How different can socionics be to mbti?

[SanityPanda]

Now up until recently I always thought that scoring ISFj would mean perhaps mean that I would be an ISFP or ISFJ due to the misconception of Fi being the same in both theories. Wasn't until recently when I discovered that the description of Se actually closely resembles that of Si described, which changes everything now.

The question is how different can a socionics type be compared to a mbti type. Would it be possible to score say perhaps ENFp and be an INTP?

Another interesting thing while rummaging through the previous threads regarding socionics I came across this.



You cannot determine your type through tests or type descriptions

Because function development is individual. So unless you can make a test that can determine interconnections between functions and their corresponding development and type descriptions that can encompass all of humanity you can never get trustworthy results. In the end each individual must be treated as such.
But one can find ones type analytically, by elimination or experimentation or something similar.


By my understanding... would this mean that all the socionic questionaires presented on this forum would be useless. To find ones type analytically, by elimination or experimentation seems awfully vague on how one could actually go about doing this.

[TheSuspect]

"You cannot determine your type through tests or type descriptions"
That is just the opinion of the writer i'd guess. The test gave a lot of us INTP as a result, and for most of us, it fits very well.

[Kljoki]

Now up until recently I always thought that scoring ISFj would mean perhaps mean that I would be an ISFP or ISFJ due to the misconception of Fi being the same in both theories. Wasn't until recently when I discovered that the description of Se actually closely resembles that of Si described, which changes everything now.

The question is how different can a socionics type be compared to a mbti type. Would it be possible to score say perhaps ENFp and be an INTP?

Yes. But it's more along the lines of some possibilities, for example you can't get ENFp and INTJ and if you do then either your MBTI or socionics type is wrong (IMO). But what specific possibility did you have in mind?


Another interesting thing while rummaging through the previous threads regarding socionics I came across this.



You cannot determine your type through tests or type descriptions

Because function development is individual. So unless you can make a test that can determine interconnections between functions and their corresponding development and type descriptions that can encompass all of humanity you can never get trustworthy results. In the end each individual must be treated as such.
But one can find ones type analytically, by elimination or experimentation or something similar.By my understanding... would this mean that all the socionic questionaires presented on this forum would be useless. Uhm... didn't I write that? Anyway, yes and no, they are useless in the result they give but not in the information they provide. For example, if the test says SEE (ESFp) then the result itself is useless as a type indicator, that doesn't have to be your type and most likely isn't, but getting SEE as a result pretty much reduces the possibility of being a conflictor of that type. The main point being that results with no analysis are fruitless.


To find ones type analytically, by elimination or experimentation seems awfully vague on how one could actually go about doing this.My main point was to ignore subjective impressions (Like test results) and base yourself on irrefutable facts (Like unchanging relationships, failed relationships and so on). Through an analytical analysis of *facts* you can reach the right conclusions.

[SanityPanda]

Yes. But it's more along the lines of some possibilities, for example you can't get ENFp and INTJ and if you do then either your MBTI or socionics type is wrong (IMO). But what specific possibility did you have in mind?

ISTJ and ISFj



My main point was to ignore subjective impressions (Like test results) and base yourself on irrefutable facts (Like unchanging relationships, failed relationships and so on). Through an analytical analysis of *facts* you can reach the right conclusions.

You mean that these facts are basically inter-relations with other people? One cannot get their true type just by themselves?
Eck... that would most likely mean you need to know other peoples type before you can find out whether the relationships hold true. :mellow:

Yeah you did write the whole misconception business. :)

[Kljoki]

ISTJ and ISFj

Yes, I'd say they are interchangeable.


You mean that these facts are basically inter-relations with other people?No, anything that is certain or an irrefutable fact (I just used the relations as an example, you can't deny for example that you broke up with somebody and that it wasn't working out. Through analyzing that, your relationship, you can find out your type).


One cannot get their true type just by themselves?Basically yes but ironically it depends on your type. Some types are, how should I put it, less connected to what really is, more biased and so on which impedes their ability to objectively judge themselves.


Eck... that would most likely mean you need to know other peoples type before you can find out whether the relationships hold true. :mellow: Well yes and no, the relationships will hold true regardless of other people's types, you could say it's the types that "conform" to the relationships and not the other way around. So if you have an activity relation with somebody who is suppose to be your super ego somebody has got their type assessment wrong.