A Thought About Socionics
While browsing this forum, I encountered the theory that MBTI and socionics are the same. Due to a tendency to use information from personality-database, a personality guessing and analysis forum that tries to figure out the MBTI, socionics, enneagram, and other personality types, I have generally believed that a person can be a MBTI type that can't be directly translated into their socionics type. This is supported by the mismatch between the MBTI ISTP and the socionics ISTj/LSI (ISTP's are in the moment and adaptable, while LSI's value structure in a way stereotypically similar to an MBTI ISTJ). However, after some research and some self discovery, I have found more information that can support my conclusion.
A history about my life:
I have historically been an artist and a scientist. From a young age, I liked drawing, but I was also a rule stickler who was terrified of going against the rules. My drawing skills were good, and I had some creativity, but ultimately my work was based more on realism than anything impressionistic. I remember having trouble with spontaneity in elementary and middle school, being skeptical of brainstorming because it was difficult for me and because I didn't think it was necessary for me to solve tasks. I was drawn to science and adept at school due to my ability to understand math and remember information. Although I did develop some spontaneous characteristics in my mid to late teens (although I was always somewhat prepared for my spontaneous presentations), I don't think that I truly used my creativity until I suddenly developed story writing in my early 20s.
Throughout my life, I've distrusted my gut instincts and intuitions because they were very unreliable. The possibilities of what could go wrong and the sense that things would go wrong were a source of paranoia for me, and I usually used tangible evidence (such as memory, observations, and facts) to reassure myself that my intuitions weren't true.
In my early 20s, after I had developed storywriting abilities, I found MBTI and researched it, thinking that it would be a useful system to be able to predict human behavior (which would help my storywriting). However, after researching it for a while, I started to get paranoid that I was a feeler type, an INFP. I researched the system more to disprove this, and then came across socionics, which made me realize that I was an EII through the dichotomies. I corresponded this to the MBTI INFP and despaired, as I was not as logical as I thought I was. Then I criticized my friends for thinking that they were different types, tried to face read and use gut intuitions to determine peoples' types, and then finally entered a period of severe psychological stress.
During my period of psychological stress, I was reckless, not in tune with my bodily needs, and started to believe in wild conspiracy theories. I was also a random idea generator that used my random idea generation to wildly support the theories. Later during my period of psychological stress, I would theorize endlessly, keeping me up at night, and I would support my theorizations with my interpretations about my personal feelings about others.
Characteristics about myself that support my conclusions:
I think that I'm an ISTJ based on an understanding of main and shadow functions. I was detail oriented and tended to stubbornly stick to a certain lifestyle, which seems to support MBTI Si. I helped others and justified my own rationales and views about the world by acquiring and talking about facts that I had acquired from reliable sources, which indicates Te. Finally, I tend to think that making decisions based on logic is the right approach, and that people should generally try to ignore their feelings, but despite this I've always had trouble doing so which might indicate Fi.
When I was psychologically stressed, I used theorizing and idea generation to come up with justifications for my viewpoints, and used my internal feelings (how I felt about others and what they meant to me) to justify my points. I got worse at logic while stressed, and I lost touch with my memories and my self restraint.
When I first believed that I was an INFP, I did a large amount of fact searching and looked into the physical world to support my viewpoints in order to support my fact-based perspective that I was actually an introverted logical type instead of a feeler (supports Se opposing). I was always self critical when it came to logic (supports Ti parent) and had an aversion to extroverted feeling (possibly supports Fe trickster). My psychological stress period was triggered by paranoia that I could be an INFP, a sort of vision or feeling that I was wrong and that I was actually a feeler (I think that this supports Ni demon).
In terms of socionics, I have historically been vulnerable when it came to physical confrontations. Despite being detail oriented and a thinker, I have always been bad at sports. Another characteristic about me is that I'm not completely comfortable with using certain types of reasoning that aren't fact based. I think that the Ne-EII description on sociotype generally fits me except for being interested in medicine and being religious.
Sociotype has a list of dichotomies that fit each type. In that list, I fit introverted (I tend to get drained when I talk to others for too long), rational (I like to make goals and stick to them, sometimes adopting different methods of accomplishing them), intuitive (I'm not comfortable with physical confrontations), and static (I tend to talk about properties and structures of reality, and have historically made stories revolving around one character).
A look into the data on personality database:
While peoples' interpretations and votes on characters' personalities are questionable, given that some of it is based on intuition without supporting evidence, there have been a few observations made there that support my conclusions. One observation that I saw there was that Nobunaga, a Japanese warlord, had an interest and an affinity for innovative strategies and technologies and objects foreign to Japan (we could say he had an interest in new, unfamiliar and innovative things), but was ultimately more focused on power and influence than the ideas themselves (indicates that he may be an ENTP SLE). Another good rationale that I saw there was that Sly Cooper, a good-hearted thief in a video game, lived in the moment but was not concerned with having influence over others (the commenter believed that sly cooper was an ESTP ILE). And finally, the Punisher (from Punisher Max), is a routine oriented person that is aware of the emotional background of a situation (this would imply that he's merry in the sociotype dichotomies, which means that he can't be an SLI).
I think that I didn't generally have problems interpreting the physical environment, but I had problems acting in it. As for Fe, I think that it was confusing to interpret peoples' emotions based on their facial expressions, but I could be part of emotionally lively atmospheres (at least until they asked me to display emotions I wasn't comfortable with). I don't think that I was ever paranoid about expressing emotions (I was confident in my ability to stay emotionally neutral or emotionally pleasant).
Last edited by Clarke; 09-30-2022 at 02:11 AM.
mbti is a stepping stone into the functions, socionics refines them into more of what they really are- but it's still not perfect. Socionics still isn't as realistic or as solid as attitudinal psyche. And being aware of and valuing something are two different things. People are aware of all the functions, what you value is based on what you personally value- LIEs don't value Fe but they are still paying attention to it in a mediocre way. Awareness + not valued sounds a lot like a person's role function.
The only proof you need that this isn't so:
Originally Posted by Clarke
Socionics was initially conceived, created, and developed by Lithuanian researcher Aushra Augusta in the 1970's. Aushra Augusta was an economist, sociologist, and psychologist; she was the dean of the Vilnius Pedagogical University's department of family sciences. Aushra used both Carl Jung's work on Psychological Types as well as Antoni Kepinski's theory of information metabolism in developing the foundation of socionics,and the influence of both Jung and Kepinski are obvious in the theory.
So after some thinking, I realized that my conclusion about the Punisher is wrong. The Punisher has the following characteristics:
-Focuses on ethics (Fi).
-Determines the world through a logical lens that he constructed himself (Ti).
-Supports his logical lens by acting in the environment (Se).
-Gets intuitions of how things are (Ni).
-Reads others' visible emotions to try to determine their thoughts (Fe).
-Has an affinity for (almost an obsession for) order (indicates MBTI Te).
In Punisher Max, Frank seems to primarily view the world from an internally constructed view of logic. He supports his internally constructed view of logic through tangible evidence that he can see with his own eyes (Se), and is generally skeptical of information that other people, even reliable sources, say (might indicate that he's not Si-Te). He frequently gets intuitions that "something's not right" or "he's probably doing this" and trusts them, indicating that his Ni function is useful to his information processing. And finally, he understands his logical system and forms his intuitions based on the feeling expressions of others (shows that he has Fe).
The Punisher has always had an affinity for war, but the only time he had ever expressed a desire to do it for ethical reasons was after his family died. Before then, in Born, he seemed to be doing it for personal enjoyment. His judgement on others based on ethics after the reality shattering experience of his family dying indicates that Fi may be a "bad object" for him that he pursues to satisfy his Ti ego.
The punisher also takes on aspects of the MBTI ESTJ during Punisher Max. He's obsessed with establishing order, and may do it based on a system of facts that he has internalized. He's also spontaneous sometimes, coming up with new and innovative ways to accomplish goals that he wouldn't be able to accomplish with standard methods. But, similar to the situation that I described in my first post, Fi is the driving force for him because it's the bad object that drives his actions and gives him paranoia.
The case for the Punisher being an ISTJ:
-His reality shattering came from the conclusion that society was not ordered like it should be (might indicate Si dominant).
