Is this guy's opinion of Socionics accurate or justified?

[Creepy-gauss]

What follows is an email I sent through the feedback link and its response to the intj.org website.

BEGIN EXCHANGE

My email:

In the "Interaction with other Types" section, there is a problem with the description of INTJ functions. The functions in their given order describe an INTP. INTJ functions in order from most to least dominant are Ti, Ne, Si, Fe. This is flaw in in MBTI typing, i.e. that someone who tests as INTJ is best described by the INTP model. Perhaps you can address this on your site? If you need more information, socionics.com explains this problem in more detail.

Response by webmaster:

Gordon,

The 8 function hierarchy I describe *is* correct and is based on my own 12 years of professional training and experience in this field. And, by the way, I'm not quoting MBTI typing -- I'm using Jung's theory.

I'm afraid I give little credence to Socionics theory. Although Aushra Augustinavichute claims to have based Socionics on Jung and Freud, it's little more than a rip-off of the 50 years of research that preceded her. She's offering nothing new, apart from a different notation that makes it confusing when trying to compare and contrast systems. Her notations mean the same thing, but she decided to reverse the meaning of J and P for reasons only known to herself. So "INTP" in Socionics is the same as "INTJ" in all other systems.

The majority of authors and experts in this field follow the model as I've outlined it. My recommendation is that you read some of the writings by Berens, Nardi, Beebe, Pearman, Hartzler, Thompson, Thomson, Kroeger, Tieger, Haas, Segal, et al in order to further your knowledge of psychological type, especially of the 8-level model. (And don't confuse the MBTI assessment with the Jungian theory that underpins it -- they are two different things.).

Regards,
Robin

END EXCHANGE

So what is your opinion of his judgement of Socionics? I am curious to hear any responses? My gut feeling is that he's misinformed about Socionics, but I can't articulate why exactly.

[Angel von Himmel]

I hate to be crude, but this guy is intellectually talking out of his ass ... unfortunatelly, that is what enduring years of education does to you. Sounds to me like he specialized himself into a state of ignorance where he just will not consider anything beyond what he has learned for years and years.

I would just ignore his e-mail, he sounds misinformed and unwilling to do any positive amount of research into the issue.

[Creepy-pokeball]

"Her notations mean the same thing, but she decided to reverse the meaning of J and P for reasons only known to herself. "

That's incorrect. The placing of J/P in Socionics is inward/outward where as MBTI uses the world of extroversion as a guiding point. Neither is really incorrect. I find the 4 letter astrology signs to be silly anyways. ENFJ should have just been called FeNi. Somethinglike that clears up so much confusion.

[Angel von Himmel]

I saw the same thing as Jadae, the ignorance presented in that letter just makes me want to null and void anything that guy ever says about anything type related, ever again. This man's opinion is worthless.

[Creepy-pokeball]

Man this is weird Ive known an ENTP (my online gaming buddy) for 6 years now and we always bicker (in a good way...well once he got the sillent treatment but he was being as ass =/) and always disagree. This is like xenophobic vertigo!

[Angel von Himmel]

Ohhh, does this mean you will now be willing to write an ENFj description for the socion.info website to replace the oddly biased one I wrote ???

[Typeless Wonder]

The 8 function hierarchy I describe *is* correct and is based on my own 12 years of professional training and experience in this field. And, by the way, I'm not quoting MBTI typing -- I'm using Jung's theory.

I guess we should just take his word for it at face value. He's being closed minded, condescending, and pompous all at the same time. I guess it never occured to him that sometimes a theory can be wrong regardless of how many years it has existed. And even though I doubt his claims about Jung, Jung was still a mortal man, just because Jung says something doesn't mean it's irrefutable fact. Even Einstein got nailed when he attacked quantum mechanics. And how does his experience in the field prove that his theories are correct? Seriously, does he have some type of probe he just shoves into his patients' brains to figure out which order they use their functions?

The majority of authors and experts in this field follow the model as I've outlined it.

So, isn't this the "appeal to authority" fallacy I always heard about in school? Just because he thinks all of the authorities believe his theory I should to? Someone correct my faulty INFP logic.

[science as magic]

this is why in my opinion sergei ganin should have called intjs logical-intuitive introverts and so on for the rest of the types. i think the attempt to "piggyback" on the success of mbti was a foolish move

[XcaliburGirl]

I agree with Jadae and Pedro. I've been trying to train myself to think of the types as "TiNe" or "Logical-Intuitive Introvert" (etc, respectively).

[IcEPiCk]

Was that email written by Data from startrek?

HOLY #$@&

[Creepy-pokeball]

"So, isn't this the "appeal to authority" fallacy I always heard about in school? Just because he thinks all of the authorities believe his theory I should to? Someone correct my faulty INFP logic." -Typeless Wonder

Nah youre fine. I think we often forget that EVERYONE is a fault-prone mortal lol. One would hope that expertise is perfection but I doubt it is.

[Creepy-pokeball]

If I was to write one than I'd need guidelines because the issue is that I know both "systems." Im still not sure how Id go about it. I was thinking about is a list of function preference showing positive and negative attributes of for the temperament.

[Creepy-]

sdfds

[Rocky]

I agree with Jadae and Pedro. I've been trying to train myself to think of the types as "TiNe" or "Logical-Intuitive Introvert" (etc, respectively).

Freaky. I just started doing the same thing the other day too.

We use the acronym because it's easier. That's all.

You could also say, "Introverted Thinker with Intuition"... but again, that is long.

I do love the idea of using TiNe, except it doesn't have the same ring to it when you say it. I'm all for converting to the functions system to label types. Then when pronouncing it you could say "Introverted Thinker with Intuition" and everything makes sense.

[Creepy-]

fdsf

[Rocky]

We are the knights who say TeNi!

No point... it is just assumed.