An additional question:
For Js, since their dominant is either T or F, do they have more trouble defining the S-N scale than the T-F scale?
So, therefore, Ps would have more trouble defining their T-F scale than their S-N scale.
Because my main question has always been my S-N scale. If my idea is right, then I am a rational.
That seems to make sense...but I can't see why you would have problems with the S-N scale. I really do think you are intuitive, because alot of this socionics stuff is interesting to mostly intuitives, and because you seem to focus on ideas and not facts. Jung was INTj, Aushra was ENTp, Myers and Briggs were some kind of NFs, and nobody S I know cares about socionics really. Most visitors to socionics sites are N, even though they are apparently in the total minority.Originally Posted by Tanzhe
Decision
What I meant is that, before I came to this forum, determining the S-N scale was, or seemed to be, more difficult than the others. Essentially, I mean that my T-F preference seemed to be quite clear.
In this sense, I am a rational.
So, therefore, I've concluded that I am an INTj. The type descriptions by socionics.com and socioniko fit me for about 80%-90%. Thanks for your help. As male21 said, there is a certain point where you must 'believe' that you are a type. I would appreciate it if you could post any other type descriptions other than socionics.com and socioniko, even though I recognise that Socionics is not as widely spread as MBTI.
I've collected and condensed my summary (so far) of the INTj. If I have any mistakes, then please correct me.
Ti Ne Fi Se Fe Si Te Ni
The conscious functions are Ti Ne Fi Se and the unconscious functions are Ti Ne Fe Si.
The mood of an Analyst is one of detached critical analysis, with clear and independent thought. He projects an appearance of self-control.
Ti He has a strong analytical mind and an ability to understand the structural patterns of any phenomena. He is objective and highly principled. The Analyst will distinguish primary from secondary. Through logical progression he can extract and convey a concept to others and direct people’s attention to the main idea. He wants to accumulate an understanding, and his logic is their area of confidence and conservatism. This logic is fundamental and can be applied anywhere.
Ne Having analysed and idea and understood its importance and potential they are often converted to it. Their creative intuition constantly develops and perfects new ideas. The Analyst can also handle people well, helping them to discover and develop their potential and to believe in it. The intuition is about perspective and potential, and gives the Analyst his creative output.
Fi His facial expressions and demeanour do not always correspond with his feelings. Many therefore conclude them to be cold and distant. He also tends to loose contact with people that he has made emotional connections with.
Se He has an inability to push his talents and make others aware of it. To aggravate the problem, they often have low self-confidence. Sometimes they lack determination and do not adapt well to rapidly changing life situations. When beginning new projects they will need outside stimulation. The Analyst tends to dislike anything that will imbalance his measured way of life. In his youth, he tends to lead an extroverted lifestyle until he realises that this existence is something other than what he really needs.
Fe He is very secretive and dislikes unwanted visitors. He prefers a happy, cheerful and exciting surrounding.
Si This gives the Analyst his hidden agenda. Introverted sensing primarily concerns the body and its functions, sensory perceptions etc. Therefore he concerns himself with living healthily. One manifestation of this is that he may not like to eat when no one else is, as this, in his eyes, attracts unnecessary attention to his bodily functions.
The Analyst has a characteristic, ascetic face. There are two reasons for this:
Firstly, the facial structure itself is often reminiscent of ancient portraits due to the angularity and composition of the features.
Secondly, the facial expression is often accepted as emotionless and severe. His skin is usually pale or bloodless, and males often have a short haircut.
His face usually has well-developed superciliary arcs, and a separating nose or obstinate chin. Commonly impassive, the pale skin is hardly ever brought warmth to or his piercing eyes light up. Gestures are usually unsure, sluggish, scattered or careful. His depressed emotions are expressed in involuntary nervous gestures. His colleagues view him as polite but dry and unwilling to form close relationships.
He is likely to be slim. His stomach is normally placed ahead of the chest, giving him a characteristic posture. His gait is somewhat unsure, wavering slightly. Sometimes it seems as though his destination is uncertain. This peculiar gait is more obvious in moments of excitement. Otherwise, his gait is usually light, carrying in a straight line, but it is possible to note constraint in the arms or a slightly stooped posture
The Analyst will commonly wear unremarkable clothes, with a style and composition lasting for a long time.
He behaves in a self-restrained manner with strangers, never showing initiative first and maintaining a long psychological distance. His speech is clear and following a logical progression. He has a tendency to emphasise key words. Whilst defending his concepts, his logic can become solid and absolute, cutting out irrelevant details that may cloud the argument.
