New test - Does it work for you?

[Hugo]

PART A - Which one describes you the best?
A
I have the ability to create a system of ranking and organising things – I enjoy helping people with this. I am attracted to people that can raise my mood. I try to keep in a good mood, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited. (If you choose this option, go to PART B)

B
I have the ability to make, maintain and strengthen relationships with others – I enjoy helping people with this. I am attracted to people that manage resources efficiently and rationally. I try to manage resources efficiently and rationally, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited. (If you choose this option, go to PART B)

C
I have the ability to manage resources efficiently and rationally – I enjoy helping people with this. I am attracted to people that make, maintain and strengthen relationships with others. I try to make, maintain and strengthen relationships with others, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited. (If you choose this option, go to PART C)

D
I have the ability to raise the mood of others – I enjoy helping people with this. I am attracted to people that can create a system of ranking and organising things. I try to create a system of ranking and organising things, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited. (If you choose this option, go to PART C)

PART B - Which one describes you the best?
E
I am creative and inventive and have the ability to identify the “hidden” abilities of people – I enjoy helping people with these. I am attracted to people that look after my health. I try to keep in good health, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited.

F
I am a bold person – I enjoy using my boldness to help people. I am attracted to people with a strong imagination and the ability to predict the future. I try to use my imagination and to forecast/predict the future, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited.

PART C - Which one describes you the best?
G
I have a strong imagination and the ability to predict the future – I enjoy helping people with these. I am attracted to bold people. I try to show boldness, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited.

H
I have the ability to look after the health of others – I enjoy helping people with this. I am attracted to people that are creative and inventive and that can identify my “hidden” abilities. I try to be creative and inventive and try to identify my “hidden” abilities, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANSWERS
AE = Alpha NT
DH = Alpha SF
DG = Beta NF
AF = Beta ST
CG = Gamma NT
BF = Gamma SF
BE = Delta NF
CH = Delta ST

[Slacker]

I didn't like any of the first set of choices particularly, but neither B or D were too bad. I liked E but didn't like either of the Part C choices.

[aestrivex]

i hate option A.

thus, this test gives me gamma NT.

[Hugo]

I didn't like any of the first set of choices particularly, but neither B or D were too bad. I liked E but didn't like either of the Part C choices.

So it seems that overall you would choose B+E, which would give you Delta NF.

[Hugo]

i hate option A.

thus, this test gives me gamma NT.

This is a good indication that you are not Alpha NT.

[XoX]

Gamma NT, Alpha NT or Beta ST. I guess it works if I'm one of those

[aestrivex]

i hate option A.

thus, this test gives me gamma NT.

This is a good indication that you are not Alpha NT.

not at all. i don't think this test is quite as bad as some of the previous tests you've made, but i wouldn't trust it.

i also think option C could apply well to any logical type.

[Hugo]

i also think option C could apply well to any logical type.

If you hate A then you are not Alpha NT, so it did work for you. In additon an Alpha NT would choose A over C.

[Hugo]

Gamma NT, Alpha NT or Beta ST. I guess it works if I'm one of those

[aestrivex]

simply not true. tests are not infallible.

[Hugo]

tests are not infallible.

Socionics is not infallible either - people tend to forget this. Socionics is a theory, not fact.

[aestrivex]

true, but i fail to see how that is relevant.

[Hugo]

true, but i fail to see how that is relevant.

It's relevant because, just as a person can say socionics is falliable, the same thing can be said about tests. They are both theoretical.

[aestrivex]

no, it is a completely irrelevant comparison. whether or not socionics is correct or consistent is an entirely different debate.

there are two possibilities: either socionics is consistent or inconsistent. if it is inconsistent then typing is pointless because the theory means nothing. therefore, in order for types to have any meaning, (or, more specifically, for this test to mean something), socionics must be correct, or at least partially correct. that assumption must be made for this test to have meaning.

if socionics is correct, than this test can either be accurate or inaccurate. however, it is impossible that this test have meaning if socionics is inaccurate, which is what you seem to be trying to suggest.

[Phaedrus]

Why do you hate option A, niffweed17?

I chose AE, which means that it is probably something wrong with the test. The first part of option A should be Gamma NT.

Read Stratiyevskaya's INTp description. Maybe you have the wrong picture of INTps, Hugo.

[aestrivex]

the first part of A is fine. i hate the second part about being attracted to people raising my mood.

[snegledmaca]

DG beta NF

[Raver]

I just accepted whatever sounded like Ne, Fi, Te and Si and I got Delta NF. I wanted Delta NF and my wish was granted. :wink:

[Phaedrus]

the first part of A is fine. i hate the second part about being attracted to people raising my mood.

Ok. I'm not sure I particularly like that either, but the other alternatives were worse.

Have you read Stratiyevskaya's INTp and INTj descriptions? If we ever are going to solve this problem with the different views on those two types, I believe it is necessary to read them. Everyone who has an opinion on this should do it, hopefully without prejudices. Only after that we could try to reach some kind of consensus.

[Slacker]

OK so here's what I don't like about option B

B
I have the ability to maintain stable relationships with others – I enjoy helping people with this. I am attracted to people can use financial resources rationally and economically. I try to use financial resources rationally and economically, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited. (If you choose this option, go to PART B)

I'd rather it said that I have the ability to make and maintain relationships or something. Or strengthen relationships. I don't know but "maintain stable relationships" sounds flatter than the reality of it feels to me.

And the second part is the part I really don't like. It isn't about financial resources, it's about stability and sensibility. The financial thing is a part of that, but overall sensibility is bigger than $$$. This makes us sound shallow and like gold-diggers and it rubs me the wrong way and makes me want to pick something else just because of that.

