But are Socionics information elements really dichotomous? Is "Time" (Ni) the complete opposite of "Force" (Se)?
http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...er_dichotomies
NB: Extraverted / Introverted is not the same thing as Extratim / Introtim.
Get out of my ass lol.
What you’re bringing up is irrelevant.
Since you want to talk though... it depends on how you think of dichotomous. Dual IEs are opposites, yet feed one another so they are compatible and don’t snuff each other out in communication with each other (like usually between two separate people communicating stuff). However in theory because they’re opposites they should be mutually exclusive in absolute form but yet related, like yin and yang.
As for same domain or same vertness IEs, I do think they have to have some more overlap, but there’s got to be some distinction between them still anyway.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
Being focused on details (Sensing) is the opposite of being focused on the big picture (Intuition). But how exactly is "Time" the opposite of "Force"?
http://socionics.socionic.info/en/soc_06_6.html (Model T)As for same domain or same vertness IEs, I do think they have to have some more overlap, but there’s got to be some distinction between them still anyway.
"Extraversion and extratimness are disjointed by model and appeared quasi orthogonal properties, the first (for the individual as a whole or his separate functions) corresponds to high thresholds on the exaltation, the second - to low thresholds on inhibition. Extra/intro-version of first two functions coincides with extra/intro-version of the individual, last two - are opposite to him; extra- or introtimness corresponds to standard socionic "color" of functions (black functions are extratimed, that is they have low thresholds of inhibition)."
If I fist your anus slowly enough, you won’t even feel it
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
“But I don't see how Socionics Se ("force") complements Socionics Si.”
if you’re a sensor, you have better strength of both sensing IEs. They must be connected from this.
GTFO noob.
[Today 07:57 AM] Raver: Life is a ride that lasts very long, but still a ride. It is a dream that we have yet to awaken from.
It's hard to find a love through every shade of grey.
You are trapped in MBTI, nobody uses "big picture Vs details", in fact that's a result Vs process dichotomy, and looking at real people that's not quite true at all. SLE are archetyped after the military leaders that definitely knows what general big picture direction to go for and leaves the details unplanned filling in themselves.
Secondly if you are asking why "Time" is the opposite of "force", it's a sign you don't understand "Ne" intellectually and how both LII and ILE like to describe the world and craft their theory. LII for example derive theory from observations and they've noted that INXP types (including INXJ - LII & EII) are detached and indecisive negating the present focusing on the development of an imaginary future ( the future isn't a real place but what is speculated). This is in contrast to the decisive ESXP types (again including ESXJ) that focus on immediate control and subjugation of the world as is.
I am not trapped in MBTI or MBTT, and that is not my view on the functions/dichotomies. I only used "big picture Vs details" as an example of an obvious dichotomy according to most people. Anyway, it is much more obvious than "Time" vs. "Force".
I disagree with you. "Detached from processes and tends to multitasking." and "Focus on the beginning and the end of processes." don't mean being focused on the big picture.in fact that's a result Vs process dichotomy,
I think military leaders often are LIE. But I agree with you as well. There is a big difference between SLI and SLE, so "Extraversion + Sensing = details" is (partially) false.and looking at real people that's not quite true at all. SLE are archetyped after the military leaders that definitely knows what general big picture direction to go for and leaves the details unplanned filling in themselves.
Are you referring to the fact that Gulenko is LII, Yermak is LII, Bukalov is ILE, Aushra was ILE...?Secondly if you are asking why "Time" is the opposite of "force", it's a sign you don't understand "Ne" intellectually
You are still not explaining how "Time" and "Force" are opposite.
That is certainly true for ILI / INTp as well.and how both LII and ILE like to describe the world and craft their theory. LII for example derive theory from observations and they've noted that INXP types (including INXJ - LII & EII) are detached and indecisive negating the present focusing on the development of an imaginary future ( the future isn't a real place but what is speculated).
Last edited by Petter; 06-23-2018 at 09:23 AM.
Yes I'm referring to the fact that those types are observers and they derive their theory from observations on "targets" they've branded as those specific types.
You are asking a moot point that's irrelevant once you understand there's no intrinsic link behind "Time" and "Force" being polar opposites besides the observations derived from people labelled as those target types.
Much of socionics has been derived this way which is why Jung's original abstract conjectures have been simplified to qualitative observations that results in the odd ways IMs are defined in socionics. The idea that extroverted sensing is linked to force, or introverted sensing to comfort has no intrinsic sense when analysing that against structural consistency - if you are cognisant you might begin to realise that "Ni" intellectually is quite abstract, which leads to lead representatives looking for structural integrity and consistency in ideas they look at.
its possible inasmuch as anything said to be objective is possible... if your worldview is founded on the notion that ultimately everything is subjective then "objective" anything is kind of a farce, but if you think of things being more/less objective and objective preference is to simply be on the "more" side as much as possible, but not necessarily absolute, then I think that is the best that can be done. to be sure subjectivity taints absolutely everything but it doesn't override objectivity in principle I don't think, it just means humans aren't perfectly objective even when they value it.. they're sort of strung out like a wire kept taught under tension, in the same way no one can be perfectly subjective either (perfect "freedom" doesn't exist either, i.e.: we are stuck with certain "facts"), you might say this tension is the basis for affording humans "choice": to prefer or operate under one or the other principle with a degree of discretion
You can be entirelly without subjectivity. Aware state, blind to interpretation and ignorning of words and inner monolougue. This is possible, and can be extended into long periods of time. Subjectivity is only possible when you believe yourself to be a subject.
