Do ESFps have ANY redeeming qualities?!

[SGF]

Miley is a SLE, and I’ve met her a few times. I was an extra on her Disney show Hannah Montana.

e_e thats because you consider her ESTP... which in socionics is more SEE than SLE.
You like most ppl here know jack shit about socionics, then come to make a fucking thread blaming one type for your misfortune, which you could have controlled yourself by simply having proper boundaries like sane ppl.

The fact that such a thread was even posted (generalizing & blaming a type) warrants 2 possibilities here: trolling for lulz or you aren't right in the head.

Now I'm going to show you wtf you should have done with those ppl you mentioned above, by blacklisting your ass and ignoring you before you piss me off even further.

[calm]

e_e thats because you consider her ESTP... which in socionics is more SEE than SLE.
You like most ppl here know jack shit about socionics, then come to make a fucking thread blaming one type for your misfortune, which you could have controlled yourself by simply having proper boundaries like sane ppl.

The fact that such a thread was even posted (generalizing & blaming a type) warrants 2 possibilities here: trolling for lulz or you aren't right in the head.

Now I'm going to show you wtf you should have done with those ppl you mentioned above, by blacklisting your ass and ignoring you before you piss me off even further.

Mustve missed the part where I said I met her in person and worked with her. But wow you seem very upset. I don’t care. None of what you said was necessary. My post was a rant but I used a lot of hyperbole and in that way I’m definitely trolling. I started with “I’m fed up” for a reason. GoodBye!
For a Gamma hater he sure does love the Gamma Thread!

[SlytherinPower]

e_e thats because you consider her ESTP... which in socionics is more SEE than SLE.
You like most ppl here know jack shit about socionics, then come to make a fucking thread blaming one type for your misfortune, which you could have controlled yourself by simply having proper boundaries like sane ppl.

The fact that such a thread was even posted (generalizing & blaming a type) warrants 2 possibilities here: trolling for lulz or you aren't right in the head.

Now I'm going to show you wtf you should have done with those ppl you mentioned above, by blacklisting your ass and ignoring you before you piss me off even further.

How does mbti ESTP correlate more to SEE in socionics? & What does mbti ESFP correlate most with then? I know the function definitions differ somewhat, but I still have way more knowledge in mbti than socionics so the relationship between the 2 theories is still a little fuzzy to me sometimes.

Don't mean to derail the original reason for this thread, but I was genuinely curious when I came across your response about it. Especially since I usually consider ESTP or ENTP for myself in myers briggs (though I think ENFJ could be plausible too).

[calm]

How does mbti ESTP correlate more to SEE in socionics? & What does mbti ESFP correlate most with then? I know the function definitions differ somewhat, but I still have way more knowledge in mbti than socionics so the relationship between the 2 theories is still a little fuzzy to me sometimes.

Don't mean to derail the original reason for this thread, but I was genuinely curious when I came across your response about it. Especially since I usually consider ESTP or ENTP for myself in myers briggs (though I think ENFJ could be plausible too).

It sounds like hogwash because it is hogwash.

[SlytherinPower]

It sounds like hogwash because it is hogwash.

Not necessarily, because their definitions do differ so I've heard there's not always a direct correlation. Like I've heard Te in mbti can correlate with SeTi in socionics sometimes. They are different systems.

[SGF]

How does mbti ESTP correlate more to SEE in socionics? & What does mbti ESFP correlate most with then? I know the function definitions differ somewhat, but I still have way more knowledge in mbti than socionics so the relationship between the 2 theories is still a little fuzzy to me sometimes.

Don't mean to derail the original reason for this thread, but I was genuinely curious when I came across your response about it. Especially since I usually consider ESTP or ENTP for myself in myers briggs (though I think ENFJ could be plausible too).

The correlation chart I posted is from Expat (an old forum memeber here) as far as I understood at one point socionics experts typed MBTI descriptions in Kiev and that chart was the result. Original MBTI is just the dichotomies, no functions. Even so, the functional model is abstract and an attempt at describing internal information processing, even IF nowadays the MBTI tries to use functions, their Se for example is more like socionics Si and there are other differences which means you can't translate Se-Fi SEE into MBTI ESFP via the functions, because it won't be the same kind of person MBTI ESFP is describing.

e_e so if we type someone by surface behavior here as ESFP... all 4 socionics types SEE, EIE, IEE and ESE are likely until we can actually check how that person thinks internally. I'm not good at this, so I try not to type ppl, which is why I was reticent to type you as well and its why I rely on data and statistics from authority figures in socionics such as Gulenko. It's simply safer than wild speculation and being wrong / misinforming a forum member, such as yourself here.

[RBRS]

The correlation chart I posted is from Expat (an old forum memeber here) as far as I understood at one point socionics experts typed MBTI descriptions in Kiev and that chart was the result. Original MBTI is just the dichotomies, no functions. Even so, the functional model is abstract and an attempt at describing internal information processing, even IF nowadays the MBTI tries to use functions, their Se for example is more like socionics Si and there are other differences which means you can't translate Se-Fi SEE into MBTI ESFP via the functions, because it won't be the same kind of person MBTI ESFP is describing.

e_e so if we type someone by surface behavior here as ESFP... all 4 socionics types SEE, EIE, IEE and ESE are likely until we can actually check how that person thinks internally. I'm not good at this, so I try not to type ppl, which is why I was reticent to type you as well and its why I rely on data and statistics from authority figures in socionics such as Gulenko. It's simply safer than wild speculation and being wrong / misinforming a forum member, such as yourself here.

The problem with this lies in the brutal difference between the cognitive functions of the MBTI and those of socionics.

We could differentiate as follows. The cognitive functions of the MBTI are a way to justify the types at a deeper level, the true basis for the MBTI types are the dichotomies. The cognitive functions of MBTI are a simplification and vulgarization of Jung's cognitive functions, but worse.
The MBTI is, to this day, a simple fandom for teenage girls, and a simple way to make profit from useless self-help books. MBTI personality types are simply fictional tropes in which kids search for a cool identity.
Socionics is a "scientific" approach (I know this definition is not the most correct, but I cannot find the word in english) towards Jung's theory of cognitive types. It is much more complex and complete than any model, and it has a greater basis in tangible reality. Socionics also has a sort of central system from which all schools come from.

I will give an example of why socionics and MBTI cannot correlate through IM and cognitive functions, mainly because of the contradictory and behavioral nature of MBTI functions.
The xNTJ of the MBTI are Ni and Te, Ni in MB is related to long-term ambitions, tactics (socionics Se) as well as strategic thinking (Te and Ti in socionics), and Te is related to hierarchy and structure (Ti socionics) the will to power and domination (Se socionics) and effectiveness (Te socionics).
Since Ni and Te in MBTI have more Ti and Se component than Ni and Te in socionics, it is safe to say that the MBTI INTJ does not correlate with the ILI but with the LSI, and that the MBTI ENTJ does not correlate with the LIE, but with the SLE.
In my opinion, once you get into socionics, the best thing to do is to completely abandon the MBTI, because it is nothing more than a fandom. Damn, I myself have always tested in MBTI as INTJ and INTP without deviations, and in socionics I am completely lost.

[SGF]

Damn, I myself have always tested in MBTI as INTJ and INTP without deviations, and in socionics I am completely lost.

This is merely my opinion: Ni HA in xSI imo can make one mistype as IxI.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I don't see SEEs are more evil than other types- but I can see how maybe they can use their manipulative Fe to look like the 'innocent' one while they are really the one playing all the strings. The affection feels genuine to me (that's why I <3 them), but of course people dishonestly manipulate with honest things all the time. =D

I think Se valuing duals have a harder time getting together and staying there compared to Si valuing anyway. At least online SEEs seemed to have liked me more than their duals- as semi-duality can feel more dual-like than regular duality much of the time. I think duality needs more of an outside support structure to work- especially Se valuing duals. SEE's Fe can be really ego-like seeming compared to the functional placement of other types IMNSHO. To not annoy and push away an ILI, I would think they would have to really make sure they use it in a demonstrative-y way compared to an ego one as to not PoLR hit the poor ILI.

[Aramas]

I don't see SEEs are more evil than other types- but I can see how maybe they can use their manipulative Fe to look like the 'innocent' one while they are really the one playing all the strings. The affection feels genuine to me (that's why I <3 them), but of course people dishonestly manipulate with honest things all the time. =D

I think Se valuing duals have a harder time getting together and staying there compared to Si valuing anyway. At least online SEEs seemed to have liked me more than their duals- as semi-duality can feel more dual-like than regular duality much of the time. I think duality needs more of an outside support structure to work- especially Se valuing duals. SEE's Fe can be really ego-like seeming compared to the functional placement of other types IMNSHO. To not annoy and push away an ILI, I would think they would have to really make sure they use it in a demonstrative-y way compared to an ego one as to not PoLR hit the poor ILI.

I've read that SEE manipulations don't really work with ILIs. According to some article I read years ago, ILIs "ignore excessive force," and apparently are pretty good at just "blocking" the force and manipulations of SEEs. They aren't prone to being afraid of the Se or feeling as if they need to change their behavior in response to it.

Part of the requirement for duality is that the special talents that make the dual so bang-up at "working" other people or situations doesn't tend to work so well with the dual type. Yes, you can help them pretty well, but they're also "immune" in a way to any attempt to gain a special advantage. But they are also more likely to fall for you too. It's paradoxical like that.

IDK if you've ever seen the show Lucifer, but Chloe has that with Lucifer. She's immune to the special ability he has to get other people to tell him her secrets or to reveal her inner desires to him. And she's at least as good a detective as he is in many ways. He will often show up to a crime scene and moments later she pops up behind him lol. He will try to go do some research on his own using his supernatural intelligence and cunning, but boom, ordinary little Chloe just pops up behind him like it's no thing. She's also the only one who can make the invulnerable Lucifer vulnerable. He is forced to comply with her to some degree because she's basically the only thing that can kill him. She's mortal herself, of course, but she also invokes mortality on this otherwise immortal being. There's also an episode where Lucifer uses his mortality to die and get out of an impossible situation, so even that weakness is turned into a strength somehow.

Same thing with the two main characters from True Blood, Sookie Stackhouse and Bill Compton. Sookie's ability of telepathy doesn't work for Bill. She can't read his mind no matter how hard she tries. But it's a relief for her, because she's always having other people's thoughts barge into her mind when she just wants some peace. Her blood also confers the special ability onto him of being able to walk in sunlight. His blood can also heal a mortal wound for Sookie. And Sookie can't be "glamored" like ordinary mortals can. She just looks at him and laughs.

So it doesn't really matter that SEE manipulates for ILI. They can see through it pretty quickly. Their sense of logic is enough that if something doesn't make sense for them, everything else stops. They don't care about the force used to deliver the message or the charm. It's just, "Wait, what? That doesn't make any sense." You can see a similar thing happening at times with the conflict dual dyad ESE and LII. On The Nanny, Fran Drescher will often try something and Mr. Sheffield will just look askance at her like, "What?" And she'll get nervous and then go along with him or change what she's saying/doing. He can't do that all the time, though, because he wants her. She brings color to his otherwise drab life and brings all the relationships he needs to him. So it's a balance.