| Questions & Answers |
| Question #1122237531 | Sunday, 24-Jul-2005 |
|
|
| What happens to the "type" system when you are neither an Introvert or Extravert, but an ambivert i.e. you are mid-point on a continuum of Introversion-Extraversion? -- Anonymous |
Your Answers: 1+ |
| A1 The real question here is how do you know that you are mid-point in the first place? How do you measure E/I exactly, so that you can find the middle? Because, using your beloved linear MB terms, if you are not precisely in the middle then you have a preference. -- Admin |
| A2 If you do happen to be exactly on the mid-point, the concept of "type" is still valid if you think of it in terms of preferences rather than behavior. Just ask yourself whether being an introvert or being and extravert would be more conducive to attaining the life you wish to live. -- Horace |
| A3 Ambivert is also a term used in the Five Form Model. However, the Extroversion scale of the FFM is more about behaviour, not about mental focus. Like explained elsehere on this site: many tests want to determine your level of extraversion independent of your perceiving (S/N) or judging (J/P) mode. This is what happens in FFM. However, in Socionics and MBTI, extraversion/introversion should be seen as the orientation of the perceiving/judging modes, which is a totally diffent concept from everyday use of the terms extravert/introvert. -- pm (ENFP) |
| A4 If a person shows extroversion as much as introversion, only a serious and deep analysis will help you know whether he's an introvert or an extravert, usually all the functions which are different from the dominant have something pathological. So if you're an introvert then the function you use in extroversion must have something pathological, if you're an extravert then the function you use in introversion must have something pathological. -- Complicater-Complexer |
| A5 You need to consider which you're more comfortable with. The E vs. I decision is all about locus of control. An extravert's locus of control is external, outside himself. An introvert's locus of control is internal, within himself. What makes you happy? If your happiness comes from the contents of the outside world, your locus of control is external. Otherwise, if you feel that you are responsible for your own happiness, your locus of control is internal. -- metroGnome, the ostensible INTj |
| A6 Why does a person have to fall into either the introvert or extravert category? If someone's actions are nearly equally balanced between extraversion and introversion, it is safe to say they are an ambivert, plain and simple. A lot of people like some time to socialize and some time to think or work on projects of their own; I wouldn't say there's anything unusual or exceptional about that (although the majority probably is moderately extraverted and not right on the ambivert midpoint of the continuum). -- Néant |
|
|
| A7 There actually isn't a continuum between "introversion" and "extraversion" if the terms are used in accordance with their original Jungian definition as they are in the typology of socionics. In socionics, these terms are not used to indicate a measure of sociability, but are rather intended to signify whether a person is oriented to a subjective or objective attitude, with sociability often, but not always, being a by-product of the extraverted attitude. In this sense a continuum between extraversion and introversion is impossible, for the idea of a mid-point existing between an object and a subject is obviously nonsensical. Therefore the concept of ambiversion, while useful as a personality descriptor, bears relevance only within the Five Factor Model. -- lf |
| A8 Extroverts vs. Introverts Extroverts are directed towards the objective world whereas Introverts are directed towards the subjective world. [I'm thinking this makes me an Introvert - facts have always been less important to me than meanings. But I'm very ENFP with high N so maybe that's more to do with the N.] Extroverts are interested in what is happening around them [Depends] are open and often talkative [Very] compare their own opinions with the opinions of others [Dunno] like action and initiative [No, but I like having novel ideas] easily make new friends or adapt to a new group [I don't know. I don't adapt to a group - I reveal myself to them.] say what they think [Yes] are interested in new people [Yes] easily break unwanted relations [No] Introverts are interested in their own thoughts and feelings [Very much] need to have own territory [?] often appear reserved, quiet and thoughtful [Yes] usually do not have many friends [Yes] have difficulties in making new contacts [Contacts no, friends yes] like concentration and quiet [Often] do not like unexpected visits and therefore do not make them[yes, but we don't really here - UK] work well alone [Yes] -- RubyENFP |
| A9 I've read Jung's definiton of a subjective or objective attitude and I still don't know which I am. When I read the traits on websites I have an equal number of traits on each side. I get my kicks from people and from ideas and am very introspective. As a child I was a lot more introverted. Jung only said that ideally you were one or the other and maybe people in his day had more inflexible personas. Can anyone help me work out whether I'm Introvert or Extravert cos I've been trying to for years. As a whole the ENFP description fits me, but not entirely. Some of me feels INFP and I wonder if I've just adapted socially. Where do I get my energy from? Coffee mostly. -- RubyENFP |
| A10 @Ruby: You seem to contradict yourself a bit. "are open and often talkative [Very]" and "often appear reserved, quiet and thoughtful [Yes]". Only one of those can apply. -- Anonymous |
| A11 Ruby: I understand your predicament. As far as socionics is concerned, the type description best fitting me is ENFp. However, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that I am introverted (not in terms of how social I am, but rather in terms of where my thoughts are generally directed - internally, to the self). Hence in MBTI terms I am INFP, and the description is quite accurate. My theory on this is that my extraverted auxillary function (Ne) is developed to an extent where I consider it more as my dominant process than my dominant function (Fi). This is where more research is required on the whole idea of subtypes (ie. iNfp, inFp) and how the J/P dimension would be played out in an individual with, for example, dominant N, but a p preferences. Of course, most people will laugh at such an idea, as it questions the very validity of MBTI/socionic theory on the assumption that S/N dominance invariably leads to p characteristics, and T/F dominance invariably leads to j characteristics. -- Anonymous |
| A12 @A11: "not in terms of how social I am, but rather in terms of where my thoughts are generally directed - internally, to the self" That's definetly not what introverted means. Basically what you describe is same as being self-centered, both introverts and extroverts can be self-centered. And there are introverts that aren't focused on themselves at all. You being a feeler, don't take that as an offence. -- Anonymous |
| A13 Depends on what personality type you are. -- Ryan |
| *Please note that the opinions expressed are not necessarily those of socionics.com* |
Page 1 |
| Would you like to add anything? |
(
