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!
|
How to convert MBTI® type to Socionics type
by Sergei Ganin
Anyone who had closely read all the articles about Socionics and MBTI® theory compatibility issues has already got a fair idea that there is no straightforward conversion between the two systems. This obviously creates quite a lot of confusion, especially when it comes to the introvert types. The most common ... question people ask is: "Is MBTI INTJ the same as Socionics INTp or Socionics INTj?" Some people have created the myth that if you change the last letter of the MBTI introvert type acronym to the opposite then you get a Socionics equivalent, i.e. MBTI INTJ = Socionics INTp. As I said, it is a myth and even though such conversion may work in some cases, it does not work in all cases. So here I'll try to show how to make such conversion possible without getting into too much trouble.
The Thinking and Feeling pair of functions is bound together in the same way the Sensing and Intuition pair is. The two functions in a pair always go up against each or fight for the domination if you like. If one of the functions in a pair appears to be Dominant function then the other function in the same pair is Inferior and is well suppressed by the Dominant function, and the domination of the Dominant function is obvious. However, if one of the functions in a pair is Auxiliary, then the other would be Tertiary, which represents the Hidden Agenda. The Auxiliary and Tertiary combination of functions provokes a war between these functions, because there is no clear dominator. On one hand the Auxiliary function is much stronger than Tertiary, however the Tertiary function is the Hidden Agenda and is extremely important. So what happens in reality is that a person find it difficult to separate these two functions in order to give them clear preference, the functions always appear to be mixed up together to a certain degree.
So, if a person's Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), then such person find it hard to keep these two in peace and may find it difficult to decide whether they are F or T. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), and should be quite easy to separate. Because the Dominant function is Perceiving in this case, the person would be Socionics Perceiving type (XXXp). So if MBTI INTJ person is more uncertain about being T or F than S or N i.e. IN(T/F)J or INxJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTp.
If a person's Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), then such person may find it difficult to keep these two in friendship and may find it hard to decide whether they are S or N. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), and should be quite easy to divide. Because in this case the Dominant function is Judging, the person would be Socionics Judging type (XXXj). So if MBTI INTJ person is more unsure about being S or N than T or F i.e. I(S/N)TJ or IxTJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTj.
So here it is all of the above simplified:
Unsure about being T or F -> you are Socionics XXXp
Unsure about being S or N -> you are Socionics XXXj
Alternatively if you would like a solid table of conversion between the two systems, you can use the table below:
Extroverts |
MBTI system |
Socionics system |
ENFJ |
ENFj |
ENTJ |
ENTj |
ENFP |
ENFp |
ENTP |
ENTp |
ESFJ |
ESFj |
ESTJ |
ESTj |
ESFP |
ESFp |
ESTP |
ESTp |
Introverts |
MBTI system |
Socionics system |
INFJ |
INFx |
INTJ |
INTx |
INFP |
INFx |
INTP |
INTx |
ISFJ |
ISFx |
ISTJ |
ISTx |
ISFP |
ISFx |
ISTP |
ISTx |
|
|
C1 How do you know that an N in MBTI is also N in socionics? Same for other four functions. -- Complicater-Complexer |
C2 Following up/developing on C1, *is* there a correlation between the extraverts in MBTI/Socionics? Are the definitions for each function the same or at least similar? Would an MBTI description of an ENFP fit the Socionics description of an ENFp? Finally, you outlined your recurring theme of "T/F confusion = p, S/N confusion = j" very neatly this time, and I found it very insightful. -- Anonymous |