The Analyst is pensive, cold and remote. When he is a collocutor, he becomes fixed and attentive. However, his expression rarely changes during the contact - it can become dreamy or soft, angry or merry; but, more frequently, it remains impenetrable and poorly expresses feeling.
The Analyst smiles seldom, rarely and only on specific occasions. Usually he is sufficiently restrained. Sometimes, desiring to seem amiable and friendly, he can smile (though unnaturally). He infrequently laughs properly and his laughter is uncommon - it is convulsive, constrained or squeaky.
Although the first impression of him is one of a cold, emotionless man, he can become inspired during conversation and an emotionality emerges. His eyes begin to flash with a frantic light and his passion increases in proportion to the length of the conversation. However, he still tries to keep his control.
The Analyst will only sustain interesting conversations, and prefers to remain silent rather than give an opinion on what he sees to be an unimportant subject.
He always gives others a chance to say what they need to say, as he considers that everyone has talents and that he should not interfere. Instead of refusing proposals immediately, he examines them.
The Analyst is often reserved, and only talks of his private life with great reluctance. This can lead others to conclude that he has no private life.
He has characteristic tendency to independence and can only accept a whole freedom. In work matters, they combine the need for freedom with a feeling of responsibility.
He is usually not very demanding. His food need only be simple and fresh, as he can easily forget about eating once he is engrossed in something interesting. In common matters, he is modest and is happy to have a minimum degree of comfort.
Normally, he will have an interest. This will stay with him for a long time, regardless of what others say of it. He never endorses his position in life. He will live in a world of his own conception, ignoring rules, concepts and directives that do not suit him. Therefore, many people do not understand him and thus avoid him.
The logical subtype, the Systemiser, is calm, serious and restrained. He is sufficiently categorical, obstinate and even uncompromising in his judgements. When the theme of the conversation does not interest him, he becomes taciturn and severe. He may look sullenly at the collocutor. His cold, penetrating view is difficult to maintain by others.
He knows how to clearly and laconically, and without excess emotions, express his thought, and he does not love long discussions. Much of the time, he reflects, analyses and compares. Thus, the impression of a volitional person is produced. The lips are held tightly together, the speech is clear and jerky, but the voice is not rich in tones. Nevertheless, the face reflects internal emotions by involuntary motions of the muscles.
The intuitive subtype, the Researcher, appears somewhat uncertain and even soft in the contact of other people. He is not always categorical in its statements but is sufficiently obstinate in its behaviour. He can keep silent and restrained from the discussion, but his opinion will not change. He is attentive and tries to give advice or impress by his knowledge. In such cases his otherwise serious exterior softens and the benevolence appears. He can be warm, or move closer to people, but only to a certain point. The concealed emotionalism is manifested at the moment of extreme nervous tension in the intonations of voice and the impulsive gestures.
The gait is calm and synchronous, but motions are a little hindered and unnatural. The poses are forged, and gestures are meagre and restrained, rarely unconsciously impulsive and badly co-ordinated.
I'll just try and help you out guy,
Yeah, these are all steretypical observations of intjs from Socionics sites. Helpful, but must be taken with a grain of salt. These descriptions simply describe how an intj could end up due to his/her internal makeup. Society and personal upbringing will play a larger role in development, and please take note that relying on these descriptions could potentialy mislead ya. I'm sure this is obvious.
Mainly intjs are smart, private (although they may pretend not to be) and phlegmatic. A couple obvious notes: They often screw up in realtionships and are aware of their emotional inabilities. If an Intj likes you, he/she will try desperately to win your over to his/her side, often in a manner that seems clumsy but to him/her seems quite clever, thus showing the immaturity of intj's emotional side. If they do not take this approach they often take a holier than thou approach and act as if they are better than the subject, all the while doubting the intelligence of this external approach.
Also, intj's carry a million thoughts in their head and often desperately attempt to place them in a theoretical structure. This challenging and rewarding process is continious. This often results in a hestitancy to act on their ideas because of a constant process of reconfiguration. This may be interpreted as a lack of self-confidence, espceially when you combine this with a non-aggressive nature. However I find it to be carefulness helpful in the process of discovery, and is often how intjs come up with bright ideas.
Lastly, intjs are not as rare as you think--in certain areas-probably more of tem in the blue states (I'm from NY) This is pure speculation but I believe that they are more prevelent in upper to upper-middle class areas where the IQ's and SAT's are often quite high due to the genetics. Go to an elite college or university in the U.S. and you'll discover that intj's are common. How will you know? When you discover your type, you will eventually develop an intuitive ability to type others, and the first type you'll be able to identify will be your own.
Hope this helps ya kiddo. Based on the style of your postings, I'd place money that you are and intj or entp. I can't tell which you are through writing style (although it seems your point by point is much like what you would expect expect from a dominant introverted thinker). The introversion/extroversion conclusion is the easiest to come to.
