Yeah and that is why typing with type descriptions is wildy inaccurate.
Yeah and that is why typing with type descriptions is wildy inaccurate.
/
My point is that both MBTI and Socionics type descriptions are tough to type with then :wink:
Removed at User Request
Last edited by Pied Piper; 10-24-2010 at 02:56 PM.
Surreal. You seem to actually believe this.- when an Fe type is angry, the easiest way to calm him/her down is pointing out the flawed reasoning, urging him to have an explanation for what he's doing, expose a reasoning for it, which usually fails - verified IRL by me.
In my experience the last thing any person wants when being angry is to also have their logical faculties insulted.
Removed at User Request
Your formulation implies that whenever an Fe type is angry, there is a flaw in their reasoning.
What you and glamourama before quoted seems more of a E > I focus. Case in point:Originally Posted by Pied Piper
That's something like extroverts usually say whenever introverts follow the idea, rather than apply it or move on. It's also one of the more significant differences between ILI and LIE.Overall, I think that most of you have the tendency to overthink, overcomplicate and overdevelop what's simple (...).
I can honestly say I can't think right now of a sentence that would be *less* descriptive of an ILI, especially in comparison to other NT types, than that. Except maybe for "need for closure and organization". Those two could contest for the title.It appears to me clearly from the description that the Scientist's primary interest is to produce knowledge, not some sort of material assets, to "put everything that they encounter into an understandable and rational system". That obviously much more ILI than LIE, a type who's action-oriented.
I'm surprised by the poll results so far.
INTj is more scientist than INTp if you ask me.
INTp is more the philosopher, therefor thinker. Also the Ni subtype description in socionics is called the philosopher.
And the Ne-INTj subtype is called the Researcher.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
Those who voted option #1 are either: a) ignorant, b) stupid, or c) both a and b.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
I see no single reason or know of any evidence that would point to option 2...
There is only one piece of good evidence (Understanding vs Applying Concepts), but it is based on the broken functions, and not off of the types themselves. Every single other piece of information relates Scientist to INTj and Thinker to INTp. They are just clinging to one phrase that "proves" Te vs Ti without looking at the bigger picture, as Pinocchio asks. He didn't even follow his own rules. Typical.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
I also chose option 1. These things like '<scientist>'s tremendous value and need for systems and organization' and 'Consequently, they are quick to express judgments.' among other things pointed out LII for me. And also: 'they may have a tendency to ignore details which are necessary for implementing their ideas' --> LII as-valuing big picture person.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Yes the temperaments match up with Socionics as well. The only part that doesn't is related to the mistake Myers/Briggs made when choosing the functions. It's not even that significant of a distinction, and I'm surprised a lot of INTj's use it to define their personality (as opposed to all the other evidence pointing towards INTJ). When it comes to Understanding and Applying, I'd like to have my cake, and eat it too.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
This topic is full of already existing evidence/claims, if you see none of it I don't know what to say. If you mean you don't think they are reasonable arguments, perhaps you would be better off showing this so we can defend ourselves.
As I said earlier, the thinker has a burning desire to engage in anything 'new', actively seeking out new things, new ideas, new ways of looking at the same thing etc. How exactly you fellows are interpreting those numerous parts of the description as Ni and not Ne is not clear to me. Especially because
Here's a snip from wikisocion describing the Ne in the ILI (I know it's not perfect);
He is clearly not nearly as interested in investigation of new ideas and possibilites as it would seem in the thinker description. Additionally, the scientist description says next to nothing about anything new, unconventional, original etc.
Also; as OP and others in the topic suggested, do not use one-two sentences to prove your point. If you're going to make a claim, take into account the entire description and not just a small part of it that fits your position.
This website, The Personality Page, says INTPs best match is ENTJ. Introverted thinking is supposed to complement Extroverted thinking. People I've talked with, and various MBTI websites, say that Ns do the best together, and Ss do the best together. This site also runs on the F-T contrast basis, so the thinking Ni type INTJ, goes best with the thinking Ne type ENTP.
Any thoughts? I guess Socionics is just different, but you would think your dual would also be N if you're N. For instance, if you're an intuitive type and INFp, your best match is an intuitive ESTp. Ns being rarer. So there are probably a bunch of S types who are Ns in Socionics. Likewise, I presume there are plenty of people into Socionics who look at N descriptions first and never get around to wanting to identify with S ones.
Also descriptions partly aside, I've found that many INTPs and INTJs get along fairly well with one another. I have a good INTJ friend, and we have good relations--she's probably an Alpha SF. She fits the Scientist description the best, but is lower on T. I'd think that a number of INTJs might not be Alpha NT but doesn't make them Gamma.
Too be honest I see the scientist as closest to LIE. I don't think LII is bad either, but there were certain traits that are more applicable to ILI (or gamma NT) that I gave more weight to.
The thinker clearly seemed like LII to me.
The names are obviously irrelevant.
Removed at User Request
I already showed you three examples of phrases within the description that only match with INTp and not INTj. There are many more.
Go to both descriptions and search for the word Strateg. You should find
FIVE in the Scientist A description (strategic, strategists, strategy, strategic planning, strategy)
ZERO in the Thinker B description (nothing)
Now look at a page about Reinin's Dichotomies: Tactical and strategic - Wikisocion
Let's find out which between INTj and INTp are Strategical types, so we can end this mess.
