| 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!
|
| Questions & Answers |
| Question #1134198664 | Saturday, 10-Dec-2005 |
|
|
| What is the statistical distribution of the 16 personality types? I have read on other personality webpages that the intuitive introverts are the most rare. I'm an INFP, and supposedly my personality type is roughly 1% of the population. What about extroverts? It seems like there is a larger percentage of extroverts, according to the other websites. If it is true that there are more extroverts than introverts, I would guess that there are a lot of problems associated with duality. In general, I know at least one ESTP for every type of organization in which I am involved; there are several who frequent my workplace. How practical is duality? I know that INFPs have problems resisting their whimsical desires and that ESTPs have a difficult time settling down, so I guess that when the time is right, everything just clicks? -- Erica Leslie |
|
A9 I do not support suffering, I do not want others to suffer, I myself dislike suffering very much (as an ISTp), and I never said I was against the idea of duality. I am merely against the idea that duality is the only relationship we should engage in. There are many kinds of love and the highest form which is not in your description is the will to give all to the person you love, even laying down your life for your beloved. Loving someone is not about you, nor the raging fire in your heart, it is about the person you love. You cannot force love or fake love but you can choose to love. You can choose to give yourself to that person. And when it is mutual, even conflicting partners are brought together. Thanks aj for sharing your experience. To the INFp, it does not just click immediately. With your dual, you should feel rather at ease and interested, and it will be easy to continue building the relationship as there should be very little friction. However it is not duality that makes it all work out, love's the key as usual. The previous poster with a talent for sarcasm has answered your question to the practicality of duality, which is as he said, mathematically probable. Thanks for the idea of sharing duals, which is cool for non marriage relationships. Duality does makes things easier for relationships, and that is good. Behaving according to your personality type is easy, and too some extent good. But personality typing does not teach you how to be yourself by putting you in boxes, which we all should be a master at, but instead how to get out of the box; our weaknesses are obviously not in our strengths, but if we master our weakness, it will be a strength. I remember a post about rings of pain and pleasure, that after the pain there is pleasure. After doing what is not natural to us, the pain will stop, but there is now pleasure. For example works of creativity, or obeying the rules, or thinking logically, or being tactful. Once we have mastered our weaknesses by allowing ourselves to face them, we have truly learnt from this website. (Note, I do not support pain, only if there is greater pleasure after, then it is worth the suffering) Same with relationships. Having a conflicting partner may be difficult, but it changes your life. Or it may not. Having a dual partner is easy, and it will teach you how to love and how a relationship works. We have only one life, so we might as well try it all  -- LoveSeeker |
A10 So we've got it out in the open. Anyone wondering what the quadrable spirits are can learn from this topic. Both aj and LoveSeeker have given a good example of the Delta quadrable values and how  manifests itself in particular. Well done everyone. -- Admin |
| A11 The only thing I know about the type distributions/percentages is not to pay attention until some real science is done to determine them. That is why socionics is so valuable and the MBTI is so worthless. -- econdude |
|
|
| A12 In the Myers-Briggs typology the four aspects of type E/I, S/N, T/F, and J/P are assumed to be independent random variables. (This assumption simplifies calculation, but isn't necessarily true.) Moreover, introversion is assumed to be abnormal, or at least less frequent than extraversion, due to a leftover Freudian bias. Also sensation is assumed to be more prevalent than intuition, and that might not be true either. All in all MB statistics are biased -- Anonymous |
| A13 I know a guy who is a hardcore shrink and I asked him once "what temperament are YOU?" His reply: "i am the ninja temperament." LOL -- Anonymous |
| A14 When you read statistics about personality type distribution keep in mind that most claims are based upon assumptions not known to be true. 1. The dimensions of personality I/E, S/N, and T/F are assumed to be statistically independent. There is no evidence to indicate that this is so. 2. There is a presumed 3:1 preference for extraversion vs. introversion. This is a bias left over from Jung (and carved in stone by Myers-Briggs). Extraversion is presumed to be "normal." 3. Thinking is predominant in men, and feeling is predominant in women. According to Kiersey this is an actual fact, though accounting for the gender bias still leaves the split at 50/50. (I have yet to see any hard data that backs up this claim however.) Putting all of that together one has the makings of a great myth. Ockham's razor stipulates that whenever possible one should avoid multiplying assumptions. In most cases however this is precisely what has been done with the statistics of type. -- Anonymous |
| A15 Kudos to A4. although i dont agree with the first two lines . A7 - couldnt have said it better myself but i do think that to some extent love is a verb and not just a noun. I agree with A8 and A9 too. I'm against the kind of people wanting to inflict pain in relationships just because they believe they are the only ones who have suffered horrible things and therefore justify causing other people hurt for selfish interests. I've realized that we are what we make of ourselves mostly even though we like to think sometimes that we are not accountable for who we become. Its like the story of two kids raised by an alcoholic, abusing, barely making it father - one becomes very successful and says his main motivation was that he did not want to live his life like his father and the second son grows up to be an alcoholic like his dad and says "Well whadaya expect?! like father, like son." -- Anonymous |
| *Please note that the opinions expressed are not necessarily those of socionics.com* |
|
| Would you like to add anything? |
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)
|
|
