| Socionics Personals |  | Female
Straight
16-25
Oceania
Libra
ENFj |
|  | Male
Straight
16-25
Middle East
Sagittarius
INTj |
|  | Male
Straight
26-35
North America
Pisces
INXj |
| | Join now! |
Who is who?Learn how to convert between different systems
V.I.An introduction into the widely used Socionics Visual Identification technique
TestsA collection of Socionics related tests and quizes
Q & AsAsk a Socionics related question or provide an answer to an existing one
ArticlesVarious articles on the subject of Socionics and Types in general
ForumsWant to discuss Type? Head to Socionics Forums!
|
NTFS
by Sergei Ganin
I thought I'd post this article to make things a bit more clear. Although what I'm going to say is obvious, it does not always register in a thought process as much as it should.
When we are talking about N types or T types or F or S types, we often take a much wider scope than is necessary.
For ... example we say ESTp is T type, which is sort of true, but try assigning your classic T traits to this type and you fail. Why? Because ESTp is the S type, that's why. By the exact definition of T, T types would be the T dominant types only. But because T as auxiliary function is also quite strong, in many cases you can broaden up the definition and get away with it.
I think I might have mentioned on several occasions before how important Hidden Agenda could be. Well, to the untrained eye it could easily overshadow auxiliary function, hence leading to the wrong conclusion. Even people with over-sensitive HA themselves often get confused as to which is their stronger function, that or the auxiliary one.
So if you think that someone is ESTp but surprisingly quite emotional and bubbly, which you might find doesn't go along with T, just remember, they are not T in the first place. So, to summarise all of the above...
Think of:
N types as ENTps, INFps, INTp and ENFps ONLY
T types as INTjs, ISTjs, ENTjs and ESTjs ONLY
F types as ESFjs, ENFjs, ISFjs and INFjs ONLY
S types as ISFps, ESTps, ESFps and ISTps ONLY
|
|
Your Comments: 1+ |
| C1 I can see where you're coming from -- Joe |
| C2 I like it. -- Anonymous Parson |
C3 I’m not sure I understood. I think the article is saying that we can’t generalize the “thinking” or “feeling” type over everything else. For example, although an ESTP is a “thinking” type, there are still 3 other parts to his type, which results in the ESTP appearing to be a “feeling” type. So, the ESTP isn’t as much of a “thinking” type as he is his hidden agenda. Is this right? -- atomicpepper
|
|
| No |
| C4 Good article Sergei. I would love to see more articles from you. -- Vlad - INTj |
| C5 How can hidden agenda be distinguished from auxiliary function? -- Fremdenverkehrsverband |
| C6 This article is quite correct and a good indication of how typing should be done. -- C |
| C7 Atomic pepper - you have to look at each types dominant and auxilliary function. Use this chart, and remember Ne means extroverted intuition, Si means introverted sensing, etc. ENTp (my type) Ne dominant, Ti auxilliary ISFp SiFe ESFj FeSi INTj TiNe ENFj FeNi ISTj TiSe ESTp SeTi INFp NiFe ESFp SeFi INTp NiTe ENTj TeNi ISFj FiSe ESTj TeSi INFj FiNe ENFp NeFi ISTp SiTe The p's and j's are lower case to distinguish socionics types from MBTI types, which are written with all four letters capitalized. The types are essentially the same, but there are a few key differences. Socionics types and MBTI types that are extroverted share the same functions. According to official MBTI literature, the introverted MBTI types are structured so that an ISFp is FiSe, and an INTj is NiTe. That's because Isabelle Myers thought that introverted types only show their extroverted function to the outside world. So she came to the conclusion that if someone's primary function is introverted sensing and their auxilliary function is extroverted feeling, that person would come across to outsiders as a j type. What really makes things complicated is that her approach to typing people involved primarily asking, is someone extroverted or introverted, intuitive or sensing, thinking or feeling, and perceiving or judging? According to Isabelle Meyers, someone who is SiFe will seem to be "judging" not "percieving." Socionics is a much more cohesive, well organized system that understands that an ISFp type actually does follow the P life rhythm because type is what you are as a whole, not just who you are around your friends and coworkers. Things get even more complicated that when you factor in the fact that the MBTI type descriptions often match up with socionics types not just for the extroverts but the introverts as well. An socionics INTj often will be typed by someone using the MBTI method as being Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, and Judging. But when a socionics INTj takes an official I vs E, N vs S, etc. based test for MBTI, and scores INTJ, MBTI tells that person they are NiTe. That's the critical error that has frustrated MBTI officials in their attempts to map out intertype relations. Socionics has been able to do it because, to put it bluntly, socionics gets it right and MBTI gets it almost right. That's why if you do a google search for MBTI official intertype relations, the first page will be all links to socionics websites and forums discussing socionics. The problem most people have with socionics is the type descriptions, specifically the physical type descriptions. When you read these it's important to remember that the type descriptions include things that you can see in a lot of members of a type, but by no means all or even the significant majority. For example, I know male ISTjs with mustaches but I also know a lot of male ISTj's who don't have mustaches. That was probably written into the physical desription because in the year it was written and in Russia (socionics comes from the Soviet Union) a significant number of male ISTjs had mustaches. Similarly, the physical description of ISFps could say that ISFps often swallow air like a fish in passionate conversation because of a mannerism many Russian ISFps share or shared. I know plenty of ISFps, and never once have I seen one swallow air like a fish. Learning about socionics is a great way to broaden your understanding of society and the psyche, but most psychological type descriptions, including the ones written by Jung, Myers, and Briggs, are caricatures based on generalisations and are not based on scientifically collected data and experiments. -- Woodrow |
| C8 I find C7 extremely interesting and instructive. However I still can't decide whether I'm a S-type or a F-type. According to descriptions and profiles from BOTH Socionics and MBTI I'm an ISFj or ISFJ. As I don't trust the function-analyse I never did care of it. Now I've a problem: my wife is an ENFp or ENFP for sure and our inter-type relation has to be a "supervision". But our relation is much more a "semi-dual" one so that one of us had to have the opposite attitude, either my wife ENFj or I ISFp. Where is the error? The ENFj profile doesn't fit my wife and the ISFp profile doesn't fit me. -- piccolo_michel |
| C9 new technology file system? -- aestrivex |
| C10 @piccolo_michel: ENFj+ISFj is NOT semi-duality but ILLUSIONARY! And it is almost IMPOSSIBLE that an ISFp thinks he is ISFj or that an ENFj thinks he is ENFp. Let's see... ISFj can easily be mixed up with ISTj. Look at the functions: ISFj = Fi Se Ti Ne ISTj = Ti Se Fi Ne So THIS might be the error. semi-duality can easily be mixed up with conflicting. So it COULD be ISTj + ENFp = conflicting Are you sure you aren't ISTj? -- LII |
| C11 I see what you're saying, and I like this perspective, actually. -- sjy |
| C12 To C10 What I actually recognized in me where the valued judging functions which are the same but not in the same order for ISTp and ISFj. So my wife ENFp is my dual and the little conflicts we have aren't in relation with our types. -- piccolo_michel |
Page 1 |
| Would you like to add anything? |
( When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.) |
|
