What is the difference between MBTI and socionics?

What is the difference between MBTI and socionics?

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
Thank Tree5Thanks

This is a discussion on What is the difference between MBTI and socionics? within the Socionics Forum forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; If someone could help answer this question I would be grateful, thank-you. I would like to know the difference between ...

  1. #1

    What is the difference between MBTI and socionics?

    If someone could help answer this question I would be grateful, thank-you.

    I would like to know the difference between the MBTI theroy as a whole and the website socionics and exactly how they look at types and relationships differently.

    Thanks!



  2. #2

    Socionics is a sort of Russian take-off of MBTI/Jung. Many of the ideas are same, some are just plain kinda out there (like the whole ENTps have crooked noses and loose their buttons stuff). But they really have their own idea of the psyche and the types, which are loosely similar to MBTI (they at least get the J/P correct in introverts, where its backwards in MBTI, so a MBTI INFP is really an INFj in Socionics which is correct since INFPs lead with a judging function, Fi). But there's a lot of stuff out there that's sort of takes them a few steps backwards for every step forward they make in my opinion (I think largely due to the fact that there's little research on it, its mostly badly translated Russian, and I think the relative homogeneity of the Russian culture compels them to make assumptions, like the ones about certain types having certain physical characteristics, that probably don't hold up as an archetype).
    cyamitide and Julia Bell thanked this post.

  3. #3

    Quote Originally Posted by WarriorDreamer View Post
    If someone could help answer this question I would be grateful, thank-you.

    I would like to know the difference between the MBTI theroy as a whole and the website socionics and exactly how they look at types and relationships differently.

    Thanks!
    Socionics is sort of like the Soviet version of MBTI. I understand that there is much information on it not translated into English.
    One of the biggest gothas is in their lettering, they use a lowercase letter for p & j, and it does not mean the same thing as MBTI! If your lead function is a J function, you are a j, or else you are a P.

    This means that Introverted types have their p/j flipped vs MBTI. MBTI INTP= socionics INTj but an MBTI ENFP is still ENFp in socionics.

    It also has alot of theory about how to type people by their appearace, and on relationships between types.

  4. #4

    Oh okay this clears it up a bit. Since I was assuming for a long time that it was the same! :/

  5. #5

    Quote Originally Posted by WarriorDreamer View Post
    Oh okay this clears it up a bit. Since I was assuming for a long time that it was the same! :/
    The functions are same, but some of the terminology isn't. If you have typed yourself correctly in MBTI as INTP with cognitive function of Ti,Ne,Si,Fe then it is very likely that you are Ti,Ne,Si,Fe type in Socionics. But this type is called INTj there.

    At their base, there are a lot of similarities. They were both based on Jung's Psychological Types. They both have 16 types based on same dichotomies E/I, T/F, and N/S. But some things don't coincide, for example Socionics doesn't have Judger/Perceiver dichotomy, what they have instead is Rational/Irrational which is why the J/P letters for socionics types aren't assigned in the same manner and are written in lower case to designate that difference.

  6. #6
    Unknown

    i thought socionics was interesting a few years back when i first looked into it--until i saw on a type-by-picture-forum, "this person appears to have the rounded forehead of an INTJ... yes, yes"--that's about when i stopped looking into it.

  7. #7

    Quote Originally Posted by celticstained View Post
    i thought socionics was interesting a few years back when i first looked into it--until i saw on a type-by-picture-forum, "this person appears to have the rounded forehead of an INTJ... yes, yes"--that's about when i stopped looking into it.
    Visual typing is something a few socionics enthusiasts engage in, but it's not the main part of socionics. MBTI enthusiasts do same, fyi, take a look at this MBTI typing by eye movements and facial expressions Physiognomy: The Eight Cognitive Functions, Guide for Typing in Real Time, yet all of this doesn't stop you from participating in MBTI discussion. Kind of a biased approach if you ask me; it's wrong for socionics, but perfectly acceptable to do this in MBTI.

  8. #8
    Unknown

    no, both are stupid methods. if typing by appearance isn't the main aspect, then ok, but from my perspective it seemed to be something that isn't "frowned upon" either, which immediately puts everything else they say into suspicion (personally). not a stance that's hard to understand; i mean would you be willing in to listen to the "wisdom" of another person if they were convinced the earth was flat and that elvis lived in their basement? this may be something that i have to overcome, thank you.

    i didn't mean to belittle something that you have an attachment to or to show a frame of mind that would antagonize you either (which is funny because that's exactly the same problem that i have with that "slim aspect" of socionics).

  9. #9

    Quote Originally Posted by celticstained View Post
    no, both are stupid methods. if typing by appearance isn't the main aspect, then ok,
    Generally speaking, the whole idea that personality has some influence on one's appearance isn't that nonsensical. There have been many research studies done that show that there are indeed correlations between personality and looks, a few of these. So it is quite possible that there are some commonalities in looks and mannerisms of people of same MBTI type.

    but from my perspective it seemed to be something that isn't "frowned upon" either, which immediately puts everything else they say into suspicion (personally).
    Everyone studying socionics picks what they want to believe (same with MBTI, you pick your interpretation of functions and types you follow) and some socionics enthusiasts discount the idea of VI completely even after being involved with it for years. There isn't this homogenous "they".

    not a stance that's hard to understand; i mean would you be willing in to listen to the "wisdom" of another person if they were convinced the earth was flat and that elvis lived in their basement? this may be something that i have to overcome, thank you.
    Personally I would be willing to listen to them :) likely because I score very high on Openness factor on Big 5 so I'm usually very open to weird ideas and imaginative thinking (I've been told that I am very open-minded by people who know me). However, even though I am willing to listen to and consider some wild possibilities, I will later check them. In case of types and visual identification I am willing to consider this possibility because there are multitudes of studies from accredited institutions that already show that there is a connection between one's character traits and one's looks. So it is not difficult to imagine that this could be true of MBTI types (or Socionics types). However since there haven't been any studies done that would directly involve these typologies, I remain skeptical of this practice. But I am not willing to just discount it completely and close off my mind to it being possible.
    Donovan thanked this post.

  10. #10
    Unknown

    It does not only have different type terminologies like INTj/INTp etc. The order or combination of functions is completely different. Extraverts in both theories actually have the same two first functions (ENFj: Fe, Ni), but the other ones are different. Introverts with the same name have got different first two function but the same two next functions. There is not the same dominant-inferior-constellation as MBTI, every type is like Ji, Pe, Ji ,Pe or Je, Pi, Je, Pi etc instead of Ji, Pe, Pi, Je... For example ENFj: Fe, Ni, Te, Si. So an MBTI INFP(Fi, Ne, Si, Te) is actually not a socionic INFj(Fi, Ne, Ti, Se). The function theories of the MBTI and Socionics are mutually exclusive!


 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Help with Socionics/MBTI!
    By The Ultimate Square Peg in forum Socionics Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-31-2012, 07:07 PM
  2. MBTI and Socionics
    By L in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-25-2012, 12:16 PM
  3. !! MBTI v Socionics !!
    By Jason Chan in forum Myers Briggs Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 01-30-2012, 10:13 PM
  4. MBTI vs Socionics
    By Revan112 in forum Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-06-2011, 04:06 PM
  5. MBTI or Socionics?
    By mav04 in forum What's my personality type?
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-09-2011, 04:14 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:31 PM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
2014 PersonalityCafe