Peace,
an introverted thinker with extraverted intution who passed by...
Thanks. Your informal diagnosis of me as an INTj or ENTp only confirms what I have now deduced.
But I did have one question, which I can't answer for myself because my knowledge of Socionics is not quite extensive enough.
When I took MBTI, before looking into Socionics, I scored as INTJ on the internet (not on the administered paper). I am sure that this is right. Since I am an INTj by Socionics, does this mean anything? I know that Myers-Briggs INTJ has Ni with Te, which is Socionics INTp. Does this mean that I am suffering from introverted complexity no. 47 (I. C. 47)?
Let's start with the IC47 thing. It really is specific to situations where introverted individuals believe they must be or try to be extraverts, and end up developing their extraverted function strongly. This happens alot in America, as it is a very extraverted country, as opposed to say China or India.
There certainly are other complexities having to do with introverts, and one you already mentioned about MBTI and Socionics four letter types, the J-P "preference", and so on. socionics.com has great resources for this, but let me summarize it.
The actual MBTI test is therhetically supposed to give you your MBTI four letter type, which stands for the actual Jung type.
But the letters they use are confusing, in Jung's writings, thinking and feeling were rational(j) functions and intuition and sensing were irrational(p) functions. Well Myers decided that a person would be J(rational) if their EXTRAVERTED function was judging, and P(irrational) if their EXTRAVERTED function was percieving. Well this works fine and well for extraverts, but introverts(in their system) are called rationals even though their primary function is irrational, and vice versa.
Now the actual test itself tests on the imaginary J-P scale. So what happens is you answer questions about how you plan things, ie strict , judgmental planning of things(rational behavior), or fly by the seat of your pants perceptive type of planning. Well, this seems to work ok if you are an extravert, but what if you are an introvert. Supposedly this should still work for introverts, because they think that it is your extraverted function that determines how you plan(a not necessarily wrong but fuzzy logic). But what if you have IC 47 and you have developed your extraversion more than your introversion? You are more likely to test right on MBTI(since IC47 means you try to act rational if you are a true(jung, socionics) irrational and vice versa). What does that mean in reverse? That means introverts are going to have a hell of a time with the j/p to begin with. Further complicating that, with tons of introverted people typing themselves wrong, a lot of MBTI stuff especially online is wrong. INTJ and INTP descriptions, although mostly right, have elements from the other type which do not belong.
So you tested INTJ on an MBTI site. This means:
I you are most likely introverted
N you are most likely intuitive
T you are most likely a thinker
J you tend to plan and stick to them than go by the seat of your pants. this is testing how you act. now if you are affected by IC47, this could mean you are possibly jung type introverted intuition, extraverted thinking. however if you are not affected by IC47, and are a true rational(J), this would be consistent with the jung type introverted thinking, extraverted intuition, which MBTI calls INTP and socionics calls INTJ.
in essence, J-P is totally screwed in MBTI. J-P is a bad thing to test for anyway, tests should be designed to test for I-E, N-S, T-F, then determine the orientations of the main and secondary functions. but they don't.
even simpler: if you scored INTJ on MBTI test (or similar) and you are sure this is right, this means you are socionics INTJ (MBTI INTP), or socionics INTP(MBTI INTJ) and apparently are affected by IC number 47. So you are probably NOT suffering from IC 47. At least not too bad(do you live in America too?)
Did you follow this? Did this make sense? I think it does, as you are INTJ also
you should register and post here, you really seem to know what you are talking about and we always like more conversation.
I think I did. But my knowledge of Socionics is not quite advanced enough sometimes. The way I understand complicated thoughts, like your post, on ideas that I am perhaps a little fuzzy on, is to sift through to the essentials. So, if it appears from this post that I have completely misunderstood you, then sorry.
To be honest, I think that I'll just stick to Socionics and not go to MBTI. Thanks for the reply, but it has only cemented a belief in my mind that I should never touch Myers-Briggs again. I see it as that Socionics and MBTI are two independent personality systems, and I don't think that it would be beneficial to try to compare them.
But the possibility of me being an INTp, or suffering from I. C. 47, does interest me. I do not think that I do, mainly because you all seem to have typed me as at least having Ti and being an introvert. Since my thinking preference is more evident, then it would stand to reason that I have not over-developed my extroverted function (Ne). Also, I do not live in America.
I would like it if someone could post and tell me how to identify a victim/whether I am a victim of I. C. 47. The article on Socionics does not quite explain it enough. I would also like this information on I. C. 47 to NOT mention MBTI; I've somewhat lost faith in it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote