View Single Post
  #37  
Old 03/06/2008, 04:11 AM
kensi's Avatar
kensi kensi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 695
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IntjWurm View Post

1. INTJ
2. INTJ
3. LII
4. LII
this is through several sources of reference, none the which i can confirm to be fully accurate but within all probabilities realistic. Personally, i believe more in V.I. to conclude anything.
    1. the MBTI test score may not be your true type if you're an introvert because MBTI J is labelled as "w.r.t. the outer world" and is by no means indicative of the dominant function being talked about in its functional nomenclature. Some introverts have problems recognizing the nature of their extroversion so certain questions may give crapshoot answers. 15 % wight
    2. Understanding notational differences would be one step above just choosing a profile that fits you. obviously i think you do as MBTI is simpler to understand than socionics 50% weight
    3. i'm not aware of an official test for this 10 % weight
    4. you cant live in to opposing columns at the same time. If you start off with an mbti result, then the socionics is there only to confirm it or vice versa.I will assume for no reason that you wish to start at mbti and further your understandings to socionics, thus it is really not that relevant which profile matches thru socionics as much as you're aware that there are reasonable similarities to validate some sort of legitamacy. 25 % weight cause you still have to validate the similarities
Thus #2, using this logic, seems the logical starting place. So 2.)=INTJ
(I attribute the INTJ of MBTI to gamma no differently than the INTp of socionics to gamma.)
Based on my experiences (and i could be wrong because there is some dissention amongst the group here) .....this should equate ,only by virtue of the reasonabless of similarity of the functions, to 4.)=INTp


thus for propper designation purposes, you can still be INTJwurm, but not INTjwurm (little J)

or if you choose you can be INTpwurm


You should probably ask RSV3 for a better understanding if you like as i am not off the top entirely familiar with the notation for the lower order functions.

feel free to argue, though, maybe i dont know what i'm talking about.
Reply With Quote