# The tactical IM types are : ILE, ESE, LSI, IEI, ILI, ESI, LSE, and IEE.
# The strategical IM types are : SEI, LII, EIE, SLE, SEE, LIE, EII, and SLI.
That is curious. So let's put the results side by side:
The Scientist is a Strategical Type.
LII is a Strategical Type.
ILI is not a Strategical Type.
Please tell me I concentrated on a vague one word description. When you do, make sure to mention it was stated FIVE times.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
Removed at User Request
Removed at User Request
They could've put the words "Understanding" and "Applying" and gotten the same point across, since they mean the exact same thing. It's mistaken, however since it came from MBTI functions and not observations on people.
Nothing on the website is based on the observations of people as can be seen with INTP's best match is ENTJ's because Introverted Thinking/ Extroverted Thinking complement. They made up a theoretical match and ran with it. The same pattern holds true for the other types.
Half of both descriptions are based on dichotomies (and are correct), and half are based on functions (which causes confusion for introverts). Seeing the bigger picture would take into account descriptions of Temperament, something you are oh so ready to shove to the side. Look at the ISTP descrip. and tell me it doesn't throw some Se in there? Does that mean ALL of the J/P switch is correct, or just INTP/INTJ? How much vital information are you willing to ignore?
Non Applicable. I chose the Correct option. Guaranteed.
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
Removed at User Request
That one is LIE, but also maybe even SLE. Forcefulness is overemphasized for an LIE, but otherwise pretty fitting.
That page brought back some nostalgia. First MBTI descriptions I saved as a resource.
I agree that it isn't a good description of LIE just like I don't think it's good description of ILI or LII. It's just that the description emphasizes action and rigidity in way that seems EJ > IP. I didn't really think of the systematization part as relevant to ILI, but I suppose that seems likely.One great difference between ILI and LIE is that while the former's global purpose is to rather systematize understanding for practical usage, the latter is a doer, who rather *acts* and *uses*. That does not mean that the ILI is an exclusively theoretical person, he's rather a planner, he puts everything down ready to use, I was told for two times in my life, by two different ILIs exactly these words: "don't reinvent the wheel". I never heard LIEs saying such thing, why? Because they're not interested in the subject, they use only only what works and the rest is a waste of time and probably interesting in one's free time.
Ignoring one type if information is not the same thing with correcting it, and yes, the real-life events are supported by the Model:
- LIE: Ti-Ignoring, in relationship with the abusive Te-Base and the mild Fe-Role
- ILI: Ti-Demonstrative, in relationship with the urgent Te-Creative and the severe Fe-PoLR.
huh? LIE is a clear business type.
if I could choose out of all types ILE is closest to scientist.
This is why she invented Socionics, because MBTI doesn't work with relationships. Why in MBTI forums one person says I'm best friends with an INTJ, and another INTJ says I don't like her, etc. So how's it going to help by caring about MBTI? This whole thread is not even much of a Socionics model A discussion.
Look we already have a near split vote on this poll. Everyone who voted is an idiot.
1) INTj is a more popular type on a Socionics forum. Also a more popular type on an MBTI forum.
2) INTJ is a rarer type than INTP.
So basically now we have people thinking there's actually a stronger correlation between INTj and INTP than there is INTp and INTP, or INTj and INTJ. Wrong.
Sums up this thread quite nicely.
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(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 DarkAngelFireWolf69, Dmitri Lytov
Are scientists not thinkers? Are thinkers not scientists? I suggest different words to differentiate.
How about
INTj - Primarily a builder of systems.
INTp - Primarily a long-term implementor of systems.
Edit: Btw, I couldn't becide between the two, so I didn't just skim over and ignore it. The descriptions were much too specific for having to apply only two categories to a broad range of information to consider about people.
Hmm, I'd say:
INTj - System's analyst
INTp - Sytem's builder
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
If I have to choose, it is the scientist as ILI and the thinker as LII. The scientist description seems like it mixes LIE, ILI, and LII and the thinker seems to mix LII and ILI. This makes the argument in this thread kind of pointless to me.
“No psychologist should pretend to understand what he does not understand... Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand nothing.” -Anton Chekhov
http://kevan.org/johari?name=Bardia0
http://kevan.org/nohari?name=Bardia0
It now seems I completely missed the real question of this thread. hehehe.
I thought the question was in general, what one would consider a scientist and what a thinker. But it seems I have to match them with those shitty descriptions. Oke then option 2.
I'm ILI and a thinker...
As I said, it's possible to be one and the other. MBTI types are not intrinsically linked to any one Socionics type, its equivalent or otherwise.
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 DarkAngelFireWolf69, Dmitri Lytov
And why would you say that?
*Genuinely curious*
And as I said both descriptions contain some elements of an ILI and neither is truly solely a description of an ILI. Also, your type at this point is a matter of debate.
“No psychologist should pretend to understand what he does not understand... Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand nothing.” -Anton Chekhov
http://kevan.org/johari?name=Bardia0
http://kevan.org/nohari?name=Bardia0
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote