I wish it were true, since I wish we could use the MBTI statistics somehow. But I think they work at best negatively -- that is, Socionics LII is extremely unlikely (to say the least) to test as ESFP in MBTI. It would be complicated to use them even in that way, though.Originally Posted by Phaedrus
I am focusing on the descriptions as a whole, not just on those. In the case of LII and ILI, perhaps they make sense since the LII is more Si-focused. But in the case of other types that focus leads to confusion.Originally Posted by Phaedrus
And yes, I can find a lot to criticize in Socionics descriptions, also in Stratiyevskaya's and Filatova's. For instance, I think Jonathan identified with stuff that Stratiyevskaya attributes to the Te PoLR in the IEI and SEI descriptions, which I would attribute to the IP temperament.
And as I have said before, regardless of the descriptions, MBTI tests - and most people will continue to over-focus on their tests - do emphasize silly things in their J/P scales, as well as in their I/E scales, and those silly things contaminate their type descriptions as well.