citting small parts of two descriptions and saying that they comefrom two specifc types and asking people to guess them does not prove that socionics and mbti do not differ much. it only proves youre an idiot for thinking so.Originally Posted by Jarno
This is the absolute truth. The fact that an MBTI expert (like myself) can still identify obvious differences makes him look even worse.
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,
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
First of all it proves that they are different types as opposed to the claims in another thread. Secondly it contains IM elements, which is rather impressive considering it was written by an MBTI person without knowledge of socionics. Thirdly, it shows that these MBTI type descriptions don't really deviate a lot from socionics ones.This is the absolute truth. The fact that an MBTI expert (like myself) can still identify obvious differences makes him look even worse.
Ps even when you're an expert in mbti, but you should also become an expert in socionics. Only then can you see that the mbti functions are flawed and the reason for all the misunderstanding. You can verify that socionics functions are the correct ones by experiencing relationships. I cannot consider you an expert when you still haven't figured that one out '-)
I never claimed ESFj to be the same type as ENFP, I claimed it to be a type based on a different system, so they could match. It's impossible to be an ESFJ ENFP or an ESFj ENFp, but it is perfectly possible to be an ESFj ENFP.
I quoted from Wikisocion.Secondly it contains IM elements, which is rather impressive considering it was written by an MBTI person without knowledge of socionics.
So? Descriptions are at very best secondary, in both systems.Thirdly, it shows that these MBTI type descriptions don't really deviate a lot from socionics ones.
Ps even when you're an expert in mbti, but you should also become an expert in socionics. Only then can you see that the mbti functions are flawed and the reason for all the misunderstanding. You can verify that socionics functions are the correct ones by experiencing relationships. I cannot consider you an expert when you still haven't figured that one out '-)
I'm gonna quote myself because I can't be fucked to repeat my argument. mmkay?
What do these signs mean—
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Why should something be tangible, if it can be experienced. That's the whole idea behind a relationship.
from a person who calls himself Ilikesex, I will take this opinion very seriously :-)
You are only giving a statement, without arguments, therefor quite useless. But since you want it this way. I think you are idiot times two. See? Now I win.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote