The problem is more than labeling. If you treat an Extravert's inferior the same an an Introvert's inferior than you disregard the differences between them seen from a Socionics perspective.Originally Posted by Aleksei
The problem is more than labeling. If you treat an Extravert's inferior the same an an Introvert's inferior than you disregard the differences between them seen from a Socionics perspective.
I see no problem with that. Introversion and extroversion are treated in a somewhat different manner in MBTI than they are in Socionics anyway.
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
You still are not following my point.. I wonder if this is Te vs Ti related...
1.) MBTI interpretors treat introverts's inferiors the same as extravert's inferiors
2.) Therefore the differences between the 5th function/DS and 4th function/PoLR are ignored
3.) Theories created referring to the inferior function of MBTI types do not recognize that extraverts thrive off their inferior(DS) whereas introverts suffer from it(PoLR)
4.)Therefore theories are not accurate due to meshing of functions.
My point is that you can use MBTI types, but not MBTI function ordering, because if you agree with Socionics then you have to agree that MBTI has it wrong. This is the reason why there is still so much confusion today because of how MBTI determines types and how Socionics determines types.
If you agree that INFP is FiNeSiTe then you agree DS = PoLR.
You seem to be operating under the assumption that the types are the same and the elements are the same, therefore that the difference in projected functions is due to something being wrong with one of the systems. The problem with your conclusion, however, is that its initial assumptions are wrong. The MBTI functions are described in a different manner from Socionics elements, and as MBTI types are constructed from MBTI functions (as opposed to Socionics elements), then there's no reason it would be necessary to establish a connection. Essentially what I'm saying is that you're wrong because INTP =/= ILI, and ESFJ =/= ESE.
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
I understand that the "blocks" used to build the types are different, but to claim that there is no correlation at all is unreasonable.
There is some, but it's like the correlation between Socionics and Enneagram: Not direct. Despite being based on the same guy's ideas, the two systems are built on different foundations, and thus you can't reasonably expect them to be tied at the hip.
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
*sigh* This invalidates all of my reasoning...
I still think that there is a bridge and the problem is perspective, but yes the only way my arguments hold up is if you claim the systems equal each other. Which is not true.
But what, then, do you say about your test results when it gives you an explanation that contradicts your understanding which encompasses the test's conceptions? That you gave false answers? That the questions were ambiguous? That the test is inaccurate? Or that the theory is flawed? Maybe you can say "this is accurate within the confines of the theory", but then that is circular logic and doesn't really have any bearing externally. To put it another way: either MBTI and Socionics correlate or they do not correlate and one is inaccurate or both are inaccurate.
Cognitive Process Level of Development (Preference, Skill and Frequency of Use)
extraverted Sensing (Se) **************************************** (40.4)
excellent use
introverted Sensing (Si) *************************************** (39.4)
excellent use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) ************************** (26.1)
average use
introverted Intuiting (Ni) ************** (14.9)
unused
extraverted Thinking (Te) *********************************** (35.3)
good use
introverted Thinking (Ti) ******************************** (32.2)
good use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) *********************** (23)
limited use
introverted Feeling (Fi) ***************************** (29.3)
average use
Summary Analysis of Profile
By focusing on the strongest configuration of cognitive processes, your pattern of responses most closely matches individuals of this type: ESTJ
Lead (Dominant) Process
Extraverted Thinking (Te): Measuring and constructing for progress. Making decisions objectively based on evidence and measures. Checking if things function properly. Applying a procedure to control events and complete goals.
Support (Auxilliary) Process
Introverted Sensing (Si): Stabilizing with a predictable standard. Carefully comparing a situation to the customary ways you’ve come to rely on. Checking with past experiences. Stabilizing a situation and invest for future security.
If these cognitive processes don't fit well then consider these types: ISTJ, or ESTP
Cognitive Process Level of Development (Preference, Skill and Frequency of Use)
extraverted Sensing (Se) ********************** (22.8)
limited use
introverted Sensing (Si) ****************************** (30.9)
good use
extraverted Intuiting (Ne) ******************************************** (44.1)
excellent use
introverted Intuiting (Ni) ******************************** (32.8)
good use
extraverted Thinking (Te) ********************* (21.7)
limited use
introverted Thinking (Ti) ********************** (22.8)
limited use
extraverted Feeling (Fe) ************************ (24)
limited use
introverted Feeling (Fi) **************************************** (40.1)
excellent use
Summary Analysis of Profile
By focusing on the strongest configuration of cognitive processes, your pattern of responses most closely matches individuals of this type: INFP
Lead (Dominant) Process
Introverted Feeling (Fi): Staying true to who you really are. Paying close attention to your personal identity, values and beliefs. Checking with your conscience. Choosing behavior congruent with what is important to you.
Support (Auxilliary) Process
Extraverted Intuiting (Ne): Exploring the emerging patterns. Wondering about patterns of interaction across various situations. Checking what hypotheses and meanings fit best. Trusting what emerges as you shift a situation’s dynamics.
If these cognitive processes don't fit well then consider these types: ENFP, or INTP
The Four Temperaments
Corresponding best-fit temperaments based on your profile: Catalyst; secondly Theorist; then Improviser; and lastly, Stabilizer.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote