| 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 #1208076469 | Sunday, 13-Apr-2008 |
|
|
| I don't understand it. After years of contemplation and searching, I have verified through many English and Russian Socionics sites that I'm an ISTp (perfect vi matches, profile fits, etc). For example, the mini +/- ISTp socionics profile on this site suits me to a tee. However, the ISTp uncovered profile on this site doesn't fit me at all!! Is this a fair representation? Maybe it's been confused with ESTps? Also, Jessica Alba has been classified as an ESTp on this site, but she's the same type as Ashley Judd and a bunch of other ISTp celeb females mentioned on other sites (who all vi like I do). It seems that these E's and I's are being mixed up in the data presented. I wouldn't mind so much, except - if someone were too take this too seriously and apply it, they could start mis-identifying the wrong people as "lazy" and unwilling to work, greedy, etc! And I am definitely not one of those types. Any input from other ISTps, here? Or the webmaster? -- strong introvert |
|
|
Your Answers: 1+ |
A1 People unwilling to work, greedy ppl., etc. are in fact ppl. with personal types "gone wrong". Someone being lazy could have any personal type. It is just merely one piece of a big puzzle, there are so many traits in everyone. The uncovered profiles are to me a collection of stereotypical behavior patterns, and I guess it's purpose is more for entertainment than for type-bashing  like taking the super-ego-block and distorting it a bit, actually I find some comical elements in it. When all the MBTI-knowledge is used by human resources managers to recruit some super human workers, I don't find it funny anymore. I think it would be highly unethical to judge people after seemingly bad traits of their personal type, which one can often only approximate. I hope that common sense does not allow such judgement. I don't try to v.i. people anymore. Often enough they are much too interesting, have so many stories to tell where you can learn so much. Another thing: I once read that ISTp's are often mistaken for being some extrovert type, unfortunately I can't cite a source, maybe it was typelogic (which is MBTI-oriented). So it could just be the other way around . All in all I wouldn't believe the "uncovered" thang too much - just have fun with it. -- 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.)
|
|