Freedom does exsist you just haven't gone far enough to see it. To many knots, hangups. Mom and Dad being one of them, and the becoming someone. Mental distraction - and the myriad of mental illness, keep you circling around true objectivity. Core beliefs from whenevef and whereever as well as yhe demands of the body are the theif that steals presence and spends it on the erroneous actions and the wheel keeps spinninh.
What exactly are those observations?
My point is that there are no Jungian (or MBTI) dichotomies, i.e. clear opposites. So "False dichotomy" is not a good argument (see previous posts).
But don't we need some kind of dichotomies in order to get the types? No, we need (and we have) 16 distinctly different thinking patterns.
The behaviour - the thinking and at times mannerisms of people attributed to be those "types" (subjectively). "Ethics of emotions" for example is derived from focusing on people skills, charisma, emotions - general expressiveness, emotional influence and manipulation; the different target personalities - behave in context of information targeted as "Emotional Ethics" is what is used in observations to derive IMs and subsequent profiles around it.
MBTI followed a similar scheme when they defined their "cognitive functions" as behaviour profiles, such as that "extroverted feeling" is about being aware of other's emotions, socially appropriate behaviour... (in socionics that's "R" which is why "MBTI-INFJ" is predominantly EII - nevertheless the theories aren't compatible, after some time it just becomes obvious that the overlaps serve to add more confusion to the theories, which is why there is no point in preserving Sergei little j/p notations)
Jung's original work is quite abstract and obtuse that everyone comes out with an idiosyncratic qualitative definition of his work - hence again, it was apparent that Socionics would use those ideas as a springboard to redefined IMs in a manner more practical and qualitative - ie using observations o what they think those target types are.
Yes there are no Jungian "dichotomies" (you are using a subjective definition that may cause confusion); that's because socionics is derived from observations of people presumed to be the target 16 types. Socionics is it's own can of worms with it's own complexities that looking back to Jung or comparing to MBTI doesn't make it lucid.
I saw your previous posts, they are under the assumption that there are clear/objective "16types" that much of the fluff, the extended theories socionics introduces, fails to align with. Whilst your insight is true - it is guised under a misconception that "Socionics" was or is ware of unanimously comprehensible 16 objective types. However this is not the case, examine the qualitative details of socionics and it becomes apparent - socionics is built on these "axioms" of observations and subsequent subjective models about how they chose to define what they think the 16types are.
When the dyads/dichotomies aren't making sense - it means you are operating on a misconception about what the theory is. According to the way the theory has been made to be interpreted it's not an issue.
I'll ditto my point, there are no unanimously objectively defined or understood 16 types of thinking patterns - WHICH ARE EXPLAINED!!! by the high level qualitative description of the IMs or type profiles; unless of course people play mental gymnastics to synthesize everything together ignoring those pesky details and fundamental way the theory has been derived.
The question was whether Socionics "Time" and "Force" are the complete opposite (and/or dichotomous) or not. I don't think they are (nor need to be) the complete opposite nor dichotomous.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers–...or_dichotomies
J/P (mbti) is especially problematic.
I think there are 16 clearly different personality types, and 8 cognitive functions.
------
I don't think "being aware of other's emotions, socially appropriate behaviour" corresponds to R. That is E instead. R is about relationships, and I think socionists got that one right. Relationships are dependent on "sympathy – antipathy, attraction – repulsion, feelings, ability not to offend" (R) much more than "people’s emotions" (E). And no, mbti-INFJ does not correspond to EII. It corresponds to IEI. (A type is defined by the functions.)
------
I agree with you that Jung's work is quite obtuse.
This is very true. I have discussed "the 16 types" with Irina Eglit (SSS), and it is very obvious that her view is completely different from mine. For example, ILI is not even "the scientist", so Richard Feynman is ILE in her view.I saw your previous posts, they are under the assumption that there are clear/objective "16types" that much of the fluff, the extended theories socionics introduces, fails to align with. Whilst your insight is true - it is guised under a misconception that "Socionics" was or is ware of unanimously comprehensible 16 objective types. However this is not the case, examine the qualitative details of socionics and it becomes apparent - socionics is built on these "axioms" of observations and subsequent subjective models about how they chose to define what they think the 16types are.
Aushra got the first four functions right in Model A. That was a big step forward. Unfortunately, most socionists got the descriptions of the types wrong and the definitions of the functions wrong (in my view).
I think the Myers-Briggs community got the descriptions of the 16 types right.
Dyad is much better... and they are not synonymous.When the dyads/dichotomies aren't making sense - it means you are operating on a misconception about what the theory is. According to the way the theory has been made to be interpreted it's not an issue.
Let's agree to disagree here.I'll ditto my point, there are no unanimously objectively defined or understood 16 types of thinking patterns - WHICH ARE EXPLAINED!!! by the high level qualitative description of the IMs or type profiles; unless of course people play mental gymnastics to synthesize everything together ignoring those pesky details and fundamental way the theory has been derived.
Last edited by Petter; 06-25-2018 at 04:27 PM.
