MBTI®/Jung: A bloody mess!
I don't really want to cause any fuss, but there are a couple of things I think are long due for some serious "clearing up". To put it simply, MBTI® Introvert types are incompatible with the C. G. Jung psychological types that they are supposed to be based on. Why? Because the dominant functions of all the ...
|C1 The way this was worded confused me a little. I'm an ISFp and I'm positve my dominant function is introverted feeling. Does this confirm what you are saying? -- Anonymous|
|C2 I am an INFP. I have many INTP friends and we get along very well as long as our relationship is purely intellectual. The minute we try to enter a close relationship (girlfriend-boyfriend), the problems begin - because we are not emotionally compatible. On the other hand, I was emotionally compatible with my ISFP boyfriend. It's a question of which is more important, sharing the extroverted iNtuition (with the INTP) or the introverted Feeling (with the ISFP). To me, the latter is more important, but I don't think this is at all obvious to the INTP's I knew and know (which was/is part of the problem - they just don't "get" it, emotionally). -- Anonymous|
|C3 C1: In socionic theory, the j/p tag designates the dominant function, regardless of introversion/extraversion. ISFp would entail your perceiving function being the dominant (ie. dominant introverted sensation). If you're positive your dominant function is introverted feeling, then you have a rational dominant function, and are therefore ISFj. Note that there is no tidy equivalent between socionic and MBTI types. -- Anonymous|
|C4 "unconsciously we actually would like to be the sort of person described" (by mbti) i am mbti intp,and mbti describe FACTS of my life extremely accurately,without a single error.and i am not proud of being correctly described by a typology profile,i even would like NOT to be described completely by mbti,i dont want to match my type,and still i cant say it doesnt fit me. i am not proud of admiring certain type or whatever(like you assume),i wouldnt be.i match it,just because,even when I try to be very careful in not letting my unconscious bias me.I try to analyze myself double-blinded,(doing meditation helps to observe yourself more dettached) May be the the mbti system should be revised,so that it gives us a correct acronym set of letters,like socionics and jung does,but the PROFILES described by mbti are not faulty in any way and are even more accurate than socionics,except when telling us which functions are which. I mean,mbti intp will be the best description of me in my day to day life,REGARDLESS of theory on what function is primary etc if mbti correct their errors and say "from now on intp will be abcd,which is good to socionics" ,that would still remain being my type just my thought -- Anonymous|
|C5 To me, I think that your descriptions were quite enlightening, as I was totally on the fence with regards to MBTI and Socionics. Now, I feel more inclined to Socionics. But seriously, try to write when you're a bit more calm, yeah? Just a tip. I tend to automatically doubt articles written when the writer was in a frenzy, considering the factor that the writer could have easily easily been irrationally slipping all over the place... Regardless, I do still think you made a good point, at least that what I personally thought. -- Jordan|
|C6 [Ti] This is a very bad article. It exhibits a poor understanding of MBTI theory, and it fails to effectively argue its point. For example, the author gives some descriptions of Ni and Ti, then says, "Note that MBTI would have INTP's as the latter type and INTJ's as the former! Surely the mistake should be bloody OBVIOUS!" It's not bloody obvious at all. I'm an MBTI INTP, and the Ti description fits me better. I can't say all the details fit, but that's because the descriptions are overly general, not because Ni should fit me better. The author ends by calling himself (INTP and "introverted intuiting"). If he means INTP in the MBTI sense, which he might since he didn't write it as INTp, and because he felt he had to add the Ni bit, this by itself reveals a lack of understanding of his subject. The article would seem to confirm this lack of understanding. -- Fergus Duniho|
|C7 @C6. Is this you: http://duniho.com/fergus/fergus.jpg? OMG it is you! You're bloody obviously an INFp, especially when trying to project your inferior T with every opportunity. I bet lots of Socionics doesn't make sense to you and seems wrong, and why shouldn't it, your perception is already screwed up after all. Oh and don't even start about j/p switch in Socionics of which you know nothing, stick with MBTI as it looks like it lets you believe you're T without problems. -- Tom|
