[cyamitide]

bump

[Ixim]

MBTI is crap, why should I care about it?

ISFP doesn't fit me like at all in MBTI because I am not a perceiver(I discovered that I judge first) and because I am not a happy-go-lucky hippy. ISFJ, if we disregard functions, would pretty much fit me otoh.

As I said, MBTI is crap because they did a huge error ( J <-> P switch) just because someone had no idea what she was doing. Not to mention that they have next to no data concerning relations, aptidutes and the like. Here, let me put it succintly:

MBTI is to Psychology what Sun horoscope is to Astrology.

(make what you will of that)

edit: Not to mention that MBTI P and J don't really correlate to Socionic P and J. Socionic p and j are irrationality/rationality while MBTI P/J would correlate mostly to Dynamic/Static reinin. So, MBTI ISFJ would tell you that you are FS introvert(in which order is unknown) with a static Reinin. While ISFP would be the same, but with Dynamic Reinin. Now, how to determine FS introvert type?

Here: Nobody in their right mind would say that ISFJ is progressive and that it accepts other ideas easily. That's because of their lead function, Fi, which is static. Which is only proven right by the fact that J is in the end which gives you a Static dom fnct. Se is also a static function, so there.

ISFP, otoh, is quite obvious that he likes to process information and to share it with others. Example: Jacko. He is typical as you can be for ISFP. I don't relate to him at all. That's because he was quite Dynamic. Almost every his song has multiple characters, multiple perspectives etc. Fe is a Dynamic function, as is its lead Si. Multiple perspectives and everything, yeah.

Meanwhile Socio j/p tells you whether you judge first or perceive first. Which has nothing to do with Static/Dynamic due to EP/IJs being Statics and EJ/IPs being Dynamic. Now, what was the point of all this ramble? This corrolary was:

MBTI is crap.

edit edit: Would I relate to an FS introvert who uses Static versions of functions? I think that you'd agree that I would, hence ISFJ = ISFj . But what do I know? You tell me

[HollyGolightly]

I am an SEI. ISFJ seems to fit me best in MBTI, but it's difficult when the descriptions are poop and Si is so poorly understood.

[Lady Isla]

ISTP and (SLI) ISTp.


Tests Result: 112515

[Neonej]

MBTI ISTJ, socionics ISTj - apparently the only one here. I tested as an ISTj on socionics two times and as an ISTJ on MBTI countless numbers. According to my socionics results, I would be an ISTP in MBTI. But, it's weird that I never got tested in MBTI as an ISTP. But I got tested in MBTI as an INFJ, ISFJ, etc. So, it's weird and make me wanna doubt whether I might be an ISTP in MBTI system.

[ChkChkBoom]

MBTI ISTJ, socionics ISTj - apparently the only one here. I tested as an ISTj on socionics two times and as an ISTJ on MBTI countless numbers. According to my socionics results, I would be an ISTP in MBTI. But, it's weird that I never got tested in MBTI as an ISTP. But I got tested in MBTI as an INFJ, ISFJ, etc. So, it's weird and make me wanna doubt whether I might be an ISTP in MBTI system.

That might explain why. MBTI and Socionics don't always correlate is the case, it seems. And if that table is true (taken from an article by Viktor Gluken) then J/P switch doesn't always work.

[ChkChkBoom]

Double post

[ChkChkBoom]

But is self-perfection always accurate? I'm of the idea that J/P switch must happen between the systems for introverts assuming they are correctly typed.

This correlation would therefore to me say more about how people's idea of type is flawed rather than whether it is accurate or meaningful in any type context outside of their own (in)ability to properly type themselves.

As the table above states, J/P switch isn't always accurate. In fact, if the table is correct then it doesn't apply at all.

[Neonej]

I don't really understand that table, but thanks anyway on trying to explain it. :)

[cyamitide]

As the table above states, J/P switch isn't always accurate. In fact, if the table is correct then it doesn't apply at all.

What is the source for that table?