Quote Originally Posted by Alive View Post
extraversion is the only jungian dichotomy that the big five uses, and they use it in a very different way. you could say that openess relates to intuitive functions, agreeableness to ethical functions, conscientiousness to being a normalising subtype, but then again, big five measures these traits very differently. neuroticism isn't even covered in socionics. khcs lives in an imaginative world where facts don't really exist, you won't get any evidence for his ridiculous claims. he showcases Te as vulnerable function very well though. 2+2=5, but the sad thing is he actually thinks he's correct. reminds me of the people who think that the earth is flat.
How is it fundamentally all that different though? Sure, I know some people might say that it's statistical and that the dichotomies could be defined a little different. But for example, I think it's probably something like this

openness = irrationality (S or N, depending). I think S types can be more open to the depth of experiencing things, while N is more open to breadth.
agreeable = Probably high correlation to F as a whole, since F types are going to be more sensitive and nuanced on F type stuff. It just doesn't make a lot of sense otherwise for someone good at F to conflict with everybody. Unless perhaps they are neurotic.
conscientious = rationality just makes sense because it requires premeditation. Irrationality perceives.
neuroticism = affectively Jungian neuroticism, which still applies to sociotypes because they are Jungian based. So a neurotic F type might not be very agreeable when showing neurotic elements. Someone like Jordan Peterson, for example, strikes me as agreeable when he's comfortable that becomes a lot more argumentative and disagreeable when things don't make sense to him and he thinks people are being illogical. I think T types have the opposite problem where they are fine conflicting with people, as long as it works for them, but when it doesn't, they want badly to find a way to make amends. It's like they are children that push the limits too far and get caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

which is pretty damn close.