C3 Moreover, how does one categorically distinguish between one's dominant and auxillary preferences, when neither seems more developed than the other? As an example, my MBTI type is clearly INFP, both in terms of preferences and in description. Socionic conversion, according to this article, demands that I know which of my S/N and T/F supressions is greater, something I am consistently unable to do. Perhaps it's a function of my F being introverted and the fact that I am more consciously aware of my extraverted N in daily life, but I cannot say with certainty that my T/F difference is greater than my S/N difference. Yet MBTI descriptions make no bones about which type I am, which is why I'm hesitant to accept socionic theory. Any insights? -- Chris |
C4 @C3 Any insights? Yeah, you should stick with MBTI. -- Anonymous |
C5 C3, I'm not at all familiar with MBTI, but from what I understand, I=I, so if your F is introverted, and an I's dominate function is introverted, I'm no professional, but I'd say that you're an INFj. If I'm wrong about the I thing, you'd probably be an ENFp, but I think the first one is more accurate. -- Myst (ISTj) |
C6 I am very familiar with the MBTI system, and I can definitively say that this article is incorrect. In the MBTI system, I-Ps and E-Js are the types whose dominant function is a judging function, the same as -j in Socionics, and I-Js and E-Ps are the types whose dominant function is a perceiving function, the same as -p in Socionics. MBTI and Socionics identify exactly the same types, differing only in how they label them. For extraverted types, the same letters are used to identify the same types. For introverted types, Socionic -js are MBTI -Ps and Socionic -ps are MBTI -Js. -- Fergus Duniho |
C7 So if I understand correctly it's easy to distinguissh ISFj and ISTj as T and F are at both ends for instance, but difficult to distinguish ISFp and ISTp as T and F are in the middle. -- piccolo_michel |
C8 C6, you don't know nothing about Socionics. I am both INTj and INTJ - no switch there. But I also think this article does not really help. What if an introvert is sure about being T AND sure about being N? Then this article is useless... The only solution is using subtypes! -- INTj |
C9 As I'm still comparing MB-theory and Socionics and try to understand the enigma about introverted types, I find a probable solution in the fact that -MB-theory uses 4 functions, each one with 2 attitudes -Socionics uses 8 functions, each one with 2 "sub-attitudes" (usual for introverts, seldom for extraverts) As everybody has to "exteriorize" his dominant function in order to interact with other people, "EXTRAVERTS" "exteriorize" their DOMINANT "extraverted function" and interiorize their auxiliary function what can be written : (Te)e = Te, (Fe)e = Fe, (Ne) = Ne, (Se)e = Se and (Ni)i = Ni, (Si) = Si, (Ti)i =Ti, (Fi)i = Fi. That is absolutely normal and done WITHOUT effort. BUT... "INTROVERTS" have an "introverted" dominant function and have to "work hard" in order to interact with other people: they have to "EXTERIORIZE an INTROVERTED function". It can be done through the help of the auxiliary function only. So an ISFj, like me, (FiSe) has to "exteriorize Fi" what can be written (Fi)e, an ISTj (TiSe) has to "exteriorize Ti" what can be written (Ti)e, an ISFp or an ISTp has to "exteriorize Si" what can be written (Si)e, and so on... BUT... (Fi)e (confused with Fe in the MB-theory) is neither identical with Fe nor with Fi, (Ti)e (confused with Te in the MB-theory) is neither identical with Te nor with Ti, (Ni)e (confused with Ne in the MB-theory) is neither identical with Ne nor with Ni, (Si)e (confused with Se in the MB-theory) is neither identical with Se nor with Si, (Fe)i (confused with Fi in the MB-theory) is neither identical with Fi nor with Fe, and so on... An example: when somebody is answering a questionnaire, Ti has to be "exteriorized" (Ti)e (easy for TiNe (INTj) or TiSe (ISTj) but maybe very difficult for extraverts who aren't used to "exteriorize an introverted function") However when they are alone and don't have to interact, introverts use their functions in their "normal mode", i.e. (Fi)i = Fi, (Ti)i = Ti, (Ni)i = Ni, (Si)i = Si. -- piccolo_michel |
