„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
The EIE subtype descriptions appear to be backwards.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
.
Last edited by golden; 06-10-2011 at 12:25 AM.
LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”
Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”
LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”
Bah, half the people in the Socionix galleries are mistyped anyway.
What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
If you focus on subtypes more than the types, there is something wrong with your approach. It should be possible to identify with being one type rather than the others - if it isn't, identifying your subtype first isn't going to help you. You should recognise which information elements you are strong in etc. and thus deduce your likely type\s - utilising subtypes just confuses things. If you are an IEI, you strongest function is Ni - you don't need subtypes to tell you that you are an IEI as opposed to an EIE.
As for intertype relations - the strength of your functions must surely have a bearing on how you get on with people of other types, in accordance with the relative strength of your functions.