# Looking for ESTj (SeTi) - or plural - to Mind Rape



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

RoSoDude said:


> I was considering making a note in my last post about how my conception of Socionics is very indicative of my own type. As an LII/INTj I care much more for systems that are consistent with their founding principles and axioms than are necessarily congruent with reality (Ti), and I also prefer systems that can be generalized and abstracted from the specific case (Ne). And thus, what I may find engrossing about typology may bore another, just as I am not particularly engaged by type profiles and specific descriptions. And as I was writing my response (to the post where you felt it was best to have a base of experience from which to understand type), I noticed that your type likely informed your interpretation of the theory as my type informed mine.
> 
> So, in short, yes, I had the same thought. I'm not personally a huge fan of Kiersey's version of Jungian types, although I do like how he related it to the Four Temperaments of Greek philosophy. I would agree that his conception of types was similarly guided by his type, and his desire to generalize the 16 types beyond the specific case (as they are built by the eight different functions) to the case where they are descriptive of archetypes that have existed since the beginning of human thought. Which I find admirable, whether or not I personally like the results of his approach.


I respect his work too. Every time I come to a realization via internally reflecting upon CF and then mentally reference back to Please Understand Me II, I realize he did/does have a deep understanding of the functions. For what it was, I think his translation into observable traits was well done. It's just not good enough on its own. This is me agreeing with you.



> avoid Socionics.com at all costs. It's full of fatalistic, ridiculous assertions and half-baked type profiles. Useless.


:laughing: THANK you. I thought maybe it was a language barrier issue or something. The profiles ARE ridiculous!! This was my initial introduction to Socionics. It's a wonder I got past it.


----------



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

itsme45 said:


> Lol. What kind of crazy questions I wonder


:kitteh:




> You will see all the symbols at - since then already linked in this thread - wikisocion.
> 
> 
> http://personalitycafe.com/socionic...ing-mbti-functions-socionics-im-elements.html


ty




> Check out the ISTJ in MBTI vs ISTj in Socionics conundrum.


What do you mean? As far as I know, the j/p functions are reversed for introverted types between the two systems. 

So, ISTJ = ISTp = SiTe 

and 

ISTP = ISTj = TiSe, doesn't it? 

Or are you referring to something else? Does this specific type conversion not translate as smoothly as the other introverted types? Something another member said in a thread I started seems to support that there is a special confusion between these two types. But it seems odd to me since they're such different types.



> Did you feel too much pushed around or what do you mean by not speaking up?


Mostly I just didn't speak, period. So I felt invisible. And I felt intimidated. I feared being boring. And my actions proved to be a self fulfilling prophecy. My Fe felt that the obviously more socially confident person (that being the ESTp in my mind) "should" be the one to acknowledge me so that a conversation could start. Silly Fe. I actually started a thread about it way back when. lol.



> Theoretical compatibility sure sure, I don't have a lot of experience there. -.-


What do you mean? LOL. You haven't felt compatible with many people in general or you haven't met any INFJs that you're aware of to test the theory of compatibility?




> This whole forum isn't too bad.


Actually I agree. I've actually developed several meaningful, worthwhile friendships here.




> Yeah I think.. it would be nice for me too, to have more of the good experiences.


Have you taken performing arts classes? I LOVE them.



> Whoa what a deep question for starters.  You know well how to mind rape hahahah.


:laughing::laughing::laughing:

See, and I thought this was a particularly bland, "easy" question to start with. :frustrating:



> Anyway I'm not sure what you mean by "kinds of friendships". A friendship is a friendship right? I'm sure you mean something else beyond that, but do please elaborate on it.


:shocked: WHAT?! You mean you don't organize friendships into color coded files with lots of different, nuanced and meaningful captions? :crazy:





> So, I'm rather poor at analysing such things to be honest. (One area where socionics is so spot on for me  )


So interesting! It's actually hard to conceive of. I'm obsessed with it. Silly, silly Fe.



> I don't have high requirements though, basically just let's have fun together! All those friendships had been really enjoyable but then life usually had us move on, different school, different timetable etc.
> 
> It's cool if we can have deep discussions at times too but those friendships all died after a while because of whatever other problem. I haven't analysed that. I also like to find something special in the other party but it's hard to put that into words.


I can relate. Friendships, like feelings, are transient. They come in and out of our lives and make little notches on our souls. But nothing is permanent or static, to be sure.

I have missed out on a TON of fun while trying to over analyze everything. Now that I'm 34, I'm finally starting to have my fun.




> Oh well four letters is not going to predict everything, will it? As a kid I wasn't exactly like this, I was this willful egocentric and yes pushy kid but a loner, not talking that much, just going & doing my own thing. Well wait, I did also have some friends here and there, having fun. So I did have a social streak but wasn't manipulative in such an indirectly effective way. Directly persuasive only.
> 
> Your kid got lucky and found some extra Fe somewhere


Hee hee. Actually, reading back over my description, I realize she could just as easily be an Fe dom. Fe is pretty bitchy, even though it doesn't want anyone to know that. SeTi might just be wishful thinking on my part. But, whatever it is, either Se dom or Fe dom, I'm much more comfortable with her than I am with either of my boys.

Actually, can you do me a favor? I have another thread about 8s. Apparently I'm all over 8s. If you read the thread and have any insights, I'd greatly appreciate them. I'll paste the link.

http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/54784-enfp-enfj-type-8-men-children.html


----------



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

I thought of a question, when you have time. When I am in a semi busy public place or walking down the same hallway as one other person, I'm always very aware of where I am in relation to any and all people and or obstacles. I take note of respective speeds of all movi g objects, and whether or not these people have taken note of where I am in relation to them. I adjust my speed and trajectory to preemptively avoid the extreme annoyance of collision. I find these circumstances stressful and very frustrating because it *feels* like I'm the only one who takes such care to stay out of people's paths. I desperately want everyone to be as aware and diligent. Do you relate? If so, how so?

No one in my household GETS IT. But I've noticed an ESFp friend is equally aware and easy to move around in tight quarters with. Simply passing by him in the hallway is like this seamless, coordinated dance of fluid beauty and comfortableness. *sigh*

Mental discomfort or emotional discomfort I can handle - enjoy even. Physical discomfort, on the other hand, is bloody hell. My nerves are always alight with anticipation. I'm easily affected by mild stimulus and acutely aware of the nuances in facial expressions, tone of voice and subtle or extreme in-your-face humor.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Berdudget said:


> What do you mean? As far as I know, the j/p functions are reversed for introverted types between the two systems.
> 
> So, ISTJ = ISTp = SiTe
> 
> ...


Now go look up ISTp type descriptions and compare it with MBTI ISTJ.
Also, look up ISTj and compare it with MBTI ISTP.




> Or are you referring to something else? Does this specific type conversion not translate as smoothly as the other introverted types? Something another member said in a thread I started seems to support that there is a special confusion between these two types. But it seems odd to me since they're such different types.


Yeah, they're such different types between MBTI and socionics. It's a good example to show that the idea of simply switching J/P doesn't work.

It also shows how it's so inconsistent that MBTI Si isn't the same as socionics Si. And so on, but I already gave you a link on that above 




> Mostly I just didn't speak, period. So I felt invisible. And I felt intimidated. I feared being boring. And my actions proved to be a self fulfilling prophecy. My Fe felt that the obviously more socially confident person (that being the ESTp in my mind) "should" be the one to acknowledge me so that a conversation could start. Silly Fe. I actually started a thread about it way back when. lol.


You still have a link to that thread? I don't know what you mean by waiting to be acknowledged?

I wouldn't call myself socially confident, confidence in general doesn't translate to the social area. By that I mean, I don't really initiate certain things. I can start interaction but that's about it. 




> What do you mean? LOL. You haven't felt compatible with many people in general or you haven't met any INFJs that you're aware of to test the theory of compatibility?


I meant the latter 




> Have you taken performing arts classes? I LOVE them.


No haven't tried that.



> See, and I thought this was a particularly bland, "easy" question to start with. :frustrating:


What? 

You cannot be serious. 




> :shocked: WHAT?! You mean you don't organize friendships into color coded files with lots of different, nuanced and meaningful captions? :crazy:


Do you then?

Guess we definitely are different. 




> So interesting! It's actually hard to conceive of. I'm obsessed with it. Silly, silly Fe.


Well it's mostly because I don't have the focus on that... when you asked above and I tried to make an answer that was more than just one line, it wasn't easy to focus, that's actually harder than the actual task itself it seems.




> I can relate. Friendships, like feelings, are transient. They come in and out of our lives and make little notches on our souls. But nothing is permanent or static, to be sure.


Lol this soul part, shows you're NF type 

So you don't mind if you don't have a best friend with who the connection can be lasting for your entire lifetime?




> I have missed out on a TON of fun while trying to over analyze everything. Now that I'm 34, I'm finally starting to have my fun.


Er, what kind of overanalysing?




> Hee hee. Actually, reading back over my description, I realize she could just as easily be an Fe dom. Fe is pretty bitchy, even though it doesn't want anyone to know that. SeTi might just be wishful thinking on my part. But, whatever it is, either Se dom or Fe dom, I'm much more comfortable with her than I am with either of my boys.


Yes I was thinking maybe Fe dom, I don't know her obviously.




> Actually, can you do me a favor? I have another thread about 8s. Apparently I'm all over 8s. If you read the thread and have any insights, I'd greatly appreciate them. I'll paste the link.
> 
> http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/54784-enfp-enfj-type-8-men-children.html


Okay will look.

All over 8's, meaning your favourite type or meaning they cause you the most trouble? 




Berdudget said:


> I thought of a question, when you have time. When I am in a semi busy public place or walking down the same hallway as one other person, I'm always very aware of where I am in relation to any and all people and or obstacles. I take note of respective speeds of all movi g objects, and whether or not these people have taken note of where I am in relation to them. I adjust my speed and trajectory to preemptively avoid the extreme annoyance of collision. I find these circumstances stressful and very frustrating because it *feels* like I'm the only one who takes such care to stay out of people's paths. I desperately want everyone to be as aware and diligent. Do you relate? If so, how so?
> 
> No one in my household GETS IT. But I've noticed an ESFp friend is equally aware and easy to move around in tight quarters with. Simply passing by him in the hallway is like this seamless, coordinated dance of fluid beauty and comfortableness. *sigh*


I get it and I don't understand what's wrong with your household lol. 

I do all this stuff you're talking about, just maybe I don't analyse it consciously. Just do it. But yeah, I can get annoyed at some people who obviously don't care. Though, for me the issue is more about how I don't try to put the whole task of avoiding another person on my own shoulders; I expect the other person to also make a move, the part that's up to them IMO. So that's when it's annoying, if someone else is so oblivious (or they just don't care) that they don't notice me coming. I will then of course adjust my own course more but sometimes I decide not to adjust that much.  I can also warn them verbally. 

Overall it's not terribly stressful, though. Maybe for you it's more stressful because you're not inclined to be in tune with objects so automatically and/or easily overloaded with stimuli as you mention below? I actually even enjoy this "course finding" stuff especially when I'm out running. 

Btw, as for collision, I always have a visceral "image" or rather, a visceral feeling of it if I see it might happen (it doesn't necessarily happen of course, depending on my reaction being fast enough etc). The feeling of how it will feel physically, the bump, the amount of physical energy in it and so on. Don't know if you have that?




