Based on the Jungian dichotomies MBTI and Socionics types should be the same

Based on the Jungian dichotomies MBTI and Socionics types should be the same

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 53
Thank Tree39Thanks

This is a discussion on Based on the Jungian dichotomies MBTI and Socionics types should be the same within the Socionics Forum forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; ....so to simplify MBTI INFP is Socionics IEI or INFp for example. Introversion/Extroversion is the same in both theories, sensing/intuitive ...

  1. #1

    Based on the Jungian dichotomies MBTI and Socionics types should be the same

    ....so to simplify MBTI INFP is Socionics IEI or INFp for example.

    Introversion/Extroversion is the same in both theories, sensing/intuitive is the same, ethical/logical is the same.

    The one difference which most people don't seem to know or notice, which leads me to believe they don't read socionics theory or their understanding of it is lacking (possible trolling included) is that socionics too has the J and P dichotomy...more specifically the following:

    Rationality and irrationality (also: Judging / Perceiving or Shizotyme / Cyclotyme ) is one of the 4 Jungian dichotomies, and one of the 15 Reinin dichotomies.

    Rational types are: ESE, LII, EIE, LSI, LIE, ESI, LSE, and EII. <=== MBTI Js
    Irrational types are: ILE, SEI, SLE, IEI, SEE, ILI, IEE, and SLI. <=== MBTI Ps

    Rationals

    (Also called shizotymes in early socionics literature)

    Tend to plan ahead, make decisions early.
    Are more often rigid and stubborn.
    Do not like to change their decisions.
    Tend to finish what they started.
    Usually have stiff movements.
    Usually more 'authoritarian' leadership style.
    Low stress tolerance.

    Irrationals

    (Also called cyclotymes in early socionics literature)

    Tend to wait and see, more spontaneous.
    Are more often flexible and tolerant.
    Change their decisions frequently.
    Tend to start new things without finishing them.
    Usually have gentle movements.
    Usually more 'democratic' leadership style.
    High stress tolerance.

    This leads me to believe that if the types differ in the two systems, then the person who has been typed as such...is mistyped either in one or both systems due to certain variables that obscure and make the typing process difficult.

    ESE=ESFJ
    LII=INTJ
    EIE=ENFJ
    LSI= ISTJ
    LIE=ENTJ
    ESI=ISFJ
    LSE=ESTJ
    EII=INFJ

    ILE=ENTP
    SEI=ISFP
    SLE=ESTP
    IEI=INFP
    SEE=ESFP
    ILI=INTP
    IEE=ENFP
    SLI=ISTP


    I'm still skeptical about functions as they can't be measured against anything and typing by function preference is one hell of an illogical guessing game imo. You can measure how far along both extremes of a dichotomy a person is and you can contrast too see objectively...something that can't be done with functions imo and I find that typing directly by deciding on function preference is a critical mistake when looked at logically from afar. One can assume function order based on type once it is established as an explanation for how the information processing leads to the 4 dichotomies.

    It is still lacking in comparison to the BIG5 as that considers level of mental health in the form of neurotic tendencies or lack of these as a 5-th element to the equation.

    For example a neurotic INFP can still be considered imo xNFP as the level of health and specific problems that manifest could be distorting the type. This would be the case of a social anxiety sufferer, who is in reality extroverted and will be once the problems are fixed.

    Discuss.
    Last edited by LibertyPrime; 01-06-2013 at 02:39 PM.



  2. #2

    The assumption made is that the dichotomies mean the same thing in both.

  3. #3

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Oliver Aaron View Post
    The assumption made is that the dichotomies mean the same thing in both.
    That assumption is correct, they are the same thing. It is a fact. I'm pulling this off wikisocion. To me this looks and feels correct, the logical structure is firm and solid, descriptions match up. I'm waiting for someone to demolish it if they can through evidence.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4

    @Rim In short: no.

    There is far, far more to Socionics than the function dichotomies. IM elements are very important in determining type. You are trying to link both theories through the connection between two sets of very broad dichotomies when at least one one of them (MBTI) is not always horribly useful or accurate. I would argue function/IM element incompatibility, but as you are not convinced the former really exists, that seems pointless.
    RoSoDude thanked this post.

  6. #5

    Quote Originally Posted by Kanerou View Post
    @Rim In short: no.

