Leading function - there's something to MBTI, isn't there?

[Ms. Kensington]

In other personality assessments, meaning anything that seeks to identify ways in which people are unbalanced in personality traits, there seems to be a mixing of Xe and Xi traits.
While looking over some assessment results today, I thought that one trait seemed to be a leading T trait. What do you have to say about truth statements for people of each leading trait:

Leading T: There is a reason for everything
Leading N: I can find a way to make anything happen
Leading S: Anything can happen
Leading F: To love or be loved is the purpose of life.

This is not given with 100% confidence by any means I am just musing.

Oh, and of course these kinds of things wouldn't be mutually exclusive.

[XoX]

In other personality assessments, meaning anything that seeks to identify ways in which people are unbalanced in personality traits, there seems to be a mixing of Xe and Xi traits.
While looking over some assessment results today, I thought that one trait seemed to be a leading T trait. What do you have to say about truth statements for people of each leading trait:

Leading T: There is a reason for everything
Leading N: I can find a way to make anything happen
Leading S: Anything can happen
Leading F: To love or be loved is the purpose of life.

This is not given with 100% confidence by any means I am just musing.

I identify very strongly with N. F I identify with the least. I have no idea if they are true or not. They sound like they could have some truth but then again...quite simplistic

[aestrivex]

none of these make any sense in the context of socionics. or in MBTI, frankly.

for example, how realistic is it to say that an LIE will have the motivation "there is a reason for everything?" or that an SLE would think "anything is possible?" these are just inappropriate associations and lead to the wrong socionics type (at least in terms of common stereotypes).

[Ms. Kensington]

i dont really understand what you're trying to say. I dont think of these things as motivations, just sort of things that each type would take as true or operate from. I guess that could be a motivation. But for example I don't think a leading S person would blink an eye if something happened without the reason being clear to them. A leading T person would.

I also don't know of any socionics literature that generalizes across extraverted and introverted versions of each type of function. If anyone has any, please say something.

The reason I mentioned MBTI is that it seems to allow for more generalization.

[BLauritson]

I definitely agree with the leading N one.

[oyburger]

Using this for me, the order of preference would be:

N
T
S
F

With me using at least some of all of them, except perhaps F.

[FDG]

But for example I don't think a leading S person would blink an eye if something happened without the reason being clear to them.

Wouldn't this generally apply to perceivers?

[Creepy-bg]

shit by my preferences the ISFp people are right...

most me
S
F
N
T
least me

[aestrivex]

i dont really understand what you're trying to say. I dont think of these things as motivations, just sort of things that each type would take as true or operate from. I guess that could be a motivation. But for example I don't think a leading S person would blink an eye if something happened without the reason being clear to them. A leading T person would.

then i don't agree with it at all