> Mental discomfort or emotional discomfort I can handle - enjoy even. Physical discomfort, on the other hand, is bloody hell. My nerves are always alight with anticipation. I'm easily affected by mild stimulus and acutely aware of the nuances in facial expressions, tone of voice and subtle or extreme in-your-face humor.


That I don't relate to. Not really affected in this way. I don't really enjoy emotional discomfort btw... what do you enjoy about it?

Wait I do relate to awareness of facial expressions and that sort of stuff, though.


----------



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

itsme45 said:


> Now go look up ISTp type descriptions and compare it with MBTI ISTJ.
> Also, look up ISTj and compare it with MBTI ISTP.


I've experienced this same confusion reading the descriptions of INFj and INFp in comparison to the descriptions of INFP and INFJ. When I first read these descriptions, I insisted that I was an INFj. But, upon further inspection, I came to the conclusion that this is not the case, based on the differing models. 

It appears to me that you are making the argument that because people do not recognize themselves in the descriptions of types, this proves that the types do not corellate between systems. Correct me if I am wrong about that. But I challenge this argument. I do not think it is sound. This is why.

The way I understand it is, in the *MBTI CF model*, the four letter designation is determined as follows:

Take SeTi vs TiSe.

_The first letter is determined by whether or not the dominant function is introverted or extroverted._

So, for SeTi, first letter designation is E. For TiSe, first letter designation is I.

_The second letter designation is determined by which perceiving function appears._

So, for both the second letter is S.

_The third letter designation is determined by which judging function is present._

So, again, for both the third letter is T.

_Finally, the fourth letter designation is determined by which function is extroverted._

For both, the perceiving function is extroverted. So both types are determined to be _perceiving_ types *in the MBTI format.* This is because, in the MBTI format, _observable traits are given primary importanc_e, following Keirsey's vision.

Now for *Socionics*:

Let's take SeTi and TiSe again.

_The first three letter designations are essentially determined the same way. But for the fourth letter designation, the determining factor is NOT which function is extroverted. It is determined by which function is dominant._

So, for SeTi, the dominant function is a perceiving function. Therefore it is designated to be a perceiving type. But for TiSe, the dominant function is a judging function. So, this is designated to be a judging type.

The difference between MBTI Si and Socionics Si is which aspects of this function are being taken consideration. It's NOT, imho, that they are necessarily different functions.

I'd like @_RoSoDude_ to check me on this, however, because I believe I gleaned this from socionics.com. :laughing: :shocked: Perhaps this is an example of the erroneous information you were talking about.



> You still have a link to that thread? I don't know what you mean by waiting to be acknowledged?


Sure. Though I want to state now that, how I perceived the situations I described at the time of creating the thread and how I see them now is different. I now recognize how I was to blame for the lack of conversation I was complaining about.

http://personalitycafe.com/estp-forum-doers/82976-your-thoughts-about-infjs.html



> I wouldn't call myself socially confident, confidence in general doesn't translate to the social area. By that I mean, I don't really initiate certain things. I can start interaction but that's about it.


My above statement is actually a response to this as well.




> No haven't tried that.


If you ever do it, please let me know if you like it. roud:





> What?
> 
> You cannot be serious.
> 
> ...


I don't think there was ever any doubt. :crazy: In case it didn't come across well, I was being self depricating. I was making fun of myself for having asked you a very me-centric type of question. I'm extremely self depricating when interacting with others, despite the fact that inside I'm an arrogant snob. This causes me all sorts of trouble. hahahaha. I speak without conviction because I'm highly aware of the fact that any statement I make is only one tiny aspect of a bigger whole and so, therefore, it is not a closed ended statement of fact on the grand scheme of things. This causes me to come off as unconfident. When people perceive someone to be lacking in confidence, they are less likely to trust that that person knows what they're talking about, even when they may actually know very well what they're talking about. Many people therefore talk condescendingly to me, even though, frequently, I am actually more knowlegeable than they are. It's quite frustrating. But I'm learning how to overcome this dynamic by speaking more directly. Slowly...slowly.

