| 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 #1198891423 | Saturday, 29-Dec-2007 |
|
|
| I'm an ISFp/ISFP and according to the MBTI my dominant function is introverted feeling while according to Socionics my dominant is introverted sensing. What are some specific things that indicate introverted feeling? -- ISFP |
Your Answers: 1+ |
| A1 I'm not *as* clued up on introverted feeling as a dominant function as I am on some of the other functions, but to my knowledge, introverted feeling as a dominant function, is likely to make a person primarily live life by assessing relations with other people in terms of ethics and define the parameters of the relation that way. It's also likely that they will set ethical standards of behaviour and be offended others do not live up to these perceived ideals. This can sometimes make it difficult for someone with dominant Fi to understand people who don't fit into what they perceive as 'normal' and this could also physically manifest by the occasional person seeing a dominant Fi as perhaps a little too self righteous. Of course, it can be difficult to look at a function seperately, as all the other functions in a type will affect how it works, and also its position of strength will change its affect on a person. But when you look at it like this it is easier to see the difference between being socionics ISFj or socionics ISFp I think, if thats what your looking to work out ? -- Cyclops |
| A2 @A1: I'm trying to figure out if my dominant is feeling or sensing. I was always under the impression that it was feeling not sensing but a friend's perspective made me question that. I do have a strict moral code and I do get offended when people say anything different than that code is acceptable, but that offense is just more of a reflex, a reaction I can't control... because I do believe that everyone has a right to their views and I would never try to force my views on anyone. Here's something I do that I thought was Fi: in my internal world i deal with things according to how I feel about them or how they fit into my internal value system. Btw Cyclops, you've answered tons of my questions on here, thank you! =) -- ISFp |
A3 A2, I'm kind of getting the impression that you are more so a dominant sensing type, as your general posting looks like you are aware of how things make you feel internally and how certain things or situations make others feel internally. The fact that you wouldn't force your views on other people, suggests Si, because as an Si you will be concerned with people recognising the 'real them' and you would encourage the pleasurable internal state that would create. If you were dominant Fi with secondary Se, then you would feel more justified forcing your ethical views on others, as you would feel more likely to beleive people should change into what you think is right. Your reflex reactions shows more so to me that you know whats best for your *own* internal physical state. BTW, it looks as tho MBTI got the functions mixed up for introverts, so generally for introverts on that system, fitting the description can be more accurate than its functional analysis. (So overall I'm hunching you are dominant Sensing and also ISFp on both systems) To see more of how the functions got mixed up, I would recommend you read the site authors article 'Things to consider about MBTI theory part I' in the articles section, which personally I thought was a good article. Phew, can I have my medal now  -- Cyclops |
| A4 Firstly, be cognizant of the possibility that you might not be either Si or Fi dominant. Often, novice socionics students become entangled in protracted quandaries relating to their type simply because they've adopted the mindset that they are either "X or Y" when in reality they're K or something random... That said, I think you're slightly overemphasizing (and so is Cyclops) the ethicality of Fi. Fi considers the static character traits of individuals - while moral assessments are indeed a component of Fi evaluations, it must be stressed that Fi is concerned with the review and appraisal of *all* intrinsic, unmalleable personality traits. Fi considers an individual in their entirety and applies a very probing, penetrating perception of who a person is and what their motivations are for certain behaviors. We can also say that the Fi dominant has a sophisticated understanding and appreciation of the complex bonds and ties between individuals and is keenly attuned to shifting interpersonal dynamics. So, in summary, and in response to your original question, the main focuses of the Fi dominant are thus: personality, motivations and relationships. Of course, these are essentially themes that *all* F types grapple with; with Fi types, however, the understanding of these issues is a continuous, conscious endeavor to the point where it has solidified into the foundation of their self-perception. -- yyy |
