Logical extroverts less "extroverted" than ethical introverted?

[Xima]

Hi,


I am currently learning more about socionics and VI by typing people I know IRL. Some of my acquaintances took the tests on sociotype.com and aimtoknow.com while others are just wild guesses on my part.

The Cambridge Dictionnary defines extroversion as "the quality of being energetic and not shy, and enjoying being with other people".

I found out that the majority of people I identified as ethical consistently appeared more extroverted than logical types.
Nothing too surprising when people type as ESE/SEE (and to a lesser extent EIE and IEE).... but then I realized this also applied to introverted ethical types (moreso ESI and SEI than EII and IEI).

Logical types, whether introverted or extroverted tend to demonstrate less extroversion: an LSE-3Te friend of mine was convinced she was introverted before taking the tests. I am even starting to think that my SLI father is actually an LSE because he demonstrates so much Te despite appearing very "introverted".


This could explain why I don't identify many ExTx people without using tests.


From your own experience:

• Are logical extroverts less "extroverted" than ethical introverts? Especially ENTx types in comparison to ISFx types?
• Any other logical extroverts who mistyped as introverts because of the image given to extroversion?

[Sol]

The common case of troubles to understand normal theory and to develop exotic views are mistypings. Where the most important is own type.

"TIM LIE"
check it. theory games to rationalize own mistakes are common for speculative Ti types

[Grendel]

I'd say they probably are.

[xerx]

I take it that you're referring to introversion and extroversion in the way that it was defined by Hans Eysenck.

To be honest, I've known some logical introverts who are chattier and more outgoing than some ethical extroverts. There is probably some correlation between logic/ethics and introversion/extroversion, but I wouldn't use it as a basis for definitively typing someone.

[Existential Ibuprofen]

If someone wants to use VI it is this time an excellent resource given that you have unadulterated baby photos.

[Xima]

I take it that you're referring to introversion and extroversion in the way that it was defined by Hans Eysenck.

To be honest, I've known some logical introverts who are chattier and more outgoing than some ethical extroverts. There is probably some correlation between logic/ethics and introversion/extroversion, but I wouldn't use it as a basis for definitively typing someone.

I do refer to this definition and I find it interesting how it could differ in socionics, even moreso now that you said you observed logical introverts demonstrating this kind of extroverted behaviour as well.
I believe the correlation between logic/ethics & introversion/extroversion is a good start for typing someone, but I would agree that it is not enough.

If someone wants to use VI it is this time an excellent resource given that you have unadulterated baby photos.

Although I am a bit sceptical of VI as well, I find the idea fascinating.

The common case of troubles to understand normal theory and to develop exotic views are mistypings. Where the most important is own type.

"TIM LIE"
check it. theory games to rationalize own mistakes are common for speculative Ti types

I'm not sure I get/agree with everything you said, but I would be interested to see any articles/links on that.

[Chiquichiquaquiles]

ExTxs may not be people people, but IxFxs are by no means energetic and not shy.

If anything, I'm more sensitive than ExTxs, and so approach socializing far more carefully than they do.

ExTxs are more likely to "suck it up" and deal with people than IxFxs at times, too, instead of avoiding people they don't like.

[sbbds]

Yeah there’s a difference between how social someone is and “cognitive introversion/extroversion” in general the first place.

So I think it depends on the person and on the particular situation.

[Existential Ibuprofen]

Although I am a bit sceptical of VI as well, I find the idea fascinating.

Well, this particular extroversion vs introversion trait is present in the beginning. Introverted babies are more prone to over stimulus and shy away also extroverted babies are more interested in stimulus. It is said to be easily observable.

[Tallmo]

extroversion / introversion was invented by Jung and should only be used strictly in the way he used it (Socionics does that). Te is just as extroverted as Fe, meaning libido is flowing into the object, but Fe deals more with the social sphere, whereas Te is programmatic logics, method etc.

The colloquial definition of "extrovert / introvert" is contaminated and should be avoided.

extroversion / introversion as a single distinction is difficult to spot unless one already knows socionics and can compare lots of people.

An introvert is only getting information from the subject and only knows how the object is reflected in the subject. Other than that the information is totally subjective. But as Jung points out, people are adapted and have secondary developments also. One has to try to isolate the base function as a phenomenon when observing people.

[Xima]

Well, this particular extroversion vs introversion trait is present in the beginning. Introverted babies are more prone to over stimulus and shy away also extroverted babies are more interested in stimulus. It is said to be easily observable.

Asking people if they were sociable/shy when they were toddlers/children is a commonly used technique in order to determine extroversion/introversion in the Jung sense of the term, so I definitely see where you are coming from, very interesting.

Do you happen to have any good source on that?

[Rebelondeck]

The Socionics term extroverted refers to being externally oriented, which doesn't exactly correlate to an energetic person who like to be with other people. External interactive sources are key ingredients in Ej-rationalization processes but this doesn't mean that they enjoy everybody's company. I've known many Ijs who've spent lots of time with others and were very social but I've known far more Ejs who needed to be in the company of others. The key difference that one should be analysing is "need".

a.k.a. I/O

[Disturbed]

It seems that way sometimes, although it depends on subtypes. LSE-Si, LIE-Ni, ILE of both subtypes and SLE can be pretty socially introverted although LIE-Te seem pretty outgoing. But LSE-Si are among the most self-isolating of all the socionics types and they appear much more awkward and less natural at social interaction than Ti and Ni ego types (some of that may have to do with the fact that I haven't interacted with Delta quadra members much throughout my life). The ESI-Fi can't always handle being around people for long periods of time but do really want to see them in spurts frequently, while some ESI-Se are very outgoing and always love being with people while other ESI-Se hate spending time with people. I don't know for 100% sure about the other introverted ethical types. But it seems like some EII don't really like spending time around people, but they'll do it because they have a hard time saying no while IEI can spend long times in groups.

So I do love to see some people at times though and can spend quite some time with them, but usually only one to one... I don't like groups, it's hard for me to focus on everyone there's usually one person that I have a strong preference for. But if someone is energetic and gentle and looks and sounds good and there isn't something I'm really angry about, then I can spend quite some time with them. I also feel pleasantly sexually and physically energized by certain people at times and I frequently like close touch/proximity (although other times I think it's unacceptable to violate someone else's personal space but if someone I really like and/or if they're really sexy then I enjoy close physical proximity with them and them touching me).

I was actually pretty outgoing and very hyperactive (I was diagnosed with ADHD-C) and tried to be competitive when I was a child and before high school, but then I had to do my work and I didn't want to get arrested and fined for doing illegal things. My mom is an ESI and is frequently on the phone and doesn't need much alone time (except for whatever she works on, she usually likes to accomplish everything independently, has to do with perfectionism). She was pretty shy and anxious around people sometimes and she'll meet people that she's pretty cold towards and she only has a few true friends but she could spend forever with those friends and with certain family members. Also, if the best way she can get practical advice is through a group, then she'll participate in the group.

[Xima]

It seems that way sometimes, although it depends on subtypes. LSE-Si, LIE-Ni, ILE of both subtypes and SLE can be pretty socially introverted although LIE-Te seem pretty outgoing. But LSE-Si are among the most self-isolating of all the socionics types and they appear much more awkward and less natural at social interaction than Ti and Ni ego types (some of that may have to do with the fact that I haven't interacted with Delta quadra members much throughout my life). The ESI-Fi can't always handle being around people for long periods of time but do really want to see them in spurts frequently, while some ESI-Se are very outgoing and always love being with people while other ESI-Se hate spending time with people. I don't know for 100% sure about the other introverted ethical types. But it seems like some EII don't really like spending time around people, but they'll do it because they have a hard time saying no while IEI can spend long times in groups.

As a LIE-2Ni, I can definitely relate to that.
If you observed that much self-isolation from LSE-Si, then this could really indicate that my father is a LSE-Si. His "j-ness" is very apparent to me, let alone the fact that he is very active, always doing Si-related things.

So I do love to see some people at times though and can spend quite some time with them, but usually only one to one... I don't like groups, it's hard for me to focus on everyone there's usually one person that I have a strong preference for. But if someone is energetic and gentle and looks and sounds good and there isn't something I'm really angry about, then I can spend quite some time with them. I also feel pleasantly sexually and physically energized by certain people at times and I frequently like close touch/proximity (although other times I think it's unacceptable to violate someone else's personal space but if someone I really like and/or if they're really sexy then I enjoy close physical proximity with them and them touching me).

On the enneagram, do you identify as a sx-first?
In my experience, enneagram does play a big part on this extroversion thing.
I am a 3w4 and I know 3w4 are considered more introverted than 3w2, let alone the fact that I am a sx-first.

I was actually pretty outgoing and very hyperactive (I was diagnosed with ADHD-C) and tried to be competitive when I was a child and before high school, but then I had to do my work and I didn't want to get arrested and fined for doing illegal things. My mom is an ESI and is frequently on the phone and doesn't need much alone time (except for whatever she works on, she usually likes to accomplish everything independently, has to do with perfectionism). She was pretty shy and anxious around people sometimes and she'll meet people that she's pretty cold towards and she only has a few true friends but she could spend forever with those friends and with certain family members. Also, if the best way she can get practical advice is through a group, then she'll participate in the group.

Which type do you identify yourself as?

[Disturbed]

On the enneagram, do you identify as a sx-first?

I don't know for sure. I'm not conventionally socially responsible and haven't really ever cared to nor to follow normal social rules which means I'm probably not an so-first. I don't require a whole lot of money in reserve just for the sake of it (I've always liked spending money as soon as I get it on high-end things) but I'm quite concerned about environmental conditions so I'm not sure if I'm sp first or sx first. Reasons I may be an sx-first include: I've been pretty aggressive in my life, some of it having to do with the dyspraxia, which had lead me to experiencing all sorts of negative emotions. I do like intensity sometimes and I frequently do look for something or someone that really gets me excited in a good way. I experience my emotions intensely. In most tests I test as 6 sx or 4 sx, but I have some type 1 characteristics. I could be a 4, but I've never been able to create anything beautiful even though I've wanted to. I do love beauty and I experience extremely intense emotions like a 4 and I've always wanted to feel good emotionally and physically; I want to express my individuality beautifully. But I'm very anxious like a 6, I place a high value on others' strength and beauty like a 6, I can be pretty suspicious like a 6, and I have a love/hate relationship with structure like a 6.

Which type do you identify yourself as?

I think I'm an ESI-Fi. Some people think I resemble EIE (probable factors include how unusual I've behaved, my unusual preferences, and how I've never fit in well anywhere and how I have sought attention excessively at times and tried to make large groups of people laugh), but I'm certainly not an EIE; I usually don't like EIE (nor ESI-Fi really). I was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome and later Autism Spectrum disorder (and many, many other disorders) several times, and ESI-Fi aren't a type that people expect to be on the autism spectrum. But my autism spectrum disorder was always mild, and it seems like I don't have it much now that I'm older.

[Number 9 large]

Extraversion and sociability are 2 different facets of socionics. The 2 are usually lumped together in daily terms.
In socionics F types have better sociability than T types. However E types have more energy/need for stimulation or interaction with the outside world. Whether that interaction involves people or not is largely determined by them being F type or T type.