aka Feathers, Penny Dreadful
I'm trying to make this not sound like a dating site profile
...But by the end of the post, I'll surely fail.
Greetings everyone. I've been an occasional stalker on this forum and finally decided to make an account.
I suck at making introductory stuff about myself so I'll just lay down a few facts about myself.
I am an INFP in the MBTI system, sociotype is unclear (inbetween IEI and EII), enneagram is 4w5 and the tritype is 4w5, 6w7 or 7w6, 9w1.
A few of my favourite topics of discussion involve art, music (I'm a Supermassive Muse Fan and an avid follower of all things Regina Spektor, Radiohead, Tori Amos, Florence and the Machine, PJ Harvey and MANY, many more.), theories and character development/motives from television (As you might have guessed, Penny Dreadful is one of my all time favourites, followed by things such as Pushing Daisies, Dead Like Me, Grimm; I generally have a taste for shows and films that blend the modern age with fantasy), and a lot of other things really.
I suppose that's it for now. I will let things unveil as my presence on here increases. Looking forward to meeting you all : )
> I am an INFP in the MBTI system
INFP in MBT is IEI/INFP in Socionics
aka Feathers, Penny Dreadful
I am fully aware, but i had people tell me that being a certain MBTI/Socionics type doesn't automatically make you the counterpart of that type in the other system.
Originally Posted by Sol
Those people are wrong. MBT and Socionics use same Jung's types.
Originally Posted by Penny Dreadful
The problem is how MBT have changed Jung's functional model of introverted types. But as they use MBTI as main typing way this problem is much reduced. Also formally, MBT says only dichotomies in types names (4 letters are just 4 dichotomies), while those dichotomies are same like used in Socionics, - they have compatible and mostly identical direct descriptions. Jung himself used terms as judging/perceiving as synonyms for rational/irrational types in his "Psychological Types" book.
The type may be incorrectly identified by MBT typers. But when the type said by dichotomies (like INFP) is correct - there is nothing to change. INFP = IEI or introverted, intuitive, feeling, perceiving/irrational.
Hello, @Penny Dreadful I like your username <3
look, J or P in MBTI roughly corresponds to rationality/irrationality. So INFP in MBTI tends to mean IEI. But there's also the possibility MBTI is all fucked up or you're just confused. I'd recommend just learning socionics and start fresh. Even pro socionists are all over the place in regard to MBTI-socionics transitions and its definitely not 1:1. You have ENTJ correlating with SLE, INTJ correlating with LIE, etc. its all over the place
not roughly, but completely identical descriptions of this dichotomy
Originally Posted by Bertrand
> Even pro socionists are all over the place in regard to MBTI-socionics transitions and its definitely not 1:1.
those "pro" should better know the theory and think. while the only thing which "pro" means in Socionics is taking of money
> You have ENTJ correlating with SLE
There is nothing significant to say about higher than expected _typing_ correlation between people typed as ENTJ and then to SLE.
If in the experiment the correlation was higher than expected for 2 same dichotomies, that probably was due to using of lame types descriptions or other external thing. MBTI types by dichotomies (which are correct there and totally compatible with Socionics/Jung's texts), but not by types descriptions or else.
@Chrysalis, o Penny Feathers, don’t worry about first impressions — I’ll admit that I want to date you, even if you won’t. <3