Recently, in fact, I've been developing my "voice." I have a INTj friend online who has helped me with this. Ti is so freaking beautiful.



> Well it's mostly because I don't have the focus on that... when you asked above and I tried to make an answer that was more than just one line, it wasn't easy to focus, that's actually harder than the actual task itself it seems.


And yet you did an excellent job. You differentiated between types of friendships just as I was hoping you would. 



> Lol this soul part, shows you're NF type


Yes...The flowery language. I'm so flowery. :kitteh: I'm sure that if I worded it differently, you'd agree with my statement. 

I strongly believe that every human interaction is a learning and growth opportunity. Even if what we learn from an interaction remains unconscious for a time, it does have an affect on our perception of reality and of ourselves. I happen to be highly conscious of this. Not everyone is. But I'm sure it happens to everyone. And this is what I meant by my soul statement.



> So you don't mind if you don't have a best friend with who the connection can be lasting for your entire lifetime?


Perhaps when I was 25. But no longer. The words trust, loyalty, deserving, etc., have all been lost in abstraction for me. There is do and there is have and there is get - all without judgement attached. Life presents me with circumstances, some of which I have power over and some that I don't and I accept what comes and take from it what it has to give. I have learned to detach and it is beautiful. If you knew my life story, you would understand.




> Er, what kind of overanalysing?


I analyze and categorize every minute detail of every human interaction I have and scrub it for meaning and personal growth potential. I think and analyze rather than act. This has actually been "fun" for me, but I have begun to require more real world stimulation as of late.




> Yes I was thinking maybe Fe dom, I don't know her obviously.


You were very kind and diplomatic about it. Thank you. lol. Sadly, I haven't spent much time analyzing my daughter. I have had so many other huge momentous things going on in my life. I've barely paid any attention to who she is until recently. My son and my husband and my father and mother in law and myself have taken up so much of my mental, emotional and physical resources and she doesn't present me with very difficult problems. So she has been on the backburner. :sad: Cute litte doll.




> Okay will look.


Thank you again for your contribution to my other thread.



> All over 8's, meaning your favourite type or meaning they cause you the most trouble?


BOTH! :angry::shocked::tongue:




> I get it and I don't understand what's wrong with your household lol.


:laughing: I love it!! This is what I was trying to explain about being physically uncomfortable with them.

When I first married my husband, I distinctly remember being halfway down the hallway in our apartment and he started coming down the hallway toward me from the other end. In my mind "obviously" it was my right of way. He's a very large man. We cannot both fit through this hallway at once. But he comes barrelling down the hallway anyway. COMPLETELY OBLIVIOUS. I thought, "You MUST be joking. You MUST be messing with me." But nope. It's taken TEN YEARS for him to finally have some concept of this FRUSTRATION. And now that he's cognizant of it, he does stand in my way on purpose. *screams*

Part of his obliviousness is connected to the fact that is IS such a big guy. People just naturally get out of his way. He just barrels through.

My son is extremely uncoordinated and oblivious as well.

My close ESFJ gf and I went to Disneyland together. Walking next to her all day was the most exhausting thing I can imagine. She doesn't walk in a straight line or make room for me when people come toward us from the other direction. She bumped into me over and over and over. DAMMNIT!!!!! :angry::angry::angry:



> I do all this stuff you're talking about, just maybe I don't analyse it consciously. Just do it. But yeah, I can get annoyed at some people who obviously don't care. Though, for me the issue is more about how I don't try to put the whole task of avoiding another person on my own shoulders; I expect the other person to also make a move, the part that's up to them IMO. So that's when it's annoying, if someone else is so oblivious (or they just don't care) that they don't notice me coming. I will then of course adjust my own course more but sometimes I decide not to adjust that much.  I can also warn them verbally.


You probably have an advantage here, well obviously. But I mean, I HATE having open my mouth unless it's absolutely necessary. USE YOUR EYES PEOPLE. USE YOUR EARS. FEEL THE BREEZE OF PEOPLE PASSING BY ON YOUR SKIN. REACT ACCORDINGLY. LOL.



> Overall it's not terribly stressful, though. Maybe for you it's more stressful because you're not inclined to be in tune with objects so automatically and/or easily overloaded with stimuli as you mention below? I actually even enjoy this "course finding" stuff especially when I'm out running.


It's less stressful when I'm walking by myself. It can be fun then. I'm often dragging a small child with me through a crowd, though. This is the worst kind of hell.



> Btw, as for collision, I always have a visceral "image" or rather, a visceral feeling of it if I see it might happen (it doesn't necessarily happen of course, depending on my reaction being fast enough etc). The feeling of how it will feel physically, the bump, the amount of physical energy in it and so on. Don't know if you have that?


YES YES YES YES YES!! You can POINT at me and I'll feel it.




> That I don't relate to. Not really affected in this way. I don't really enjoy emotional discomfort btw... what do you enjoy about it?


I like the intensity and the growth potential.



> Wait I do relate to awareness of facial expressions and that sort of stuff, though.


That makes perfect sense. Do you know these guys? I'm a little obsessed with them at present. 

So good with the use of facial expression. Gawd.


----------



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

I feel like I must be deluging you with tmi, but I want to go on about the facial expressions. When I eat, I savor every element of the experience and I tend to look like I'm having sex with it. I don't always realize it and people comment on it frequently. My husband doesn't get it. He just thinks I'm weird. My gestures also stupefy him and cause him discomfort. lol

EDIT: Also, where are you in life right now? Perhaps there is certain personal information you prefer not to share publicly, but are you a student, married? What part of the world are you in? How did you first come across topology?


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Berdudget said:


> I've experienced this same confusion reading the descriptions of INFj and INFp in comparison to the descriptions of INFP and INFJ. When I first read these descriptions, I insisted that I was an INFj. But, upon further inspection, I came to the conclusion that this is not the case, based on the differing models.


Ah so how did you decide on INFp / IEI?




> It appears to me that you are making the argument that because people do not recognize themselves in the descriptions of types, this proves that the types do not corellate between systems. Correct me if I am wrong about that. But I challenge this argument. I do not think it is sound. This is why.


No, my argument is that the dichotomies and function definitions clearly cannot be the same. Consider how an ISTJ in MBTI is suddenly supposed to change either the fourth dichotomy or the functions when going to socionics type ISTj or ISTp. The person is still the same person, with the same psyche... :/




> The way I understand it is, in the *MBTI CF model*, the four letter designation is determined as follows:
> 
> (...)
> 
> The difference between MBTI Si and Socionics Si is which aspects of this function are being taken consideration. It's NOT, imho, that they are necessarily different functions.


Well we disagree here but no worries 

(And heh well, I've of course heard about that method of translating type but see note below.)

How I see it, is that MBTI analyses the person (say ISTJ) differently from socionics, in a different framework, where the same thing in reality means two different things between the two theories. So this ISTJ has property X of their cognitive thinking (or their behavioural patterns if that's what you prefer to analyse instead, apparently this is up to who you're talking to ), this will be part of function Y in MBTI and function Z in socionics. But the issue is even more complex than that, this is just the surface of it. If it was as simple as the same things distributed in different functions, that would perhaps be what you called structural difference, though it would still be significant. But it's not just about distribution in such a sense, it's about a lot more. You might want to study socionics more to see what I mean. (I don't know how deep you've got into it so far.)

Also, a note, it's not good practice to switch MBTI type into socionics type along those guidelines. You simply have to start from zero when typing yourself in socionics because the correlations between the systems aren't that great. Not good enough to rely on them so much.




> Sure. Though I want to state now that, how I perceived the situations I described at the time of creating the thread and how I see them now is different. I now recognize how I was to blame for the lack of conversation I was complaining about.
> 
> http://personalitycafe.com/estp-forum-doers/82976-your-thoughts-about-infjs.html


Heh ok, I skimmed that thread, I guess not a lot of info in it. I really don't know what those situations were like exactly but yeah trying to start up some convo or something can never hurt.  Maybe you'll be pleasantly surprised 



> If you ever do it, please let me know if you like it. roud:


Alright though I don't know when that will be  Which form of it have you been doing?



> I don't think there was ever any doubt. :crazy: In case it didn't come across well, I was being self depricating. I was making fun of myself for having asked you a very me-centric type of question. I'm extremely self depricating when interacting with others, despite the fact that inside I'm an arrogant snob. This causes me all sorts of trouble. hahahaha.


Lol I see 

Yes I think I got the idea, no worries. 

(No trouble here...yet!)

(Not serious)




> I speak without conviction because I'm highly aware of the fact that any statement I make is only one tiny aspect of a bigger whole and so, therefore, it is not a closed ended statement of fact on the grand scheme of things. This causes me to come off as unconfident. When people perceive someone to be lacking in confidence, they are less likely to trust that that person knows what they're talking about, even when they may actually know very well what they're talking about. Many people therefore talk condescendingly to me, even though, frequently, I am actually more knowlegeable than they are. It's quite frustrating. But I'm learning how to overcome this dynamic by speaking more directly. Slowly...slowly.
> 
> Recently, in fact, I've been developing my "voice." I have a INTj friend online who has helped me with this. Ti is so freaking beautiful.


Well glad you like Ti 

As for the condescending part, I wonder though if that was sometimes imagined or not. Sometimes people perceive me as such even though I may have just happened to neglect the Feeling side of the situation. :/




> And yet you did an excellent job. You differentiated between types of friendships just as I was hoping you would.


Well heh cool then 



> Yes...The flowery language. I'm so flowery. :kitteh: I'm sure that if I worded it differently, you'd agree with my statement.


I didn't say I disagreed. I just noted it was NF language  Not something I do myself but it doesn't mean I'm not ever open to any of it. It does have to make some sense though (usually), and what you say below about this does make sense.




> Perhaps when I was 25. But no longer. The words trust, loyalty, deserving, etc., have all been lost in abstraction for me. There is do and there is have and there is get - all without judgement attached. Life presents me with circumstances, some of which I have power over and some that I don't and I accept what comes and take from it what it has to give. I have learned to detach and it is beautiful. If you knew my life story, you would understand.


Oh well I see. Yes I guess that's a complicated topic.




> I analyze and categorize every minute detail of every human interaction I have and scrub it for meaning and personal growth potential. I think and analyze rather than act. This has actually been "fun" for me, but I have begun to require more real world stimulation as of late.


Oh the Se seeking 




> You were very kind and diplomatic about it. Thank you. lol.


No worries  




> Sadly, I haven't spent much time analyzing my daughter. I have had so many other huge momentous things going on in my life. I've barely paid any attention to who she is until recently. My son and my husband and my father and mother in law and myself have taken up so much of my mental, emotional and physical resources and she doesn't present me with very difficult problems. So she has been on the backburner. :sad: Cute litte doll.







> BOTH! :angry::shocked::tongue:


Well I *somehow* had a feeling.....





> :laughing: I love it!! This is what I was trying to explain about being physically uncomfortable with them.
> 
> When I first married my husband, I distinctly remember being halfway down the hallway in our apartment and he started coming down the hallway toward me from the other end. In my mind "obviously" it was my right of way. He's a very large man. We cannot both fit through this hallway at once. But he comes barrelling down the hallway anyway. COMPLETELY OBLIVIOUS. I thought, "You MUST be joking. You MUST be messing with me." But nope. It's taken TEN YEARS for him to finally have some concept of this FRUSTRATION. And now that he's cognizant of it, he does stand in my way on purpose. *screams*
> 
> Part of his obliviousness is connected to the fact that is IS such a big guy. People just naturally get out of his way. He just barrels through.