-He's suspicious about society and thinks in conspiracy theories (might indicate Ni demon).
-In one arc, he throws someone's crimes back on them by telling them the moral principle that allows him to kill them (might indicate Fe trickster).
-He primarily defends his need for order by fighting it himself (might indicate Se dominant).
-He prepares for everything that could go wrong, organizes himself, and rarely uses spontaneity (seems to follow the ISTJ stereotype).
The explanation for Punisher's usage of shadow functions:
The Punisher has been a man who wants an endless war since Born, but in The Platoon, he seemed honest. I think that something that he saw between the beginning of Platoon and the beginning of Born caused him to question what he knew.
I currently think that the punisher is a very ordered ISTP. It makes more sense for him to be motivated by Fi, since he keeps trying to use it to justify his actions in Born and Punisher Max.
Last edited by Clarke; 10-01-2022 at 10:30 AM.
I would generally say that I have a fairly low awareness of Fe. I don't understand it, and I usually just ignore it when making decisions. It's not necessarily vulnerable for me though, since I'm more impacted by others establishing their influence over me, or physical confrontations. But I think that I generally see emotionally expressive people as suspicious.
Originally Posted by Shazaam
This would generally indicate that I both fit ISTJ (Fe is questionable and suspicious to me) and EII (I'm aware of Fe, but it isn't vulnerable).
I realized that I may be an ILI. I seem to have the following dichotomies: Constructivist, Intuitive, Tactical, Introverted, Farsighted, Declaring. I think that I'm farsighted because I rarely created my own goals, simply followed the correct procedure to get the right answer or follow the right life path.
This should've been clear to me. As a kid, I was manipulated ethically by a friend of mine, who I'm now very guarded from. And I think that my aversion to emotions comes from not only my interpretation of others' as odd and confusing, but also my own paranoia of crying.
If the votes on personality-database are true, I have had attractions to ILE's and LSI's, and have had respect for SEE's. I have historically been attracted to strong characters, who have been slightly mean. And now I understand why.
I think that my ISTJ conclusion is not necessarily correct. I have historically wanted to be a good person, and it's possible that Ti was a "bad object" for me. I think that I have also wanted revenge through physical means (implies Se trickster).
I realized that I might be an ISTJ because my usage of MBTI Ne is fairly poor, and its role in my life is usually negative.
I realized that if Ti had been a demon function, I would've seen its usage as bad/evil (instead, I criticized myself if I seemed bad at it). Now it makes sense that I have Ni demon, because I've always seen gut reactions as questionable things to rely judgements on.
I think that a source of paranoia for me has been the possibility that I was wrong, or the implications of certain facts about me. It also seems like I used Se trickster (due to the desire to get physical revenge).
There's a small problem with my reasoning. When I became psychologically stressed, I endlessly theorized, which is an aspect of Ne. I think that I used logic to try to support my conclusions. Ne is also something that seems to throw a wrench in my impressions (I think of negative possibilities and try to disprove them).
So it turns out that I actually match the dichotomies of the EII. I think that I thought that I didn't match strategic because I didn't want to make long term goals. Somehow that made me believe that I was a different type.
I think that INFP EII makes sense for me. I've been having alot of trouble learning personality systems through cognitive functions, and I've also kind of oriented my posts towards having a certain look or image. I guess it's weird to say that I match a person who isn't detail oriented, since I remember being detail oriented from a young age.
I guess if I'm wrong here, it would have to be because the cognitive functions are actually different somehow.
I guess I just don't understand the systems. I criticize myself for being logical. I've make stupid decisions during psychological stress and had paranoia because of intuition.
Maybe the body of facts is the bad object?
Nope. Most of the wrong ideas that I've had were intuitions. I seem to have Ni demon.
I got pretty good at improving in mid highschool, so I guess that would count as Ne in the main stack.
What if type 6's just think that they're Si doms, when they're actually something else?
Last edited by Clarke; 10-01-2022 at 04:38 AM.
So I came out with a few hypotheses:
1. Si and Te both represent facts. Te represents the actual facts, while Si represents the sort of room where the facts are stored and judgements are made about consistency.
2. Enneagram 6's are detail oriented not necessarily due to their attachment to Si, but due to their paranoia. I think that other types can be type 6's, but their source of paranoia will be different (they'll be checking the details of their work to make sure that their source of paranoia (functions such as Se and Ni for ISTJ's, and Ne and Si for INTJ's) is unfounded).
I currently believe these hypotheses because Ne is a negative cognitive function for me, a counter to my instincts that causes me to be paranoid about them and ignore them, and Si (the body of facts collected from MBTI and Socionics) is what led to my psychological stress period.
I don't think that this make sense with my current pool of knowledge. Si in socionics deals with internal state, not facts. Maybe my problems were caused by MBTI Ti working with a different function.
I didn't get any better at using Si when I was psychologically stressed. In fact, I think I got worse. I couldn't tell what foods were good for me, and kind of ate recklessly (or didn't eat).
I think it was actually the logical implications of the MBTI system that led to my psychological stress period. Logical implications seem like MBTI Ti.
Last edited by Clarke; 10-01-2022 at 11:19 AM.
I think that based on my experience, memories might be stored in MBTI Si or the dominant socionics function. When I had psychological stress, I sort of lost access to my ability to reference my memories. It was hard for me to remember stuff.
Well it looks like I have INTJ cognitive functions and ILI dichotomies. In descriptions, I could really match INFP or ISTJ. It doesn't really matter.
Don't ever try to develop a skill that feels unnatural. I got this way by trying to face read to better understand how to type people, since I couldn't understand why people like me could test as ISTJ, but have different cognitive functions.
I think that Se facts might be different from Si-Te facts. Si-Te facts seem like specific knowledge, while Se is the combination of alot of different tiny observations. When Se is combined with Ni, it might paint a picture of someone, like a face or an object, as well as a specific memory. And Ni might give the person emotions about the image that they're seeing.
What if for some people, Se acquires so much information about someone that Ni paints a picture that's exactly like a memory?
I'm saying this because I thought that I was an ISTJ partially because I had detailed memory that seemed like it had emotions. I know that I used to have a poor sense of internal state. I once wore a jacket when it was hot, and got a stomach ache. Then I threw up on the way to the nurse's office. I don't think that this makes sense for an Si user, at least not an Si-dom.
During psychological stress, I ate foods recklessly because I craved them. That was unfamiliar for me before. I would just feel like eating certain foods.
I do have a sense of my internal state, I just ignore it sometimes. It's not a priority compared to interesting things.
Maybe my problems are related to Ti in MBTI and Si in socionics. It seems like it's the facts, and the implications of them.
I think it's finally over. I'm worried about possible consequences, not future trends.
Last edited by Clarke; 10-02-2022 at 05:00 PM.
I think that some people might appear to be certain types (fit certain descriptions on MBTI sites on 16personalities.com) that are different from their socionics types because of their attitudinal psyche type. I'm a FLEV, and those have high physical awareness (good awareness of their internal state and their surroundings, which fits Si).
I think that I was an artsy kid because of my Ni. I'm not sure why I was sensitive.
I would generally say that despite being someone who was kind to animals, I wasn't ethical. I adopted other peoples' ethical principles and caused grief to others a few times.
Last edited by Clarke; 10-04-2022 at 10:33 PM.
I would like to say that during my period of psychological stress, my dichotomies seemed to change. I think that I became emotivist, extroverted, and static.
Yeah I think it's common for Fi valuers to find Fe 'suspicious' - my IEE cousin's SLI husband is very suspicious of me like that often, cuz my creative casts Super Effecive dmg against his PoLR. I would say 'vice versa' but I feel bad, cuz he feels more sensitive of me than I am of him.
Originally Posted by Clarke
Fragile and precious things- need special handling. What have I done to Delta's Souls. lol
(Fe polr?) My opinion with Fe be like: ok, you act friendly, so now it's my turn to be friendly back? No, don't push me, or I would run away, don't expect any Fe from me, I don't have it, spare me please!
I like 4 Fe from Fi creative because I don't feel the need of paying Fe back to them.
I have this theory that shadow mode could serve as a defense mechanism against supervisors. Consider that in shadow mode, someone seems to have the same cognitive functions as their supervisor's benefactor.
An example would be a LSI. Their supervision partner is the ILE, since they have Ne vulnerable. But when they go into shadow mode, they become the LSE, which has Ne mobilizing and Si creative. That would give the LSI psychological power over the ILE, who they would usually be controlled by.
My reaction to Fe has always been to try to act in a way that logically makes sense I think. I take on a certain image or style of speaking to make myself more interesting in that realm.
Originally Posted by Renna
The "personality-database" website is full of misunderstandings. I think you should not refer to that website.
In the Tavistock Lectures, Jung emphasized that memory is not a part of the 4 cognitive functions. So how could Si store memoreis? If so, it not's Jungian at all.
Originally Posted by Clarke
The so-called "MBTI" theory, which is considered to be different from Socionics, is rather a stereotypical version of the Big Five theory instead of a Jungian typology theory.
To understand your type better, I suggest you to totally forget what Beebe has said. He mixed Jung's explorations on archetypes with Jung's PType theory while fully misunderstanding Jung's fundamental ideas on psychological types. Also, his descriptions are very blur and you might find that you fit into multiple descriptions if you follow his ideas.
Originally Posted by Clarke
You should definitely read Jung and Model A to understand your type.
I'll say again that I think that you should never use an unnatural set of abilities to try to solve problems. I think that it might lead to MBTI shadow mode, which seems to exist from personal experience. It could potentially be life ruining.
I think that face reading is related to Fe and Si. If you don't have Fe and Si in your valued set of cognitive functions, I think that you shouldn't face read. It's much better to use your normal cognitive functions to make decisions. For typing people, that means looking at their actions and trying to determine what they mean for that person.
Face reading is tempting because if utilized properly, it seems like it would be a very efficient way to type people. But from my personal experience, it's probably not worth it.
Edit: It seems like some people who use Te and not Si are able to successfully face read, with a few errors. I might have just somehow taken the wrong approach, or maybe I personally can't face read. I guess my advice would be not to push yourself to use an unfamiliar skill.
Edit 2: I now think that face reading might be related to Ni.
Edit 3: I think that people might be able to take a Te or a Fe approach to face reading. I just know that for some reason, I can't face read very well.
Lately, I've gotten insights from seeing others' faces. I start suspecting that they're certain types.
Edit 4: I remembered a crucial memory, and it makes me doubt that face reading led to the period of time that I'm calling my psychological stress period. However, it might have had an impact on me before that period of time. Generally, I'd say that you should never take actions to try to become a different type.
Last edited by Clarke; 11-01-2022 at 12:39 PM.
Reason: Updating potentially useful information.
They typed Paladin Danse as non-curious in SLOAN. Paladin Danse constantly asks questions about the wasteland in Fallout 4. He wonders about basically everything, and he has a sort of attraction to interesting technology.
Originally Posted by CR400AF
They also typed Zuko from Avatar: The Last Airbender as 4L in attitudinal psyche. He spoke up at the war table because the logic was wrong. That's not passive listening.
I would generally say that you should never trust the votes on Personality Database. I would generally recommend looking through the comments for good rationales, and then compare what those comments say to theory.
Edit: Paladin Danse might fit the RCOAN description on Similarminds more than the RCOAI description. He doesn't fit it perfectly though because he has an interest in science, and he's a naturally curious person. But maybe his inquisitiveness isn't high enough to classify him as an inquisitive type.
In Zuko's case, when he spoke up at the war table, it actually seemed like he was self positive and others negative when it came to logic. I can't currently think of whether this was his standard behavior across the show. If this is his normal self, he could be LEVF. This might make sense because he generally didn't seem emotionally expressive when healthy, or even when he and Azula still lived in the fire nation. I think that he has insecure volition because of his attitude towards Azula.
What bothers me is that Azula was able to manipulate Zuko as a kid. That seems like it would be hard if Zuko was a 1L. I think that she successfully used ethical manipulation or persuasion, which is interesting.
Last edited by Clarke; 10-19-2022 at 12:59 AM.
Tags for this Thread