You need to read the profile descriptions again and the IMs looking at how they are defined in socionics and compare to the cognitive functions of MBTI.
E is about expression, emotions...
R is about relationship, appropriate behaviour, manners, etc
MBTI INFJ that's said to have "Fe" defined as socially appropriate behaviour, awareness of others - all of which is defined make them more empathic and aware of others.
MBTI INFP is defined as being artsy and expressive, inwardly focus on their own feelings, values and personal beliefs "Fi".
In socionics the INFJ(EII) is composed and aware of relations between people, they care about others - that's the focus on relations being talked about. "R", Delta's are more composed and ethical.
INFP (IEI) is the beta drama queen - obsessed and passionate, expressive - known as the Lyrist or Poet, focused on their emotions and what that means to their world.
Besides the niggles, it's apparent which is most similar to which. Gulenko has mentioned how he doesn't believe in the JP switch in an article shared already.
I can see why you think that. But that is a misinterpretation... socionists did not mean it like that. Instead, being focused on emotions is the same thing as being focused on social behavior.
This is Viktor Gulenko's current view on the functions:
+E Ethics of positive emotions [MBTI: Fe+] : being happy, expressing enthusiasm, being friendly and open with people. That's the way ESE (EF) [ESFJ] share the joy of living.
-E Ethics of negative (dramatic) emotions [MBTI: Fe-] : being angry, indignant, dramatizing events, ridiculing others, escalating conflicts emotionally. That's the way EIE (EI) [ENFJ] acts
+R relationship ethics of forgiveness [MBTI: Fi+ ] : forgiving people, giving them benefit of the doubt, grieving and comforting those struck by grief, being kind to others. That's the ethic of EII (RT) [INFP].
-R relationship ethics of disapproval [MBTI: Fi-] : keeping others at a distance, being suspicious, holding a grudge. Such is the ethics of ESI (RS) [ISFP].
CorrectMBTI INFJ that's said to have "Fe" defined as socially appropriate behaviour, awareness of others - all of which is defined make them more empathic and aware of others.
Fairly accurateMBTI INFP is defined as being artsy and expressive, inwardly focus on their own feelings, values and personal beliefs "Fi".
SRSI (Moscow):In socionics the INFJ(EII) is composed and aware of relations between people, they care about others - that's the focus on relations being talked about. "R", Delta's are more composed and ethical.
INFP (IEI) is the beta drama queen - obsessed and passionate, expressive - known as the Lyrist or Poet, focused on their emotions and what that means to their world.
Ethical-intuitive introvert (EII) puts in the first place of his priorities hierarchy matters of human ethics and morals (ethics of relations is the basic function). All his creativity is filled with the search of new, more perfect forms of human relationships. EII tries to be attentive to every personality as he sees it as the whole world, a vessel where beauty gets on with coarseness, anger and hatred. EII type is a spiritual and moral pastor, mentor irrespective of age. He is turned to when grief occurs, when one needs to cry on somebody’s shoulder or there is a gnawing in one’s heart. On his way from understanding to forgiving EII representative fulfill his destiny.
EII’s drawback is inadequate manifestation of will sensorics seen in irreconcilability with personal violence. Their favourite words are the epithets of “must”. As a result there appears unnecessary fuss over nothing. Spending days in philosophic reflection which often do no have practical exact use, EII is unable to arrange his own everyday life. Steamroller approach is destructive for a vulnerable EII, who is unable to resist the pressure. This type representatives stand up for noble, spiritual ideals, throwing away and criticizing “bourgeois” manifestations: urge towards good clothes and tasty food. EII’s self sacrificing can sometimes be turned to the people who do not need that.
Intuitive-ethical introvert (IEI) can be characterized as a dreamer and romantic. Reminiscences of future and thinking of the past take IEI’s thoughts. This type representatives like to lay on a sofa with a book or go to the country to reunite with nature. But actually, nature is an insidious thing, it can give cataclysms like snow, rain and wind. That’s why such undertakings IEI usually holds in his own imagination. Strong intuition of time (the first channel) gives this type the inclination for mysticism and superstition. IEI believe in prophetic dreams and omens. Ethics of emotions (creative function) helps them to tune into the interlocutor’s feelings and grasp the deep strives of the other person’s soul.
Unfortunately , people are not always able to use their creative function for the good. Sometimes one can meet IEI with exaggerated ethics of emotions, simply speaking, emotionally dissipated. Instead of comforting people with the warmth of their soul they start manipulating others and become whimsical. In exalted upsurge IEI can go into hysterics because “everything goes wrong’ and “nothing turns out to be as expected” (sensorics of sensations and logics of actions are weak functions). In a word, this type representative is not for hardships. Intuition of time can make him wallow in the world of illusions, dreams and imaginings. He would hardly muddle through a long-term matter. IEI can renovate the house for years or, having started moving the furniture in the morning, drop this occupation by lunch time.
Is that a recent article? Because he seems to support the JP switch in various discussions in Ben's Model G Facebook group.Besides the niggles, it's apparent which is most similar to which. Gulenko has mentioned how he doesn't believe in the JP switch in an article shared already.
Last edited by Petter; 06-27-2018 at 04:56 PM.