|C8 Tom, please don't put your foot in your mouth any further. You have said enough to convince me of your ignorance. I have no problem with Socionics, and unlike you I'm not tripping over semantic differences between two theories about the very same types. -- Fergus Duniho|
|C9 No offense, but you sound nothing like an MBTI INTJ (which is a socionics INTp). I've gotten to know quite a few INTJ's ever since I started learning about typology, and none of us ever get angry. We might get annoyed or pissed off, but never do we start employing ad homonim's simply because someone disagrees with us. We smile, nod, and think we are right. We do not start spitting random insults out. -- <_<|
|C10 @C9 - The MBTI-INTJ is Ne-INTj in Socionics while the MBTI-INTP is Te-INTp in Socionics. Tom (the author) says he is Ni-INTp so his type does not really exist in MBTI. ) Ni-INTp and Ti-INTj are somewhere between INTP and INTJ. You MUST read about subtypes to understand... -- Ne-INTj = INTJ|
|C11 The solution is using SUBTYPES! Ti-INTj and Te-INTp are sometimes more similar than Ti-INTj and Ne-INTj! You can't say "Socionics is wrong" or "MBTI is wrong" - it always depends on the subtype you are! Producing subtypes make more use of their creative function AND of their demonstrative function. I am Ne-INTj so I use very often. My brother is Te-INTp so he uses very often. @Tom: You are Ni-INTp but why don't you accept the existence of Te-INTps who often use their demostrative function and think it is their base function? The confusion concerning functions is just because people don't know SUBTYPES!!! The confusion concerning the j-/p-switch is just because people don't know SUBTYPES!!! Read this http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Subtypes and that http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Category:Subtype_descriptions -- Ne-INTj|
|C12 I agree that it is a confusing mess. I think part of the problem is that neither MBTI or socionics has extremely good descriptions of the functions, so there is a lot of confusion about what the introverted functions actually are. However, I believe the MBTI introvert profiles are the same as the Socionics profiles, therefore INTp in socionics does not equal INTJ in MBTI. I am definitely an INFJ in MBTI and an INFj in socionics, and I also believe introverted intuition is my dominant function, and extroverted feeling is my secondary (or creative) function. I still can't seem to understand whether socionics has a totally different function order for introverts or if Fi in INFj is really the same as extroverted feeling being the secondary function in MBTI. I think maybe socionics and MBTI just have different ways of describing the same thing, however eventually both theories will have to reach some sort of agreement or I feel it will hinder the acceptance of both because people will be so confused. -- Anonymous|
|C13 C3: you should NEVER type people by their dominant functions. this method is not reliable. If C1 thinks her base is this does NOT mean she is ISFj!! The question should be: perceiving or judging? C1 says she is perceiving with dominant . So she is probably Fe-ISFp with (base) (creative) and (demonstrating) on the same level. My , and are almost on the same level - Socionics says is dominant, MBTI says is dominant... who cares?! I say they are almost on the same level. Wait... today I used 4 hours, 20 minutes, 27 seconds, I usesd 4 hours, 18 minutes, 54 seconds, I used 4 hours, 11 minutes, 46 seconds. So is my base function, isn't it? ) -- Ne-INTj|
|C14 Who said INTj's can't be mean, hypocritical, insensitive, self-righteous, sanctimonious, rigid, dogmatic, and deceitful? -- Anonymous|
|C15 I'm sorry Tom but you are wrong, in the truth the j/p means how do the individual interacts with the world, it refers to his function when on the extrovert mode, therefore for the introvert types it refers to the auxiliary function (checkmate!). This means that the INTp seems irrational to the world (when on the extrovert mode), but when on his dominant function (on the introvert mode) he will be as rational as he likes to be. Of course this convention generates a lot of misunderstandings, but I think it is better to don't try to change the conventions so we don't need to adapt the theory that is already there. I would apreciate a lot if you answer me. -- Mark|
|C16 I just want to add that I came to the same conclusion as C13. As an example if you are INFP and INFp, then I'm sure this is because your Fi and Ni are equal in strength. But if you are INFP and INFj, this would show your dominant function is clearly Fi. -- Anonymous|
|Would you like to add anything?|
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.