[pesto]

Yup, it worked, but I agree with Slacker Mom on the objections to B.

[Hugo]

OK so here's what I don't like about option B

B
I have the ability to maintain stable relationships with others – I enjoy helping people with this. I am attracted to people can use financial resources rationally and economically. I try to use financial resources rationally and economically, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited. (If you choose this option, go to PART B)

I'd rather it said that I have the ability to make and maintain relationships or something. Or strengthen relationships. I don't know but "maintain stable relationships" sounds flatter than the reality of it feels to me.

And the second part is the part I really don't like. It isn't about financial resources, it's about stability and sensibility. The financial thing is a part of that, but overall sensibility is bigger than $$$. This makes us sound shallow and like gold-diggers and it rubs me the wrong way and makes me want to pick something else just because of that.

I agree with the stuff you said about relationships (and I will edit that part), but the stuff about sensibility is not specifically Te related. the Te aspect of the description basically says you try to spend your money wisely - nothing to do with "gold digging".

[snegledmaca]

I'd rather it said that I have the ability to make and maintain relationships or something. Or strengthen relationships. I don't know but "maintain stable relationships" sounds flatter than the reality of it feels to me.

Maintaining "stable" relationships sound like something I would never, ever want to do or help others with.
Perhaps he was thinking more on the lines of differences between categories and not emphasizing individuals.

[Raver]

Hugo, I think you should be more creative with the test writing and think of a new way to type people that doesn't get interfered by their knowledge of socionics. Mcnew attempted to do this and it is a difficult process, but worth it in my opinion.

[Hugo]

To Slacker Mom,

I edited the description:

B
I have the ability to make, maintain and strengthen relationships with others – I enjoy helping people with this. I am attracted to people that rationally use resources. I try to rationally use my resources, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited.

[Sarah]

CG - gamma NT.

I agree that the wording is not ideal in these descriptions. Especially the financial distinction made for Te. In (C) for instance, I think it would already be better if you took out the word financial and changed it to "managing resources efficiently and rationally," or something similar.

[Hugo]

Thanks Sarah,

I made the following changes:

C
I have the ability to manage resources efficiently and rationally – I enjoy helping people with doing this. I am attracted to people that make, maintain and strengthen relationships with others. I try to make, maintain and strengthen relationships with others, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited.

[aestrivex]

Have you read Stratiyevskaya's INTp and INTj descriptions? If we ever are going to solve this problem with the different views on those two types, I believe it is necessary to read them. Everyone who has an opinion on this should do it, hopefully without prejudices. Only after that we could try to reach some kind of consensus.

i would love to read those descriptions, but, as with many russian materials, no translation i have found has been sufficiently coherent to adequately decipher it.

[Phaedrus]

i would love to read those descriptions, but, as with many russian materials, no translation i have found has been sufficiently coherent to adequately decipher it.

With some slight effort these should be possible to understand:
http://the16types.no-ip.info/forums/...pic.php?t=2871
http://the16types.no-ip.info/forums/...pic.php?t=3742

Have you relate to my comparison between some parts of those descriptions in the "Balance between subtype" thread?

[Hugo]

no, it is a completely irrelevant comparison. whether or not socionics is correct or consistent is an entirely different debate.

there are two possibilities: either socionics is consistent or inconsistent. if it is inconsistent then typing is pointless because the theory means nothing. therefore, in order for types to have any meaning, (or, more specifically, for this test to mean something), socionics must be correct, or at least partially correct. that assumption must be made for this test to have meaning.

if socionics is correct, than this test can either be accurate or inaccurate. however, it is impossible that this test have meaning if socionics is inaccurate, which is what you seem to be trying to suggest.

People here only assume that socionics is infallible, even though it is not. If we wish, we could assume the same about the tests.

[Slacker]

Hugo - I definitely appreciate the changes, but are you saying Te is just about money?

[Hugo]

Slacker Mom,

I changed the decription again:

B
I have the ability to make, maintain and strengthen relationships with others – I enjoy helping people with this. I am attracted to people that manage resources efficiently and rationally. I try to manage resources efficiently and rationally, but my ability to do this (on my own) is limited.

Tell me what you think?

[Slacker]

OK here's what I'm going for: I don't care how much money a guy has. I just want stability. And not just in regard to money. I want him to behave sensibly in all his life decisions. I wouldn't be happy if I had to worry about get-rich schemes (which is money) or that he'd decide all of a sudden to sell the house and move out into the country. Nothing unexpected and non-sensible. So it is to some extent money.

But I'd rather have only a modest amount of money and be able to count on it then to be rich but have even occasional worries about losing it.

btw I wrote this before I saw your last post.

[Slacker]

Yes I like that better

[Gilly]

I will invariably test ENTp on these.

[snegledmaca]

I will invariably test ENTp on these.

But you don't have to

be wild
go for it
you only live once

DO NOT TEST ENTP!!!

[Gilly]

I will invariably test ENTp on these.

But you don't have to

be wild
go for it
you only live once

DO NOT TEST ENTP!!!

OH YEAH

DG

OWNED

WHAT NOW BITCHES, I BE INFP

[snegledmaca]

be wild
go for it
you only live once

DO NOT TEST ENTP!!!

OH YEAH

DG

OWNED

WHAT NOW BITCHES, I BE INFP

Dude... like TOTALLY

[implied]

CG = Gamma NT

[aestrivex]

People here only assume that socionics is infallible, even though it is not. If we wish, we could assume the same about the tests.

no, wrong. you just don't get it. if socionics is fallible, the tests mean nothing. saying that the tests are reasonable while questioning the validity of socionics is simply wrong.


the very existence of the test assumes that socionics is consistent, or at least mostly correct.