He doesn't that is what Ben pushes on him, it is Ben's channel and he edits and interprets Vikor's work as he chooses. Ben's groups subscribe strictly to the idea that socionics and MBTI are compatible and were they clash - MBTI is the way to go. You'll get booted if you challenge otherwise, there isn't the freedom to question.
You are performing unnecessary mental gymnastics trying to force the theories together, the ENFJ is much more positive and inspirational in MBTI, a teacher that mentors and guides - there's nothing about being negative. MBTI INFJ remains as EII, seriously this has not stopped being the EII http://www.personalitypage.com/INFJ.html & http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ile-by-Gulenko.
The two profiles are both based on describing a very moral and principle centric personality. That's the essence of the Delta quadra. "Fe" is doing the right thing, and caring about others - morals, which remains closest to "R" in socionics which isn't about feelings, but morals, tradition, manners.
Extraverted feeling (Fe) Edit
Extraverted feeling (Fe) is the feeling function that is primarily concerned with connection and commonality to others. Since it is extraverted and objective, it encapsulates the system of 'value' outward in the form of common courtesy and etiquette.[11]
Fe can be seen as accommodating and presents to mind a picture of a motherly figure.
Overall, Fe is concerned with phenomena to be harmonious with its external environment. Jung writes of extraverted feelers as those where feeling "loses its personal character -- it becomes feeling per se; it almost seems as though the personality were wholly dissolved in the feeling of the moment. Now, since actual life situations constantly and successively alternate, in which the feeling-tones released are not only different but are actually mutually contrasting, the personality inevitably becomes dissipated in just so many different feelings."
ESE can at times fit ESFJ but the SJness is quite strong and distorts those SFs; ISFP is seriously more SEI with the comfort sensation used to observe the type's more artsy tendencies http://www.personalitypage.com/ISFP.html . MBTI Se is most similar to Si, which is bizarrely odd and shows the subjectivity of the highly qualitative descriptions of either IMs or Cognitive functions. Some say the ESFP is just an extroverted SEI.
Last edited by Soupman; 06-27-2018 at 09:49 PM.
yeah that's something I really don't like about Ben's work, is that he consistently tries to reconcile MBTI and Socionics in a way I don't believe is possible. For example I don't think there's a 1:1 type conversion between the two systems. Yes they both have 16 types, but that doesn't mean they neatly flow from one into the other. The basic postulates of socionics and MBTI are sufficiently different that a ENTJ in MBTI could either a ILI or LIE or SLE. This is mainly a product of MBTI having inferior definitional and rational precision over its own framework... its precisely this disjunction that makes socionics better, so to exclude socionics or to shoehorn it into MBTI is the exact opposite of how I think the issue should be handled. It basically takes where socionics improves and tries to zero it out in the name of making it more accessible when its not that issue thats making it harder to "access" in the first place. People will come to socionics as is, it doesn't need to be dressed up as MBTI. Further the right kind of people want to keep socionics in tact, the people who bandwagon MBTI will come along in any case, because 99% of them don't understand either system anyway. Its like, what's it to them what you call it, so why cowtow. I concede I may be wrong and maybe the key is to somehow ride in on MBTI and let MBTI control where popular prejudice favors it, but it seems wrongheaded to me. One gets the distinct feeling his obsession with reconciling keirsey and socionics is more about his own ego pursuits than guided by any real consideration for endstate, to where the justification is just a rationalization that sounds good but is speculative and essentially does violence to the cause in the name of helping it. nevertheless Ben has done a lot to bring Gulenko to me so for that the entire scheme seems to be working somewhat
I concur, well said.
Even Maritsa says that she self types as both MBTI INFJ and Socionics EII - the types which are both about morals and behaviour, leading by example.
Unlike the beta IEI passion and subsequently ad-hoc morality based more on whims and passion, which is pretty much MBTI INFP.
yeah not only that, but once you realize socionics ITR were developed with sociotypes in mind it becomes assinine to talk about ITR between MBTI. Its like saying ILI LIE and SLE all have the same ITR to IEI. this is what was driving me crazy about the supervision discussion, its like we don't even know what we're talking about, because its not clear what ITR is even operative. Instead they were talking more about a generalized feeling of inferiority arising out of people talking to them in a way they neither appreciated nor could effectively rebuff. In essence that is something like supervision but it wasn't clear when people were talking whether this is how EII experiences supervision or IEI or whoever, and I think that is the most interesting thing, instead its like unknown type x experiences it like this, and it was basically entirely general talk... in essence personality got reduced out, not explicated. they were essentially working backwards from supervision and just throwing type labels over the top of it, but it made the idea of it about being about individual perspectives on type kind of a farce, since the it was simply different people of ambiguous type talking about a general phenomena but it was actually lacking a true individualized perspective. it would be like if I asked everyone to discuss a topic according to their own preferences but they all said the same thing and we differentiated it solely in terms of volume or timbre or something. its the illusion of perspective
Are Si and Se mixed up here. Would Se see the car, and Si see the details of the car?
