless, as then MBTI is just Socionics by another name. Ergo, most Se types in Socionics are not Se types in MBTI. QED.
So in other words, call MBTI primitive or whatever, I don't care. But don't insist that MBTI types necessarily have to align with Socionics types, because it just makes you look dumb.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
That's because every single one of the functions defined in MBTI are wrong. It is only the general type descriptions in MBTI that are useful. The general type description of ESTP matches almost flawlessly with the socionic description of SLE.
Now you're catching on! Good for you!
Last edited by Crispy; 08-21-2010 at 02:34 AM.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
See... I don't care. Far as I'm concerned they're all wrong, given that they're all the result of an acidhead INFP's inane, confused and thoroughly unscientific ramblings. The point is that their functions are right for their system and Socionic functions are right for that system. As for the descriptions, they actually fall short of describing the actual behavior of many people of the given types, and with good reason because Jungian typology is based on cognition, not behavior.
I'm going to ignore this because it's the height of idiocy. There's, erm, no point to the existence of two different typology systems that are the exact same.
And I'd like to see you try to tell my ESTP SLI friend she's not ESTP.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
1. Jung is not INFP.
2. LSD is not nearly as bad as what authority figures have brain washed you into thinking it is.
3. If this is your view of MBTI/Socionics, I can't imagine a single reason you would continue coming here. Are you trying to learn about something that you believe is not true?
There is if one had functional descriptions that are BROKEN for 8 of the 16 types. Augusta realized this, patched it up, and presented the evolution of MBTI: Socionics. They describe the same types.
Taking into account your socionics fluency, I'd sooner tell you she was SLE.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
He is, officially, by MBTI standards. :wink:
Of course it isn't, but it does make one have weird visions, which an Fi type could then think of making into some stupid convoluted system like this.2. LSD is not nearly as bad as what authority figures have brain washed you into thinking it is.
Well, they're fun theories to explore, and do work quite well as a rough analytical tools. There isn't an Si or Te part of the brain though.3. If this is your view of MBTI/Socionics, I can't imagine a single reason you would continue coming here. Are you trying to learn about something that you believe is not true?
One- That, then, means the vast majority of people typed SP in MBTI are mistyped, given that the kind of drive and forcefulness associated with Se is notoriously absent in that temperament.There is if one had functional descriptions that are BROKEN for 8 of the 16 types. Augusta realized this, patched it up, and presented the evolution of MBTI: Socionics. They describe the same types.
Two- There's nothing to break. MBTI is a psychometric tool. Socionics is a different psychometric tool, one perhaps more refined than MBTI, but still nothing more than a description of a collection of traits that might or might not fit one person.
Dude...Taking into account your socionics fluency, I'd sooner tell you she was SLE.
This is not my friend. Nor does it really describe three quarters of all ENTPs I've met. Either this description is wrong (and so is Labcoat's above -- think hard before answering this), or she is not SLE.SLEs easily spot power dynamics within any given structure, hierarchy or relationship, and strive for a secure position where they are less subordinate to others. At the same time, SLEs are comfortable with hierarchies, and recognize that they are a necessary part of everyday life. SLEs may sometimes seem dismissive of those of a lower social status, as if they were weak or inferior in some way. Likewise, they see dependence as weakness, and so strive to minimize their dependence on others, especially in their personal relationships.
SLEs' energetic and direct nature tends to make them natural leaders. They are quick to assume this role, even in alien or unfamiliar environments. They usually adopt a direct administrative style and build a bureaucratic structure beneath them over time. They will take full responsibility for their actions, and understand these terms when they take a leadership-based role within a group, company or organization as being part of what leadership is about.
Last edited by Aleksei; 08-21-2010 at 03:46 AM.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Using SP and SJ as "Temperaments" is another monstrosity created in the MBTI system. Drive and forcefulness are strewn throughout ESTP and ESFP descriptions. You won't find them in ISTP or ISFP, which is why you won't find them in a description of SP temperament, as it only describes half of them.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
It was actually created by Keirsey (fag), and yes, it is a monstrosity. It's a useful shortcut for Se-using types though.
But not in the way that they are described in the above quote. ESPs hate hierarchy, and usually (but not always) have little desire to lead. ESTPs and ESFPs are usually daredevils. This:Drive and forcefulness are strewn throughout ESTP and ESFP descriptions.
is something that ENTJs and ESTJs do. ESTPs usually don't.SLEs' energetic and direct nature tends to make them natural leaders. They are quick to assume this role, even in alien or unfamiliar environments. They usually adopt a direct administrative style and build a bureaucratic structure beneath them over time.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
I don't. I call them ESTPs dumbass. And they call themselves ESTPs (or the ones that know MBTI do), because they, are, fucking, ESTP.
I tell you, go tell my ESTP friend she's not ESTP (my ESTP friend who's a sociology major and has more knowledge of typology in her pinky than you do in that pin head of yours). Hear her laugh.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Removed at User Request