Thoughts on Socionics

[Brutananadilewski]

Have you guys ever spent any length of time exploring socionics theory and descriptions at To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. What are your thoughts on the theory (besides the prodigious use of outstanding grammar and professional russian to english translations)?

I find it to be pretty interesting, especially concerning the deeper functions and how they may affect your interactions with other. I've certainly found some insights that I hadn't found the good ol' Myers-Briggs, but it's also got some holes that are certainly in need of filling.

If you're interested in the INTj description, here it be To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. , and the model from where it was derived To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I'd appreciate any thoughts on socionics in general, or specifics concerning types.

[Zilal]

That's cool... I'd only ever seen the profile at socionics.com, and since I think that one is ridiculous, it didn't encourage me to explore socionics more. But a couple of the ones on the wiki made a lot more sense... it's cool to see things that I feel really describe me that I've never seen in MB theory before. I don't know much about the underpinnings of socionics, though, still haven't bothered to read that.

[Jgib5328]

The INTj of socionics is different from the MBTI INTJ. Usually MBTI INTJs are socionic INTps. The INTJ and the INTp have the same function orderings and I've never been able to identify with the INTj description, but I identify with the INTJ one. I don't really like the INTp description, but it seems more fitting.

I don't really like socionics. It seems interesting, but it just complicates everything and goes overboard with details. It tries to describe everything about personality to it's tiniest detail and I don't like that. Basically the stuff with the interactions is like pretty much telling you that you are going to be friends with this person, but not with this person because of the ordering of your functions. I don't like to go that in depth and I don't like being told things like that.

[Marmalade]

I've visited all of the Socionics sites and studied it some, but I found it difficult and confusing. There is a lot of disagreement I discovered when I visited the two Socionics forums. Its interesting and if I ever feel motivated enough, I'll explore it further.

- P/J isn't the same as p/j.
- The function orderings are different.
- The definitions of the functions are different.
- It emphasizes relationships over personality meaning personality is defined by relationships.
- It has many proposed theories that are quite different from MBTI such as Visual Identification and Sub-types.

[Schumann]

Socionics is quite incredible! It's based on relationships to other types decided upon shared values of functions and their positioning. I figured out that my INXP friend is an ENTp in socionics, and that my INTJ friend is an ISTp in socionics. There is a lot of truth to this system. I find it intensely fun to analyze types of friends and to read on relation types and how to better my relationships. I'm an INTp, so of course I value Fi :)

I am one to recommend this over MBTI. It might take you a few tries to warm up to it, but when you do you'll realize why MBTI doesn't actually work or make sense. It's too vague, where as socionics is just right. Personality profiles aren't supposed to be 100% accurate whatsoever, but I think you'll understand why these classifications are much more easily compared and contrasted than MBTIs. It just requires a bit of reading.

[Synamon]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

This chart is a pretty good indication of the problems when you start mixing systems. It indicates which profile description people familiar with socionics thought matched up with which MBTI one. The INTJ profile didn't even correspond with INTj or INTp. The socionics ESTp profile was the best match? Come on, that is practically the INTJ opposite in MBTI, we are not Se dominant. The socionists thought INTP matched with INTj so you hear a lot of INTPs throwing socionics around and mixing up the nomenclature. Socionics uses the same letters and terms as MBTI and they have different meanings, it's really confusing, even the various sites about it are contradictory.