    There is far, far more to Socionics than the function dichotomies. IM elements are very important in determining type. You are trying to link both theories through the connection between two sets of very broad dichotomies when at least one one of them (MBTI) is not always horribly useful or accurate. I would argue function/IM element incompatibility, but as you are not convinced the former really exists, that seems pointless.
    Can you show me how you measure IM elements or functions, do it and gather data to disprove the theory I just posted or quote someone that has done it in a scientifically valid way? Unless you can measure function preference, typing based on them is futile imo, a waste of effort and they remain inaccessible to testing.

    You can conduct tests with the fMRI scanner nowadays to measure how introverted or extroverted someone is based on neurological activity as introvert and extrovert brains are wired to respond differently to variables in the form of stimulation. My point is that we can measure, compare and contrast dichotomies such as the 5 presented in the Big5, but not the functions which are assumed to be there through the hypothesis, functions which are inaccessible.

    So yeah, naturally I ignore basing things on them, its the logical step imo.
    MyEuphoricSolitude thanked this post.

  7. #6

    Quote Originally Posted by Rim View Post
    Can you show me how you measure IM elements or functions, do it and gather data to disprove the theory I just posted or quote someone that has done it in a scientifically valid way? Unless you can measure function preference, typing based on them is futile imo, a waste of effort and they remain inaccessible to testing.

    You can conduct tests with the fMRI scanner nowadays to measure how introverted or extroverted someone is based on neurological activity as introvert and extrovert brains are wired to respond differently to variables in the form of stimulation. My point is that we can measure, compare and contrast dichotomies such as the 5 presented in the Big5, but not the functions which are assumed to be there through the hypothesis, functions which inaccessible.

    So yeah, naturally I ignore basing things on them, its the logical step imo.
    Maybe pop culture personality theory isn't for you, then? So little of it can be proven scientifically.

  8. #7

    Quote Originally Posted by Rim View Post
    You can conduct tests with the fMRI scanner nowadays to measure how introverted or extroverted someone is based on neurological activity as introvert and extrovert brains are wired to respond differently to variables in the form of stimulation. My point is that we can measure, compare and contrast dichotomies such as the 5 presented in the Big5.
    Untrue. Your source?

  9. #8

    @Rim

    MBTI only cares about your external irrationality or rationality, that is made explicit in their J/P dichotomy.
    FreeBeer and Helios thanked this post.

  10. #9

    Quote Originally Posted by Rim View Post
    That assumption is correct, they are the same thing. It is a fact. I'm pulling this off wikisocion. To me this looks and feels correct, the logical structure is firm and solid, descriptions match up. I'm waiting for someone to demolish it if they can through evidence.
    Socionics doesn't use the same dichotomy for J/P letters as does MBTI.
    In MBTI the J/P letter denotes Judger/Perceiver and corresponds to the highest order extraverted function.
    In Socionics the j/p letter denotes Rational/Irrational and corresponds to dominant function.

    Lets take Ni-dominant Te-auxiliary type (Ni,Te,Fi,Se) as an example or what in MBTI is the INTJ type.

    In MBTI this Ni-Te type would be a J-type because it's highest order extraverted function is a judging function, Te => Ni-Te in MBTI is INTJ

    In Socionics this Ni-Te type would be a p-type because it's dominant function is perceiving one, Ni => Ni-Te in Socionics is INTp

    Because the MBTI's Judger/Perceiver dichotomy is not the same as Rational/Irrational dichotomy, you can see that you cannot convert MBTI types into Socionics types letter-for-letter i.e. types aren't the same.
    madhatter, Figure, koalaroo and 4 others thanked this post.

  11. #10

    Oy vey! Can we just agree that ILIs don't mix well with Socionics? :D
    @Rim @aestrivex @Boolean11 @Zero11


     
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Types with wings, MBTI correlation as based on PerC user profiles
    By aconite in forum Enneagram Personality Theory Forum
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 05-03-2016, 12:11 PM
  2. MBTI types vs Socionics
    By Sollertis in forum Socionics Forum
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: 12-17-2014, 01:33 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-26-2012, 11:08 PM
  4. Socionics Dichotomies Descriptions
    By Marco Antonio in forum Socionics Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 02:49 PM
  5. Socionics Dichotomies and Personality
    By Marco Antonio in forum Socionics Forum
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 12-12-2009, 09:09 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:35 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0