| A5 A4, I don't deny that your post is intruiging, but perhaps you can quantify for me ? Fi on its own is a single theoretical expression. Yet the poster (being an actual person) has identified a strong S preference, by at least their own reckoning (aka..what you suggest is that perhaps they are neither Fi or Si..so they could be any type ?..I like to think people understand themselves at least a little bit ) So in reality, one would say on availale informations, we have an SeFi or FiSe. (Note that N is not within the base nor the creative functions) On that basis, FiSe is rather distinctive - look at I/O's ISFj uncovered for a basis on the reality of FiSe (and ones own personal observations which is essential due to lack of proper socionic empirical data..on that train, Fi ethics is congruent to that of FiSe ?) One therefore does not perceive FiSe but rather SeFi, hence my analysis ! (Sorry A1 !.maybe I lose myself here, no ? ) -- Cyclops |
| A6 What concerns me is not whether the original poster has a proper understanding of herself (himself? whatever.) but of whether her progression in socionics has thus far allowed her to conceive the functions with any degree of lucidity. You see, sometimes it's quite difficult for socionics neophytes to accurately differentiate between the functions as defined by Myers-Briggs typology and the functions as they are defined by socionics. *For this reason* I think that before giving credence to one's categorization of their psychic orientation a modicum of circumspection is necessitated. And I make this point because, as I attempted to explicate in my previous response, the understanding of Fi that the original poster, "ISFp" (who is apparently now judiciously leaving the last letter uncapitalized) presents is a rather narrow and slightly skewed conception of how Fi is ordinarily delineated in socionics. Therefore I am hesitant to say that what she identifies as "S" in herself is actually S *as defined by socionics* as opposed to MBTT. So it's hesitancy, not skepticism, that deters me from reaching the conclusions you have. -- y |
| A7 @A4: Well I am definitely concerned (obsessed) with understanding people and personality traits and I'm very sensitive to the state of my interpersonal relationships. What are some things that indicate introverted sensing? -- ISFP |
| A8 Si deals with the perception and recollection of the varied nuances of scents, flavors and tactile impressions one receives and, based on one's apprehension of such phenomena, the satisfaction of one's own and other's physiological needs: the need to be healthy, to be clean, to be comfortable, to consume adequate food and drink, achieve sexual gratification, attain proper rest, etc. -- y |
| A9 AHA! Now I understand! You were right!...I was under the impression that myers briggs and socionics were a lot more similar than they really are!...I did some research and IN SOCIONICS I am NO DOUBT ISFp/SEI!!...with a base function of introverted sensing...WHILE IN MYERS BRIGGS I am an ISFP with a dominant function of introverted feeling!...WHY? Becuse in each system those things are totally different!...or so I think anyway. Thanks for your help! -- ISFP/ISFp |
| A10 To add to A8, psychological harmony and balance as well as physical harmony and balance would also be desired. As a side note, one can see certain compensatory Si traits in socionics as, assumptions are made that we are essentially on a quest to better understand ourselves. PS y - I see your point, but how does one judge as to how much information to give or to judge the accuracy of a newcomers current level? For some less more, more is less, or others by different approaches ? -- Cyclops |
| A11 When rationalizing situations or putting things into perspective, introverted F seems to more often than not place him or herself into the equation. If you decide most things based your personal set of values or feelings or how valuable the decision would be to you personally then you are likely introverted F. If you frequently place yourself in the other person’s shoes and rationalize based on that person’s value system then you’re likely extroverted F. Note that this has nothing to do with selfishness or selflessness. -- I/O |
| A12 A11, I/O, on what you say, if that is the case, why is it that ISTp can create the impression that they do not care about others views, and indeed within the face of it, it therefore appears that they care more so in regards to there own personal values, more indeed than the 'madding crowd' .. At least by, of course, by SG's, ISTp's assessment. So here's a thought; an ISTp's stance could, by your assessment be viewed as F. Perhaps you could further define your outlook, or redifine it ? (Aka..for me to further explain .. It's a fact that ISTp's base things on their own personal values, and they are clearly not F, so maybe a revisionary effect on your part, could be required.. ) -- Cyclops |
|
|
| A13 A12, any type is capable of uncaring acts. My point revolves around the perspective from which one rationalizes information. Introverted rationalization (both T&F) would consider firstly “how would I feel about or value this, or how I would utilize or employ that”; another’s perspective might be eventually considered but this would be the secondary consideration. Extroverted rationalization is the opposite, considering firstly “how that person would feel about this or how this person would utilize that”. -- I/O |
| *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.)
|
|
