For fuck's sake SOMEONE wrote something specific.
Thank you kind sir. I'll take note of your words as I continue my research.

Quote Originally Posted by Fragment View Post
There isn't always a good correspondence between descriptions and functions largely because both (but more of the former) are interpreted differently. In MBTI terms, INTPs likely would correlate to INTj in socionics, based on much of their descriptions. INTps are moodier and more prone to bouts of 'laziness' and inactivity than INTjs, which goes against the "J-like" mantra in the MBTI sphere.

Likewise, INFPs are seen as flakier than INFJs in MBTI; however, in socionics, INFjs are noted to be more active.
All I saw was calm and diligent. Not much activity. That is still said about the IEI instead.

-Different function definitions (especially w/ Se/Si)
Please explain.

-PoLR vs. Inferior Functions in MBTI
Yes?

-J/j P/p, both pairs that identify qualities and impart their own explanations of manifestations (attributes) of each differently.
Explain this especially.

leading most INTJs to believe that it's their introversion that's responsible for the gap in the potency of their Te function.
No, this is a common misconception. Te second function is not about potentcy, but about focus and prefference.
It's not your second function because you'll less able to use it, but because you'll be more likely to use Ni to generate bottom line principles and insights before using Te to collect data and back up your shit.
Te can be just as strong in INTJ and ENTJ.

In socionics, this is different. Each type uses Te towards different ends, effectively creating "versions" of the employed functions.
Same thing is noted in MBTI, only more indirectly and more imprecisely.

I'd say conversion is not easy, overall. It is not uncommon for people to say that they had to unlearn one to learn the other. It is also not uncommon to see people who denounce MBTI conversions of their type, often stating that they do not relate to their MBTI "equivalent"
I do relate to a lot of EII description as well as IEI, but the functions (as well as Reinin dychotomies) make it, or break it for me, because I see them both as the only stable part in a bunch of generalizations, both MBTI and Socionics-wise. (Even if the function descriptions are different, I still know I'm a socionics Ni dominant, Fe creative, just like I use NiFe as MBTI INFJ.)

This is not the issue with socionics, but MBTI it seems. MBTI is so watered down and messed with, descriptions are being ruined and we end up with improper behavior-function relations, so function based typing (MBTI) is a huge gap away from a very specific description based typing, with function definition, alone in and of itself, taking second place (socionics).