How is MBTI J/P different from Socionics j/p

[Phaedrus]

I think Sergei Ganin's notion of R/I is very much in sync with MBTI's J/P: P stands for Phenomenon .

It certainly is. But so is the rest of the Socionic community. In every Socionic type description I have ever read the notion of R/I is perfectly in sync with MBTT's J/P. It's incredible that so many people can believe that there is an important difference between the two models here.

[consentingadult]

It certainly is. But so is the rest of the Socionic community. In every Socionic type description I have ever read the notion of R/I is perfectly in sync with MBTT's J/P. It's incredible that so many people can believe that there is an important difference between the two models here.

You know, one of the many reasons I hang around here, is that this site is full of pathological manifestations of Psychological Type, and you are especially interesting in that respect, and also one of a kind on this site: you seem to be an expert at distancing yourself from other people. The louder you scream, the more isolated you become. You're running around in circles constantly trying to prove (on an pathological, existential level, not just Socionics theory) that you're right and other people are wrong, but not providing much evidence in the process, expecting others to follow your lead uncritially. Seems you are fulfilling your own prophecies. Perhaps you might want to share with us your relationship to your parents? It might explain some things, I think.

I know, I know, I must be wrong, ignorant, uneducated and what's more. I admit, I'm wrong and you're right. I hope you feel better and more superior now.

[Phaedrus]

You know, one of the many reasons I hang around here, is that this site is full of pathological manifestations of Psychological Type, and you are especially interesting in that respect, and also one of a kind on this site: you seem to be an expert at distancing yourself from other people.

Or at a loss at getting closer to them. I am, by natural temperament, a very distanced person. And that trait is inborn.

The louder you scream, the more isolated you become.

I know. I have observed that effect too. It is a somewhat interesting phenomenon, but not much to do about it.

You're running around in circles constantly trying to prove (on an pathological, existential level, not just Socionics theory) that you're right and other people are wrong

No, that's where people misunderstand my intentions. I am not trying to prove much really, because most of my statements don't need to be proved. They are obviously true to everyone who has acquired the basic knowledge of Socionics. Basically I am just stating the commonly known facts.

but not providing much evidence in the process, expecting others to follow your lead uncritially.

I don't expect them to follow me. I expect them to study the subject. I am trying to stop people from forming false beliefs based on too little knowledge of the facts. But unfortunately people tend to be very lazy and jump to conclusions faster than the speed of sound.

Seems you are fulfilling your own prophecies. Perhaps you might want to share with us your relationship to your parents? It might explain some things, I think.

Why do you think that? I can assure me that my relationships with my parents are quite good, despite the slight inconvenience that my mother is an ESFj and my father an INTj. So, I was brought up in an Alpha atmosphere, but that happens to a lot of people, and I don't have much to complain about in that respect.

I know, I know, I must be wrong, ignorant, uneducated and what's more. I admit, I'm wrong and you're right. I hope you feel better and more superior now.

Not at all. That's exactly the kind of reaction I am totally uninterested in. I don't want to be alone in being right all the time. I want other people to be right -- that's why I try to correct them when they are wrong. I hate false beliefs, but I don't hate people. I just wish they would study more so we could have more interesting discussions.

[consentingadult]

@Phaedrus: I won't stop you, but addressing me is a waste of time, since I'm no longer granting you the privilege of interacting with me.

To all others: does this qualify as Creative Fi?

[Phaedrus]

@Phaedrus: I won't stop you, but addressing me is a waste of time, since I'm no longer granting you the privilege of interacting with me.

That's no problem. For a long time now, I have basically been talking to myself on this forum. It's like writing in a diary, and "talking" to you is no more and no less a waste of time than not doing it. Posting on this forum is a waste of time of course. But I have nothing better to do anyway, so I can at least practice on my English.

[Jonathan]

That's no problem. For a long time now, I have basically been talking to myself on this forum. It's like writing in a diary, and "talking" to you is no more and no less a waste of time than not doing it. Posting on this forum is a waste of time of course. But I have nothing better to do anyway, so I can at least practice on my English.

I think you make valuable contributions to the forum. I don't know why you upset people so much, but it may have to do with phrases like "Well, that means that you are uneducated." It's strange that you use such phrases (and suffer the consequences), because you don't seem to habor any ill will towards anybody. Perhaps it's a habit you've picked up on these forums, because other people unfortunately say things like that too (?). People might accept those phrases from someone who represents the consensus view or is accepted by the group as an "authority." But when used by others, people don't take it well.

[consentingadult]

I think you make valuable contributions to the forum. I don't know why you upset people so much, but it may have to do with phrases like "Well, that means that you are uneducated." It's strange that you use such phrases (and suffer the consequences), because you don't seem to habor any ill will towards anybody. Perhaps it's a habit you've picked up on these forums, because other people unfortunately say things like that too (?). People might accept those phrases from someone who represents the consensus view or is accepted by the group as an "authority." But when used by others, people don't take it well.

It's statements like "Well, that means that you are uneducated." too, but also his insistence on repeating his point of view over and over again. I think we can safely say "we've heard you alright!", can't we? It looks like he will keep bugging us until we finally give in and say he's completely right about his point of view that MBTI and Socionics are exactly the same. There seems to be no respect for other people's opinions, he does not agree to differ. At least not in his outward behavior. He does not seem to be very open to learn something new. I think such behavior is pathological: a psychologically healthy person would not be persistent in advocating a certain idea to an audience that doesn't want to hear it, but shrug, move on and do something worthwhile instead.

My personal guess is that his underlying cognitive schemas include a maladaptive schema on not being accepted by other people (social isolation and regarding himself as different and an outsider) and behaving in such a way as to perpetuate that schema.

Now normally I wouldn't say such harsh things (typically, but this is a site on Psychological Types, and I think my analysis is type-related. I think this kind of pathology is typical for INTp's

[Phaedrus]

I think you make valuable contributions to the forum. I don't know why you upset people so much, but it may have to do with phrases like "Well, that means that you are uneducated." It's strange that you use such phrases (and suffer the consequences), because you don't seem to habor any ill will towards anybody. Perhaps it's a habit you've picked up on these forums, because other people unfortunately say things like that too (?). People might accept those phrases from someone who represents the consensus view or is accepted by the group as an "authority." But when used by others, people don't take it well.

I think you are right about everything there. I agree with all of it.

It's statements like "Well, that means that you are uneducated." too, but also his insistence on repeating his point of view over and over again. I think we can safely say "we've heard you alright!", can't we?

Yes, probably. But why doesn't anything happen after that? Why do they refurse to check the references? Why do they refuse to see what's in plain view to see? Why are they blind to the truth?

It looks like he will keep bugging us until we finally give in and say he's completely right about his point of view that MBTI and Socionics are exactly the same. There seems to be no respect for other people's opinions, he does not agree to differ.At least not in his outward behavior.

As I tried to explain in another post, I don't want people to say anything they don't honestly mean. If they don't agree, they should definitely not give in. Instead they should try to argue as convincingly as possible for their case. They should try to prove why I am wrong and they are right by using as strong arguments as possible.

But that almost never happens. People just proclaim that they disagree, and that's unacceptable me. One of very few persons that have actually bothered to make a good case for why they disagree is Expat, and that has helped me to see more clearly where he has gone astray in his reasonings. What I would like the most is having a serious discussion about the exact causes of people's mistypings (for example Expat's when it comes to my type) and the limitations of various typing methods. Until that happens this forum will probably never rise above kindergarten level in typing people.

People's opinions are essentially irrelevant. I cannot, and should not, have any respect for opinions that are obviously false, and neither should anyone else. What we should do instead is to try to find the objective truth together. It is a huge mistake to believe that it is okay to just form your own opinion on any subject without checking the facts first, and it is an equally big mistake to teach people that everyone's opinion merits equal respect. Such an attitude is an irritating obstacle if we want to make scientific progress. A much better example to follow is Karl Popper's debating technique.

He does not seem to be very open to learn something new. I think such behavior is pathological: a psychologically healthy person would not be persistent in advocating a certain idea to an audience that doesn't want to hear it, but shrug, move on and do something worthwhile instead.

The popular view that I am not open to learn something new is another very irritating misunderstanding of what's going on, because my attitude is the same as Popper's when it comes to science and rational thinking. It is the same as the scientific attitude, and that attitude is the exact opposite of dogmatism and narrow-mindedness. Most people on this forum are less open-minded than I am, and that is shown very clearly in their refusal to argue and their willingness to adopt views uncritically and without hard study of the relevant facts. They are much less interested in searching the truth than in social activities, like making sure they have their right place in the group, getting appraisals from others, feeling good about themselves, upholding the status quo, and stating their subjective opinion for the only sake of doing it (because everyone's opinion is of equal value, right?).

I think this kind of pathology is typical for INTp's

It seems to be typical of some other types to call it pathological what is actually the natural state of an INTp. The attitude you express towards INTps here is also described and confirmed by the ILI type descriptions, and that's what I have said myself before on this forum. It is something in the behaviour of ILIs that makes other people misinterpreting their intentions and sometimes become hostile or at least irratated. Wouldn't it be interesting to investigate why ILIs are perceived that way? Is it the mysterious function plus the IP temperament, or what is it?

[Jonathan]

To all others: does this qualify as Creative Fi?

I'm not sure in your particular case, but I wouldn't regard deciding not to talk to someone as a good or typical example of what IEEs and SEEs do. I know where you're coming from....Fi having to do with decisions about relationships, personal preferences and the like. I think creative Fi might be more typically about having one's actions appear justified based on basic good will or ethics, although perhaps some clear IEEs and SEEs could answer that better (maybe you're IEE, but I haven't been following your type so I don't know).

[consentingadult]

I'm not sure in your particular case, but I wouldn't regard deciding not to talk to someone as a good or typical example of what IEEs and SEEs do. I know where you're coming from....Fi having to do with decisions about relationships, personal preferences and the like. I think creative Fi might be more typically about having one's actions appear justified based on basic good will or ethics, although perhaps some clear IEEs and SEEs could answer that better (maybe you're IEE, but I haven't been following your type so I don't know).

To be quite honest, I don't know my current type, but I'm pretty sure it must have been IEE or ILE before I went in therapy