Quote Originally Posted by chemical View Post
Let me put it this way: the commonality between socionics and MBTI holds most if you just take "functions" without function-attitudes in both.
The focuses in the IE/function-attitudes/whatever you want to call them have some legitimate differences.

But the spirit of logic/ethics and sensation/intuition seems to be quite similar to MBTI's version.

If one views the function-attitudes less as independent mental processes and more as just the combination of 2 independent scales as Jung did, e.g. viewing introverted thinking types as thinking types with a penchant for introversion, then this question doesn't arise.
But if one purports to select the most fundamental information the extraversion of a process tells you, and call that an IE of its own right (i.e. for example algorithmic/pragmatic logic and Te), all of a sudden you've introduced a lot more specificity and the potential for another system to approach the subject with another focus.
Why do you think it introduces more specificity? Not debating this statement but want you to elaborate on it.