Can one MBTI INTP be INTj and another INTp in Socionics?

[Hugo]

Can, for example, one INTP (MBTI) be INTp (socionics), and another INTP(MBTI) be INTj (socionics)?

If this is possible, please say why.

[Slava]

Its not possible to be INTP ( ) and INTp ( ) ... But it is possible for the test(s) to be innacurate (or poor self knowlege which is common among INTP/INTj's since they can't see themselves from other perspectives), and give you a one letter error.

[Hugo]

Its not possible to be INTP ( ) and INTp ( ) ... But it is possible for the test(s) to be innacurate (or poor self knowlege which is common among INTP/INTj's since they can't see themselves from other perspectives), and give you a one letter error.

So are you saying that INTP (MBTI) and INTj (Socionics) are identical?

[Creepy-kaido21]

MBTI and Socionics are two totally different theories which just have common in that they both came out form the ideas of Carl Gustav Jung. The similiarities between the Socionics and MBTI come form the loans form the works of Myerss and Briggs which socionists used in their work to build up Socionics as the science. Followers of the Socionics how ever concider the approach of their jobe for Jung better than the MBTI is, what is far more different from Jungs ideas than Socionics ideas are, for example the rationality and irrationality in Socionics are the same as Jung meant, but the original idea of the rationality and irrationality in MBTI has been abbandoned basicly and the artifitial scale of Judging and Percieving was taken to use to make difference between the types differenting only in one scale, such as ENTP and ENTJ. Hope that this made something into more clear.

[Hugo]

Thanks Kaido,

I understand what you have said, but:

Can, for example, one INTP (MBTI) be INTp (socionics), and another INTP(MBTI) be INTj (socionics)?

If this is possible, please say why.

[discourse]

If this is possible, please say why.

Actually I don not know how to answer. But I think that person who has done the MBTI test scoring as INTJ , might come up as INTj in Socionics.

Huh .. if my acting function goes on I sound in my conclusions totally fundamental. Talk about your Creative

[Cone]

Can, for example, one INTP (MBTI) be INTp (socionics), and another INTP(MBTI) be INTj (socionics)?

If this is possible, please say why.

Yes, Hugo, this is very possible. It's all because of Introverted Complexity No. 47, which states that certain introverts focus too much on the outer world of the extraverts, and thus the 'P' or 'J' gets screwed up (I notice that this especially happens for teenagers, and pans out with age.) This explains why I keep coming up as INTP on MBTI tests.


Your INTp friend,

Cone

[Transigent]

Edited for gayness.

[science as magic]

It is possible I was one. I would say it is characteristic of INTJs who are "disordered" for various reasons (usually because they are not receiving or stimulation).

[Slava]

What I don't get is how one test can tell you that you are Ti, Ne and the other that you are Ni, Te ... thats just silly... the models must be the same, the tests aren't. Are we talking about the models or the tests?

[peteronfireee2]

IMO, for a particular subset of true INTP / INTJ are one of those types, that, although they're probably considered one of the more "cerebral" of types, ironically, have *potentially* one of the hardest times typing themselves / others, and they often struggle and go back and forth and have some ambivalent quality to them

EX: Sometimes while testing as LII they are actually ILI. Or vice versa. (another possibility)



With the MBTI/socionics correlation data for example,

A true INTP *should* be a true ILI, but they often for, some reason, *test* as something different, thus the low correlation between MBTI/socionics.

This doesn't necessarily mean introverted types can be xxxP in one system, and xxxJ in another, it's just that in one system they are probably just mistyping themselves (for whatever complicated reasons)