Hello, Ladies and Gents

[Metaphor]

Howdy, fellow people.

So, I've been following this forum but never tried to join until now.
And to be honest, I still don't know what to do here since I'm somewhat new (I guess?) in the realm of typology forum. Nothing interesting to tell about me either, technically, just a boring person or nerd who likes to read book, no matter how bad or good they are so long it has knowledge or value in it. Interested in theoretical explanations, can do the application of theories but somehow pretty careless. My other interests outside typology are math, sports, games, literature, graphic design, movies, science, history, biology, politics, and philosophy. As for the type, I've been typed as almost every type, perhaps, to the point I can't be typed anymore. But as of now, I'm a self type SLI (ISTp) and still torn apart between INTJ or INTP for MBTI. Someone suggested either EII/IEI/LII but I'm not quite sure since Si-valuing somehow fits me very well, but honestly, I do be careless about my socionics type although if you have any comments, suggestions, opinions or else, write that down below.
Okay, I think that's all and perhaps, thank you for reading this uninteresting introduction.

[Tallmo]

Welcome. The types are the same so you cant be both sli and intj. There is no need for mbti because socionics is more accurate. If you are sli then that's it.

[InterPrizeWes]

Welcome. The types are the same so you cant be both sli and intj. There is no need for mbti because socionics is more accurate. If you are sli then that's it.

Why is socionics better than mbti?

I found mbti is a telescope into discoveries of process and meaning for executing and unfolding the way of desire and vision, however that unravels or cracks the door of dawn for you.

[Tallmo]

Why is socionics better than mbti?

As I said, because it's correct, unlike mbti. It's not possible to learn this by just studying the theory. You have to observe the types and functions irl for many years. Socionics is describing the same fundamental phenomenon as Jung did. Mbti is trying to do the same, but they often regress to a pointless labelling of behaviours, thus mistyping people, instead of looking at the real psychic functions. They made a mess by mixing up the J/P for introverts and misunderstanding Si, and assigning it to the wrong types. There is no use for mbti anymore because Socionics captures the type phenomenon completely. However, if you want a deeper understanding of the functions, read Jung.

[chriscorey]

Why is socionics better than mbti?

I found mbti is a telescope into discoveries of process and meaning for executing and unfolding the way of desire and vision, however that unravels or cracks the door of dawn for you.

Yes, of course it is. Why did you come here?

[Sol]

> I do be careless about my socionics type

MBTI test and Socionics use same Jung type.
There are no special "MBTI types" or "Socionics types". When you identify type correctly - it's practically will be the same.

There are no types as "ISTp". Socionics has identical description to J/P as rational/irrational types (just look at dichotomy tests). It's appropriate only to use MBTI notation as "ISTP".

> I'm a self type SLI (ISTp) and still torn apart between INTJ or INTP for MBTI.

you may get opinions. I recommend to make a video for this
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...=1#post1096450

There is no need for mbti because socionics is more accurate.

There is _usefulness_ in MBTI test, dichotomies theory used in it (which is correct) and results goten by this test (which are correct more often than accidentally). MBTI test is similar to dichotomies tests used in Socionics.

It's not clear to claim "socionics is more accurate".
Socionics has more of correct theory. But while in some places its theory is more correct than in "near-MBTI" texts (which have nonsense about introverts' functional model), Socionics has own doubtful and wrong theory too (as Reinin's traits). Plus some people use non-Socionics doubtful additional theory as Gulenko's subtypes and other baseless heresy.
Besides the theory, Socionics has practical problems which may lead to mistakes in significant %, what also makes doubtful to claim that Socionics is significantly more accurate in practice. Based on known experiments the typing match allows to say about common ~40-50% chance of correct types. The common practical accuracy definetely is far from 100% by today approaches and skills.
So it's rather possibly to get correct type by MBTI related methods and incorrect by Socionics. It's not known how _in common_ more accurate Socionics would be. Even if to use only correct theory in Socionics. Especially when on other side is used MBTI test result only without additonal "near-MBTI" texts about 8 functions.

[Tim]

MBTI pop psychology is garbage. A lot of people in the MBTI community thinks Te is force (not Se), Si is past (not Ni), Fe is harmony (not Si), and Fi is authenticity (?). These ain't Socionics definition. That said, I think Jung is much closer to Socionics than MBTI pop psychology system.

In my opinion, you can't translate MBTI to Socionics but you could translate Socionics to MBTI with the correct dichotomies (INFP = NiFe; INFJ = FiNe).

[Beautiful sky]

Welcome

Hang around etc. Try not to take things personally. There are a lot of different kinds of people. Don't take things personally lol

[Beautiful sky]

From being around both SLI and ILI I can tell you that they both can ignore your feelings lol
ILI are critics, if you find yourself criticizing he living hell out of everyone and everything lol you are ILI if not you are probably SLI who enjoys the things you are already familiar with and every once in a while tries new things and generally like to chill and enjoy yourself

[Metaphor]

Don't take things personally lol

Thank you and without you telling so, I already do.
And honestly, I never take things such as typology as a serious concern moreover, I really don't care.
I just wanted to have my types, possibly read some useful threads, and get out of this place as soon as possible.

[Metaphor]

From being around both SLI and ILI I can tell you that they both can ignore your feelings lol
ILI are critics, if you find yourself criticizing he living hell out of everyone and everything lol you are ILI if not you are probably SLI who enjoys the things you are already familiar with and every once in a while tries new things and generally like to chill and enjoy yourself

It's easy for me to ignore someone's feelings, to the point I'm so insensitive and dense about it.
I consider LII though, since it's another good fit but I still doubt of having Ne-ego.

[Metaphor]

Why is socionics better than mbti?

To be fairly honest, this is such a rhetorical question, almost everyone already knows why.

[Metaphor]

Hello, first of all, thank you for the help, I really really appreciate that, the shortcoming problems though, I'm pretty nervous in front of camera, to the point that I don't know what to do about it, how to appear well or just fine in front of it, I'm well awkward at it, but if it's the most accurate way to type a person, I could take it, though, I'd also need some time to prepare it. I've checked the link on your post, but I couldn't find any available questionnaire there, would you like to tell me a place to find some? And also, I've read Filatova's "Understanding the People Around You: An Introduction to Socionics", and to be honest, I'm not that well satisfied, since I could see myself as both SLI and LII on her book, probably I should read more, or if not, just use test as another parameter in my typing. Regardless, that's all.

[EUDAEMONIUM]

You do not have to make a video if you aren't comfortable. You can fill out a questionnaire and post a type-me thread. That way we can have more information about you.