Fi
"The individual sees reality primarily through static personal ethics and stable interpersonal bonds between individuals, including himself, where the status of such interpersonal bonds is determined by his personal ethics. The individual is very confident in evaluating the ethical or moral qualities, and their consistency, of other people. This makes the individual seem "judgemental" or "self-righteous" to people less so inclined. If he has difficulty in deciding the status of a personal relationship, he will take action to try to reach a conclusion but if that continues to elude him, he will regard the relationship as not worth it. His own sense of constancy in personal ethics and in his relationships with others is a very strong factor in his sense of self-worth. Fi in this position implies the ability to almost instantly recognize whether someone is a friend or an enemy, whether they are demonstrating good will or ill will, and whether they are drawn to or repelled by the individual."
This is MBTI INFP. INFP is focused on their own personal ethics and the ethics of others, and their own personal relation to others. INFP expressiveness is one of art and poetry and all that, because it is not verbal or facial because it is introverted.
Fe
"The person is sensitive to the emotional atmosphere around him, either from an individual, or a group, or even from inanimate objects such as the landscape, the state of the physical environment he happens to be in, or his own emotional associations with the place or people around him. A positive emotional atmophere is essential for his sense of well being and inner peace, and he either tries to promote it himself by directly influencing it around him, or by simply moving away from the environment or the people causing a negative emotional environment in his view.For the SEI, this takes an on-the-spot aspect and is reflected in cracking jokes, trying to make people laugh, or simply moving away from people he perceives as affecting him negatively. For the IEI, this takes a longer-term perspective; so the focus, rather than being on the immediate emotional environment, is on the perceived longer-term emotional state of others towards the individual, and is reflected in trying to be on good terms with those he interacts with or seeking distance or protection from, or "preventively" attacking, those he sees as irremediably hostile emotionally.
This is MBTI INFJ. INFJ creative Fe is focused on emotional environment. Focused on trying to influence that as well, INFP does not try to influence other's emotions.
I see your point but, this is much of the quasi-identity competences and ability that lead to confusion when you mix the theories together. @Lord Pixel it seems like you've copied one of those early English socionics sites that merged MBTI with socionics since the definitions are off on IMs. Before google translate, most people involved took the early ideas in socionics and mixed them with MBTI. BTW Introverted IMs are observable they aren't defined as mysterious speculations that take place in the mind - R is defined as the observable behaviour and attitudes in people claimed to have that personality. R is much more clearly defined here as is the norm in Russian schools, that have a mature development of the theory.
Your "Fe" contains attributes of R which is sensitive to the "moods and feelings of people", this influences relations. E is generally more assertive and expressive; again this overall aligns with the "Fi" expressiveness and individuality stated in the MBTI profile http://www.personalitypage.com/INFP.html . Deltas don't have the "selfish" angle to them, as they focus more on principles than the expressive desire that beta NFs seem to have (which is pretty arguably "Fi" but extroverted).Originally Posted by Gulenko
Originally Posted by Gulenko
I don't know what R means or what IM means but I just read those descriptions and I relate alot to the IEI description (except the emotive parts and the fast fleeting expression parts)and some parts of EII. The IEI description does sound like MBTI INFP, but parts of the EII description also sound like EII so it gets confusing.
But I relate to Delta conservative values, Infantile romance style, and ESTJ/INFj duality more than anything else. So now I'm confused.
This definition of is also found in the IEI description.
Ne as Creative Function (EII, LII)
The individual likes to apply his insights to specific situations and discussions. He grasps a generalized snapshot of the conversation capturing the essential information and then looks at how events, people, concepts, and things are related with each other. By spotting these similarities and analogies he hopes to find general trends, patterns, prevailing attitudes, universal rules and values of his environment and the people within it. He enjoys discussing different potential viewpoints and often adds new tangents to a conversation, thereby prolonging the discussion sometimes seemingly indefinitely. In conversation, he may give idealized accounts and statements and prefers to talk about things and events how then could be instead of explaining and talking about them as they already are. He does not pursue ideas or new opportunities merely for their own sake, but for their application to specific situations, questions, and issues that he is currently engaged with.
And this descriptions sort of contradicts the IEI descprition.
Fe as Creative Function (IEI, SEI)
The person is very consciously and acutely but only situationally sensitive to harmony of events transpiring around him, tries to affect the course of events to steer them into a more amiable course. He can perceive from an individual, a group, or even from inanimate objects such as the landscape, the state of the physical environment he happens to be in, or his own emotional associations with the place or people around him. He prizes a supportive and friendly atmosphere, and he either tries to promote it himself by directly influencing his environment, or by simply waiting it out or leaving the place with a negative and hostile environment.
I do not relate to this though.
Ne as Ignoring Function (IEI, ILI)
The individual is aware of many possibilities and connections between different areas of knowledge and experience, but prefers to consder and talk about only the most probable ones, which he selects by connecting them with the past trends. Such individual is keenly aware of past trends and recurring cycles, and the context that they create, however, this serves to curb and the options that he considers to be viable, effective, and likely. He is able to grasp the intrinsic potential of a given even, person, or block of information, but prefers to restrict indulging such assessments in the face of understanding the latent past processes underpinning said things. When somebody is voicing alternatives that to him sound improbable and unlikely to happen, he is either dismissive or irritated by such information. Sometimes feels like others around him are busy reinventing the wheel and making statements that are nothing new in their essence.
And I relate more to this these definitions of the F functions.
Fe as Ignoring Function (EII, ESI)
The individual is perfectly able to integrate in a group emotional situations, such as people having fun and trading jokes, and sustain that for a long period of time. He is also usually adept at promoting such an atmosphere himself. However, he sees no point in doing so if his own inner emotional state does not prompt him towards that, especially if he does not feel as having positive private feelings towards the other people involved. He is aware of the need to keep a "polite façade" in certain social situations even in the presence of people he personally dislikes or during periods of negative inner emotions, but he refuses to actively attempt to integrate in, or promote, a positive external emotional atmosphere in such occasions. His disinclination for doing so increases along with his feelings of closeness with the individuals present.
Fi as Leading Function (EII, ESI)
The individual sees reality primarily through static personal ethics and stable interpersonal bonds between individuals, including himself, where the status of such interpersonal bonds is determined by his personal ethics. The individual is very confident in evaluating the ethical or moral qualities, and their consistency, of other people. This makes the individual seem "judgemental" or "self-righteous" to people less so inclined. If he has difficulty in deciding the status of a personal relationship, he will take action to try to reach a conclusion but if that continues to elude him, he will regard the relationship as not worth it. His own sense of constancy in personal ethics and in his relationships with others is a very strong factor in his sense of self-worth. Fi in this position implies the ability to almost instantly recognize whether someone is a friend or an enemy, whether they are demonstrating good will or ill will, and whether they are drawn to or repelled by the individual.
I also relate to this strongly.
Se as Ignoring Function (SEI, SLI)
The individual is dismissive of exerting direct physical impact to move himself towards meet his goals and needs in favor of preserving his own resources and efforts. He is preferably aware and in tune with the physical and material world around him, but sees little sense in aggressive expansionism and exertion of his own powers. He is adept at observing and perceiving potential conflicts of interests and aggression around him, but typically tries to maneuver around such conflicts to not over extend himself and picks the middle ground. However, if a direct confrontation and collision is inevitable, he is able to provide resistance or even actively participate in them if that is seen as unavoidable. Participating in vigorous physical activities where such fights may take place, martial arts for example, these individuals are motivated not by competition in itself, but by the impressions and sensations those activities generate. When making evaluation of physical nature he prefers to listen internal responses and impressions, rather than going by what he can clearly see on the outside.
Last edited by Lord Pixel; 06-30-2018 at 05:02 AM.
There are lots of videos as well, and they are not edited and interpreted by Ben.
That doesn't seem like Ben at all. I have questioned him and Gulenko many times.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzrdA9DbtzQ&t=124s
Those descriptions of the functions are quotes, so Gulenko himself thinks R corresponds to Fi etc.You are performing unnecessary mental gymnastics trying to force the theories together, the ENFJ is much more positive and inspirational in MBTI, a teacher that mentors and guides - there's nothing about being negative.
I agree with you that ENFJ / EIE is portrayed too negatively.
General DescriptionMBTI INFJ remains as EII, seriously this has not stopped being the EII http://www.personalitypage.com/INFJ.html & http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ile-by-Gulenko.
Two of EII's main distinguishing qualities are an interest in human values and a developed capacity for compassion. The EII tries to maintain stable, well-wishing, and friendly relations with others. She listens to people, alleviates their emotional stress, reconciles arguments while remaining objective. Readily helps those who turn to her for support. Prefers not to focus attention on her offenders and ill-wishers and accumulate ill memories.
Although the EII is usually tolerant and accommodating, she won't forgive betrayal and injustice. Negatively views any sort of coercion, counters it with stubbornness and patience. Good at seeing and bringing up omissions in new undertakings. Notices and uncovers human vices, but formulates her findings as general tactful statements.
Prefers a quiet, stable, measured rhythm of life. Dislikes crowds, loud declarations. In performing her work, the EII is conscientious and meticulous, though she may be slow in operation. Demonstrates diligence, endurance, and discipline. She is able to make herself do more than what others expect of her. For implementation she often needs detailed instructions on how to do a particular job.
The EII is emotionally keen and impressionable, and disapproves of insensitivity and harshness. She is unable to coerce and pressure others to do something, and dislikes showing this kind of assertiveness. However if she is pressured herself, she can deliver a sharp rebuke. At times, she is unsure of herself and loses initiative. Strongest form of her punishment is a complete disregard of the person. Others can take advantage of her because she finds it difficult to turn them down.
This sounds like an EII / INFj (or mbti INFP).
------
General description
Romantic dreamer and visionary. Curious: not indifferent to anything that is novel, unusual, and fascinating. Leaves an impression by his unexpected, sometimes extravagant behavior and statements. Has a refined sense of humor. Knows how to comfort a person, how to uplift the mood.
Emotive and charming; may smile even when he is saying something unpleasant. Insistent in his requests when he is strongly motivated. Knows how to pick a good moment to approach a person with his request. Freely manages his own time and that of others.
Attentive to his own appearance and that of others, aware of its influence. If necessary, dresses elegantly even exquisitely. In a demobilized state complains of about his life and hardships. Likes when he is looked after, when someone is attentive to his worries. Finds it difficult to give up comfort that he has grown accustomed to.
Without strong directives becomes disorganized and demobilized. Cannot focus his attention on a task for lengthy periods of time. In handling money uneconomical and careless: may spend a large sum money on something "for the heart and soul". May give promises that he hasn't considered well. Entertains himself to drown out disturbing premonitions.
[...]
