Personality Cafe banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
629 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I need a little help here.
I have studied MBTI quite a bit and am pretty comfortable with it. I want to know more about the relationships between types, though, and I know Socionics explains it better and goes into more detail.
But the Myers-Briggs types don't completely match up with the Socionics types...
Does anyone know what type of relationships exist between Myers-Briggs types??
Or do you have a website I can refer to?

For instance, I've read that ENFP and INFJs have mirror relations.
Where did they get that from?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
970 Posts
MBTI types are based on "Cognitive Functions".
The letters INFJ don't REALLY mean all that much (it's hard, I know. We were just starting to get attached. Lol!).

When you say: "I'm an INFJ" what you're REALLY saying is: "Hi, I'm an [Ni, Fe, Ti, Se]..."

Here are the functions:
INFJ, ENFP:
Ni, Fe, Ti, Se.
Ne, Fi, Te, Si.

So, we have the opposite functions, but in the same order.

Opposed to:
INFJ, ESFP:
Ni, Fe, Ti, Se.
Se, Fi, Te, Ni.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,961 Posts
I need a little help here.
I have studied MBTI quite a bit and am pretty comfortable with it. I want to know more about the relationships between types, though, and I know Socionics explains it better and goes into more detail.
But the Myers-Briggs types don't completely match up with the Socionics types...
Does anyone know what type of relationships exist between Myers-Briggs types??
Or do you have a website I can refer to?

For instance, I've read that ENFP and INFJs have mirror relations.
Where did they get that from?
Actually the intertype relations match up exactly. You need to match types by cognitive functions, however. MBTI's INFJ has cognitive function of Ni, Fe, Ti, Se. In Socionics the type that has these functions is IEI or INFp.

Socionics assigns j/p letters differently from MBTI (hence why they are lower-case). They are assigned by using trait of rationality/irrationality instead of MBTI's Juger/Perceiver, hence the discrepancies in 4-letter codes (function-wise MBTI and socionics are exactly the same system of 16 types). In Socionics the rational types i.e. types dominant in judging functions like Te, Ti, Fe, Ti are j-types. All types that lead with perceiving functions like Ne, Se, Ni, Si are p-types. So INFJ since it is leading with a perceiving, irrational Ni function becomes INFp (also called IEI - intuitive (Ni) ethical (Fe) introvert). It's explained here and if you want to discuss socionics further there is a forum for it where you can get better-informed replies.

Some people will come in and say "the conversion between types isn't straightforward!!!" but trust me, after reading this forum and socionics forums over a year now, and observing what intertype relationship unfold, these relationships are exactly the same. People who claim that conversion isn't straightforward are typically those who have mis-typed themselves by either MBTI or Socionics.

You can for example observe how frequently INTJs and INFPs/ENFPs are attracted to each other, or the chemistry that exists between INFJs and INTPs/ENTPs. All these relationships have already been predicted in socionics theory. I've also seen a few particularly observant members of this forum take note these patterns in attraction between types, but they know nothing of socionics, and thus they begin re-discover it all over again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
629 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
@cyamitide
thanks for the explanation! So to clarify, are you saying that the relationships between the socionics types are exactly the same between the myers-briggs types?
If you're not, could you explain that a little more?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,961 Posts
@cyamitide
thanks for the explanation! So to clarify, are you saying that the relationships between the socionics types are exactly the same between the myers-briggs types?
If you're not, could you explain that a little more?
That's what I meant, that relationships are the same because types are the same. There doesn't exist some separate 16-type typology. Jung, Myers-Briggs, and Socionics were all trying to describe the same network of 16 types, but they went about it differently. Hence descriptions and profiles will differ somewhat, but in their essence the 16 types they were trying to outline are the same ones.

If you're trying to use intertype relationships, keep in mind that about 20% of people on this forum are not typed correctly. I think the accuracy of MBTI tests is only like 70-80%.

ps. when creating a mention you need to write out the person's name after the "@"
it you just copy-paste it, it doesn't work (I didn't get a notification of your mention in your post)
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top