| 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 #1155991066 | Saturday, 19-Aug-2006 |
|
|
| Is there a difference between the definitions of the Myers-Briggs ISTP and the Socionics ISTP? -- Fefe |
Your Answers: 1+ |
| A1 According to Myers-Briggs ISTP has dominant introverted thinking, and auxilliary extraverted sensing. According to socionics ISTp's program function is introverted sensing with a creative function of extraverted thinking. Obviously these are not the same types. Nonetheless, there is good agreement between the descriptions of ISTP's and ISTp's. Thus one is forced to conclude that Isabel Myers got her function descriptions bass-ackwards when it comes to introverts. -- Anonymous |
A2 In Socionics the ISTp,   , is the Artisan, while the ISTj,   , is the Pragmatist. To my understanding these are functionally functionally reversed. Si, , is about comparing past experiences to present ones to ensure continuity. Whereas, Te is about systematizing, organizing and categorizing facts so as to reconcile one's understanding to the external world. Therefore it seems that , the ISTJ according to Myers-Briggs, is a better representation of the Pragmatist than the Artisan. Likewise, Ti, , is about holistically analyzing facts to see if they fit general truths, and Se, , is about raw, present sensory experience. Combining these two, , seems to fit the picture of an Artisan better. -- Anonymous |
A3 Si is not past experiences, don't take this garbage into your heads. is about body functioning, how is that even remotely related to past experiences? Ni  in fact is closer by its nature to past experiences, but I wouldn't call it that either. -- Dr. Zoidberg |
| A4 @A3, That is about bodily functioning would account for the similarity between the M-B ISTP and the Socionics ISTp. However, I based my remarks upon an explanation of that is consistent with M-B theory, and makes more sense to me personally. I am INTj and therefore my hidden agenda is supposedly my own health or comfort; but it's not. I'm overweight, not particularly sensitive to my own discomfort, and the only concern I have about the food that I eat is what it tastes like. That much as background, the M-B explanation of Si that I had read says that Si compares and contrasts past experiences with present ones. By contrast Ni -- -- is about forecasting. There is no intuition needed to understand the past. The future implications of past events maybe, but not the past itself. The past is concrete, factual data very much the realm of the senses. It is not particularly the same as either, because dictates that whatever creates the biggest splash in the present moment gets the most attention. Anyhow that's where I was coming from in A2, Mr. Zoidberg. -- Anonymous |
| A5 @A4. It's Dr. Zoidberg. Besides how would you even know if I'm Mr or Mrs, huh? On the topic, if we discuss socionics, then we talk socionics and there is no point of mixing it with MBTI definitions that don't make sense. Apart from that, I don't think you understand the hidden agenda. I also doubt you're an INTj. -- Dr. Zoidberg |
| A6 You do of course realize that you're insisting upon deriving academic authority from a cartoon character? Aside from that, if I misidentified your gender, Miss, I humbly apologize. As for the INTj thing, perhaps not, but why would it really make a difference how I identified myself? Maybe my hidden agenda, whatever it is, does indicate a different type; however, it seems to me, that the concept of the HA is one the weaker aspects of the theory. (In terms of Occam's razor, less likely to be true than say that a person's overt behavior would match his ego functions.) -- Anonymous |
| A7 I wonder, if you have actually read the INTj uncovered before proclaiming that INTjs cannot be fat and ugly and insensitive to own discomfort??? -- Dr. Zoidberg |
|
|
| A8 @A7: Yeah, I've read it. It's a stereotype like everything else. Certain parts of it don't fit but others do, so what? -- Anonymous |
| A9 So am I to understand that you accept the possibility that there might be fat and ugly and disgustingly dirty INTj out there living in a barn with pigs? Then why are you using yourself as a premise for an argument - "I am not like that therefore you're wrong!"? Dude, so nothing. -- Dr. Zoidberg |
| A10 @A9: I use myself as an example because I know myself best. Also I wasn't saying that anyone in particular is wrong. I was saying that matching the present to the past seems to me a good description of Si; whereas, the emphasis on body functioning per Socionics doesn't seem to fit with my own experience of Si. And yes, I do accept that possibility since the profile of an INTj, viewed with a jaded eye, closely resembles that of someone with a schizoid personality disorder. -- Anonymous |
| A11 So what function would describe internal body functioning if it is not Si? -- mark |
| A12 @A11. I believe that Si certainly fits the bill at least in terms of Jung's writings on the matter; however, I don't believe that one's internal body functioning has a great influence on behavior -- unless it's pathological that is. -- Anonymous |
| *Please note that the opinions expressed are not necessarily those of socionics.com* |
Page 1 |
| Would you like to add anything? |
(When posting, we ask you to make the effort to qualify your opinions.)
|
|