Watching the IEI for some time, it is easy to notice the following particularity - a contrast between his behavior in public or unfamiliar company, and among familiars, including at home. In public the IEI always behaves gently and politely, not permitting himself any rudeness or disrespect. But in a circle of close friends he can sometimes behave uninhibitedly. Likes to fool around, to create unusual situations. Stirs people up to evoke positive emotions. At home can be moody, capricious, stubbornly gets his way, may put on tears, even provoke scandals. These emotional outbursts pass quickly, however, without hurting him very deeply. His emotions are very flexible, switching on and off consciously. In dealing with money, can be a spendthrift, cannot refuse himself in anything, going into debt if his own means are not enough. Loves beautiful, "salon" life, thus makes great demands. Inclined to marriages of convenience. Complains about his bad life and suffering. He likes to be cared for, to be healed and treated, for someone to listen to his complaints about poor state of health, etc. Accumulates complaints in himself, so that later with a good opportunity he can spills them out all at once.
This sounds like an IEI / INFp (or mbti INFJ).
I disagree with you. "Doing the right thing, and caring about others" (and tradition and manners) correspond to Fe and E. This is about action/behavior.The two profiles are both based on describing a very moral and principle centric personality. That's the essence of the Delta quadra. "Fe" is doing the right thing, and caring about others - morals, which remains closest to "R" in socionics which isn't about feelings, but morals, tradition, manners.
Morals corresponds to Fi and R. This is about values.
I disagree with you, but let's focus on EII and IEI.ESE can at times fit ESFJ but the SJness is quite strong and distorts those SFs; ISFP is seriously more SEI with the comfort sensation used to observe the type's more artsy tendencies http://www.personalitypage.com/ISFP.html. MBTI Se is most similar to Si, which is bizarrely odd and shows the subjectivity of the highly qualitative descriptions of either IMs or Cognitive functions. Some say the ESFP is just an extroverted SEI.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzrdA9DbtzQ&t=124s
"Please consider all 4-letter codes as Jungian codes where J/P relates to first, dominant function."
Hmm... he is confused about MBTI J/P.
-----
N S: "We don’t know the author of the image, but I think he meant Jungian types, not MBTI. For example mr. driver is ISTJ (Inspector) if we compare him with ISTP (Craftsman) Inspector better matches to be the driver because he is more organized, likes work by schedule and more communicative then Craftsman who does not like to sit all day long in one sit (dynamic) and does not like to communicate unknown people and does not like to control others."
-----
SRSI descriptions of the types correspond with MBTI descriptions of the types. That is good enough for me. Gulenko does not represent all of Socionics.
Last edited by Petter; 06-30-2018 at 07:52 AM.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ile-by-Gulenko
"The LII has a well developed ability for logical analysis and is capable of clearly distinguishing the primary from the secondary. Creating structures, classifications, concepts is in his style. He is objective and impersonal, at times even harsh in his assessments and principles. If he is not satisfied with some guidelines or regulations, he can simply ignore them."
"LII knows how to logically and convincingly express his thoughts. He creates schemes and conceptualizations, distinctly separates the important from the secondary. Once he develops a general idea of schematic, he works on reifying it and bringing it closer to practice. Pure theorizing, philosophizing, discussions that are completely removed from the life are not for him. The correctness of the system he evaluates by its internal logical consistency."
This corresponds to mbti INTP.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/286-INTp-The-Critic-Profile-by-Gulenko
"Has a good eye for noticing contradictions and omissions in actions and words. Skeptical about the prospects of hasty initiatives. Can provide a characteristic for someone, predict his main reactions. Patiently leads a person along towards taking the necessary step, preparing him or her in advance.
Takes up only those tasks that ensure reliable returns. Thrifty with money. Does the job scrupulously, slowly, attentively examines details. Calculates everything in his mind. Tries to control the process. Able to capitalize on information that he or she has accumulated.
Prudent in matters of comfort and health. Reckless methods and unfounded enthusiasm are not acceptable for the ILI. At home surrounds himself with familiar items. Often, he is a food gourmand. Observes cleanliness and standards of hygiene.
He likes to discuss and argue on a variety of topics, but growing hot-tempered he can spoil the mood for himself and others. Poorly control his emotions: his states range from melancholic depression to outbreaks of discontentment and frustration. His problem lies in finding inner balance. Does not like when he is perturbed from a state of tranquility and relaxation."
"For his physical well-being engages in athletic types of sports – tries to build stamina and overcome his natural weakness, toughens himself. But to engage in this regularly he usually does not have enough willpower."
"The logical subtype of ILI is often active and assertive in dialogue. Sometimes can be demonstratively rude and vulgar."
"Frequently washes his hands, tries to keep cleanliness"
And this corresponds to mbti INTJ. I don't think Gulenko is confused about the types.
Last edited by Petter; 06-30-2018 at 08:30 AM.
Stop being naive, about a simple fact - the J/P switch which Ben holds but, Viktor doesn't not, he doesn't buy the MBTI idea that the "demonstrative" function is prominent which is what much of energy model is about. The types don't really match, it's best to keep a wall between the theories, but J/P switch isn't there and the functions get confusing with overlaps - the quasi-identity conundrum makes things worse
//There are many more articles like this were viktor has mentioned how he thinks the J/P difference is stupid in MBTI and he reiterated why the idea of the second function being extroverted is pretty stupid. You should know that both L and R are observable in behaviour - they aren't abstract thoughts that take place in the mind never meeting in behaviour.