C10 I agree with C6, because For INTP, MBTI says: - Your perceptive function is extraverted. - Your juldgement function is introverted. - Your introverted function is dominant. For INTj, Socionics says: - Your perceptive function is extraverted. - Your juldgement function is introverted. - Your introverted function is dominant. It will be ALWAYS THE SAME. -- thiagomdo ( INTP and INTj ) |
C11 To C10 Actually it's NOT ALWAYS THE SAME. Many are INTP/INTp or INTJ/INTj. FOR "S" types it's ALWAYS different as, for instance, ISFJ (SiFe) IS similar with ISFj (FiSe)! C6 (Fergus Duniho) is the one who built a MBTI (!!!) test which scored me as MBTI-ISFJ or MBTI-ISTJ, (I took this test several times) with a dominant judging function (!!!) what is in CONFLICT with MBTI but in AGREEMENT with Socionics. -- piccolo_michel |
C12 Okay. I know next to nothing about socionics, but I have been studying MBTI, so I may be able to add some info that someone else can use constructively. Maybe. So. In MBTI the first and last letter (E/I, J/P) determine how the middle two letters (S/N, T/F) are used, and which is preferred most 'overall'. S and N are known as 'perceiiving' or 'info-gathering', T and F and 'judging' or 'decisions-making'. Someone who is a 'J', whether they are introverted or extraverted, prefers to organise their outer world - that is, reality. This may be manifested as tidiness, timeliness, organisation etc. (But I'm not going to say this is always the case) J's use their decision-making letter extravertedly to do this. So if we have an INFJ, this person will, according to MBTI, use 'Fe'. If the INFJ uses 'J' extravertedly, then they will use 'P' introvertedly. This means they use their info-gathering function internally, or that they use Ni. The last two functions are the opposites of the first two (yay for balance) so an INFJ uses Fe, Ni, Se, Ti. Because they are an introvert, the INFJ will have the Ni as their dominant, so their functions, in order of dominance, are: Ni Fe Ti Se Hope this helps. -- K |
C13 Yes, there is a little mismatch between mbti and socionics. Here is an example http://psychotype.ru/article/robesper-lii-logiko-intuitivnyj-introvert-intj-14.html She has been typed as an INTJ in Russia. I would type her as an INTP and never an INTJ. Who is right now? She is a Kim Raver look-alike. http://www.starpulse.com/Actresses/Raver,_Kim/gallery/SGG-001730/ -- jgbr |
C14 Socionics' INTp and INTj are whacked. I'm an INTP by definition in both fields, but the order of functions in Socionics classifies me as INTj yet the description does not fit me. I think there was a language problem during translation. -- Anonymous |
C15 INTPs seem to have the biggest problem. Same for me. We identify strongly with the MBTI description, but don't feel that the either the INTps and INTjs in socionics gives us a very convincing home. The 'INTps uncovered' article describes INTps as a plague, eating away at the foundation of socionics. No wonder. -- Anonymous |
C16 C15: identifying to a stereotype is not enough because INTp and INTj are quasi-identical types (it's also the name of their relation) there will always be one detail or another that will make you trust one or the other. When unsure, whatever the system, user the sorting question provided in the article (which conflict is greater? N vs S or T vs N, or inversely what is harder to distinguish? if T>F or if S>N) But in the end what's important is to get the function order right, in both systems there is one type who is TiNe and one type who is NiTe. You are one of them but you can't be both. So if you are NiTe, you are INTp=INTJ=ILI. If you are TiNe, you are INTj=INTP=LII -- Anonymous |
C17 As meanings of functions are different in MBTI and Socionics a correlation as INTJ = INTp, ISFJ = ISFp, INFJ = INFp, and so on, IS NOT POSSIBLE. So, for instance, "valuing traditions" is linked with Si in MBTI, Fi in Socionics, or "valuing pleasures of the table, good food, good wine, etc" is linked with Se in MBTI, Si in Socionics. Definitions for N and T are also different in MBTI and Socionics. Therefore NiTe in MBTI is not necessarily NiTe but can be like TiNe or even anything else in Socionics, and vice versa TiNe in MBTI is not necessarily TiNe but can be like NiTe or even anything else in Socionics. -- piccolo_michel |
|
Would you like to add anything? |
( When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)
|
|