Personality Cafe banner

1 - 2 of 2 Posts

1,338 Posts
a worthless, moronic article, completely lacking in substance or knowledge of socionics; a few counterpoints

Introverted Intuiting - ineffectual dreamers, mystics, fantasizers. Sometimes end up as the half-wit wise men in "psychological novels". Incredibly bad with communication (other people simply can't understand them, and they can't understand why), though not necessarily unsociable. Often attacked from the unconscious by a primitive extraverted sensing function which results in obsessions with visual images, places, faces, etc. Further, in the section on Introverted irrationals in general, they are described as good teachers who teach not with words but with their life.

okay, in socionics an Ni-oriented character; the emphasis on visually obsessive imagery is sort of misstated but not wrong, just very poorly worded

Introverted Thinking - cold-blooded strategists, loners, theoretics. Arrogant, unsociable, having a certain disdain for others whom they consider stupid. Seem to others to be constantly angry, almost hateful. Completely certain in their opinions, strong will. Sometimes shamelessly exploited by strong women. Attacked from the unconscious by a primitive extraverted feeling function which makes them take every criticism, even fair, very personally (and later makes them seek revenge).

okay, in socionics nothing vaguely resembling Se polr or alpha values; clearly nothing like an LII, perhaps more like an poorly actualized ILI. also, not a fair description of jungian Ti

2. INTP's, INFP's and ISTP's. Which of the latter two is closest to the first? MBTI would have both INTP's and ISTP's together, since they both have a dominant introverted thinking function, while INTP's and INFP's only share the secondary extroverted intuiting function. Which of them do you think go best together (simply judging from their MBTI descriptions)? And shouldn't ISTP's go together with ISFP's? And INTJ's with ISTJ's, rather than INFJ's? Take ENTP's and ENFP's - everything says that they are the two most closely related types. Make them both introverts and everything turns upside down! See? Now, what one starts to wonder about is why such a glaring mistake has not yet been fixed.

what on earth is the argument here? why are INFP and INTP inherently more similar than INTP and ISTP? for that matter, why are IEI and ILI inherently more similar than ILI and SLI? saying so ignores the fact that in terms of quadra values, these types are no more or less distant

I think that this maybe so because unconsciously we actually would like to be the sort of person described. For example, INTP's admire ISTJ's, so they accept the "introverted thinking" tag proudly, ISTJ's admire ISFP's so they are willing to be called "introverted sensing", INFP's admire ISFJ's, and so on. Socionics actually describes this intertype relationship as one of "benefit" - one of the two believes the other to be a wonderful and admirable person, while the other considers the first to be rather usual and not particularly interesting

failure to account for quadra values -- even in the classical interpretation of benefit relations which incidentally i have never had an interpretation for, ILIs are benefited by LSIs because LSIs have Se in the ego block; ILIs' dual-seeking function, and in theory don't care about LSIs' emphasis on Ti as an id function in ILIs, rather than "admiring" it. in my interpretation, however, from what i can see in practice, relations of benefit are entirely about quadra values and have no classical "asymmetrical benefit" interpretation. in practice specifically between ILIs and LSIs, my observations have tended to be that ILIs are more indignant and distant towards LSIs precisely because of distaste for Ti values (as well as ILIs' propensity for harsh judgment as gamma types)
1 - 2 of 2 Posts