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ican-typology)
//Lytov's former site has got a lot of information explaining why socionics doesn't believe in the stupid idea that the second function is dominant in rationality - they've mocked MBTI countless times for this.
http://www.socioniko.net/en/
This is the correspondence between Fe and R, though the two functions don't align entirely.
https://personalitygrowth.com/extraverted-feeling-fe/Originally Posted by MBTI Fe
http://www.personalitypage.com/INFJ.html
That's pretty much "Fi" in the MBTI. Despite the overlaps with R which add general confusion when one understands the type missions.
Originally Posted by [URL="http://www.personalitypage.com/INFP.html"
http://www.personalitypage.com/INFP.html
At this point I can't take you seriously and neither can anyone that has been studying socionics for over 5 years at this point. You are better off sticking to MBTI or make it clear that you are interested in a derivative "socionics" that takes MBTI as the basis - adding and subtracting from core socionics theory as arbitrarily desired. The "introverted functions" are external and observable in behavioral parameters - that's why nobody talks about MBTI's auxiliary function seriously.
https://socioniks.net/article/?id=115
Last edited by Soupman; 06-30-2018 at 03:07 PM.
MBTI INTP corresponds to both the critic and the analyst, but mainly the critic, as pretty much the inferior "Fe" is mostly the break function. However that's not entirely true since the MBTI INTP can be any four of the Researchers in socionics. All researchers are extremely introverted - nerdish in behaviour - that is normatively. Mark Zuckerberg is LIE (quintessential one without developed superego functions) which amplifies the autistic quality he has. Sheldon Cooper (though fictional) is ILE, the intuitives are pretty introverted on default. Gulenko has confirmed these typings.
God this thread is such a shit show and apparently you guys didn't read my post.
You need to learn epistemology 101. Axioms are not based on observations; a posteriori. Axioms are for deducing without any observations; a priori.
All mental facilities MUST be mutually exclusive dichotomies. The only way to create the intellectual types is by putting people into these different buckets. If they mental facilities are not mutually exclusive then the types are not mutually exclusive and people would be multiple types. That would ruin the system.
The irony here is that Jung and MBTI both use mutually exclusive dichotomies where Socionics does not and so Socionics in fact relies upon Jung's originally work as it's axiomatic foundation.
It always amazes me how you can always be so wrong. All types have a 1:1 correlation between Jung, MBTI and Socionics. They all go trace back to the 16 types Jung identified. Jung's Extraverted Feeling Dominant, Introverted Intuition Auxiliary is MBTI's ENFJ and Socionic's EIE, Ethical (dominant), Intuitive (auxiliary), Extraverted.
This is my definition of axiom it encompasses "posteriori", obviously "observations", but I wouldn't entirely deem socionics as objective since though it's inspired by observations, those observations are "dubious" in the sense that they are interpreted and make assumptions about the thing supposedly claimed to exist not bound by fact.
Definition of axiom
1 : a statement accepted as true as the basis for argument or inference : postulate 1 one of the axioms of the theory of evolution
2 : an established rule or principle or a self-evident truth cites the axiom "no one gives what he does not have"
3 : a maxim widely accepted on its intrinsic merit the axioms of wisdom
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/axiom
You have odd axiomatic assumptions about socionics which, I have to be honest dude, you haven't grasped and instead chosen to create your derivative system. You are still under the assumption that there are unanimous and objective 16 distinct ways to delineate the types - and that your interpretation of the theory is the only sane one. That's either hubris or delusion since, since some really smart minds have worked on this theory for 40 years now, and there's nothing truly solid about socionics that's been discovered which can make it a respectable scientific discipline.
What are you talking about? "MBTI idea..."? Are you saying that MBTI/MBTT claims that INTJ's Ti (ego: NiTe) is prominent?
First of all, Model G and the energy model are not identical. One of the main features of Model G is that INTJ's Ti (ego: NiTe) is prominent, hence the NiTx notation.
No, there are some descriptions of the types that don't match. But it is very clear that Aushra (and VG) thinks Introverted Ethics/Feeling corresponds to R, white Ethics. And a type is defined by the functions, so an NiFe (ego) type cannot also be an FiNe (ego) type.
The types don't really match, it's best to keep a wall between the theories, but J/P switch isn't there and the functions get confusing with overlaps - the quasi-identity conundrum makes things worse
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...gustinaviciute
It depends on what we mean by 'dichotomy' here. If we mean that ILI largely prefers logic over ethics, then I agree with you. But then we need functions in order to explain why ILI sometimes prefers ethics over logic.
My point is that real dichotomies (i.e. mutually exclusive, like MBTI) are not possible.
Jung observed 8 different personality patterns, and he suggested the 4 functions and E/I as an explanation for those patterns. It is not the other way around.
I think you misinterpret those descriptions.
------
Can you explain why there is only an overlap for introverts? That doesn't make any sense!
If you argue that INFJ (mbti) clearly corresponds to EII, then can use Bukalov's article as an explanation:
https://www.personalitycafe.com/soci...s-model-b.html
... which doesn't make any sense either.
https://www.truity.com/view/types
Here are accurate MBTI descriptions of the types.