Ehh, I would have let him know clear and loud that there's a problem. Not that it means everyone will understand right away. He sounds pretty funny though... from this distance 




> My son is extremely uncoordinated and oblivious as well.
> 
> My close ESFJ gf and I went to Disneyland together. Walking next to her all day was the most exhausting thing I can imagine. She doesn't walk in a straight line or make room for me when people come toward us from the other direction. She bumped into me over and over and over. DAMMNIT!!!!! :angry::angry::angry:


 maybe she was on drugs
Lol.




> You probably have an advantage here, well obviously. But I mean, I HATE having open my mouth unless it's absolutely necessary. USE YOUR EYES PEOPLE. USE YOUR EARS. FEEL THE BREEZE OF PEOPLE PASSING BY ON YOUR SKIN. REACT ACCORDINGLY. LOL.


Yeah, you're right. 




> It's less stressful when I'm walking by myself. It can be fun then. I'm often dragging a small child with me through a crowd, though. This is the worst kind of hell.


I've yet to try the joys of having kids.




> I like the intensity and the growth potential.


Okay that actually makes some sense. Intensity, OK. I have yet to see growth potential in that though. What does that say about me :/ 




> That makes perfect sense. Do you know these guys? I'm a little obsessed with them at present.
> 
> So good with the use of facial expression. Gawd.


No, I didn't know them, but they look cool.




Berdudget said:


> I feel like I must be deluging you with tmi, but I want to go on about the facial expressions. When I eat, I savor every element of the experience and I tend to look like I'm having sex with it. I don't always realize it and people comment on it frequently. My husband doesn't get it. He just thinks I'm weird. My gestures also stupefy him and cause him discomfort. lol


I have to say that sounds really funny too  got a video of yourself having sex with the food ? 




> EDIT: Also, where are you in life right now? Perhaps there is certain personal information you prefer not to share publicly, but are you a student, married? What part of the world are you in? How did you first come across topology?


Topology, typology right? Though topology is pretty cool too 

So anyway, uhh, I don't fit into these neat categories right now. I'll have my degree next year, past all exams except the final shit. So in a legal sense I'm not a student anymore, well that's only apparent from how I don't get student discounts blahblah. No no not married. Complicated topic there  I'm in Europe, that much I will say publicly. Guess you're in the US.

And as for typology, I like some girl's blog and the link was in her blog to a MBTI site. I had/have several motivations for dealing with the topic. One of them being understanding differences between people, another is finding common ground with some people and so on. How about you?


----------



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

@Diphenhydramine and @itsme45 and anyone else who reads this thread. I just realized that I have made myself look like a raging bitch. I don't have time to explain everything atm, but please allow me to apologize for what it appears I've implied and give me the opportunity to clarify. I do not think I know more than either of you about socionics. There is no question in my mind that you both know more and understand this model far more completely than I do. The reason I keep making arguments is not because I think I'm right and you're wrong. It's because I'm not yet convinced that how I conceive of it in relation to other models and how you do are mutually exclusive concepts. I think the fact that the four letter designation exists in addition to the three letter designation is possible evidence of that. I am under the impression that the 3 letter designation is more precise and that it captures the original essence of the model more fully. I'm under the impression that the 4 letter designation is a translation between the two systems and that it is valid. I'll explain more later. Feel free to correct mw if I am mistaken.

I don't think either of you have been condescending to me.


----------



## Diphenhydramine (Apr 9, 2010)

Berdudget said:


> @Diphenhydramine and @itsme45 and anyone else who reads this thread. I just realized that I have made myself look like a raging bitch. I don't have time to explain everything atm, but please allow me to apologize for what it appears I've implied and give me the opportunity to clarify. I do not think I know more than either of you about socionics. There is no question in my mind that you both know more and understand this model far more completely than I do. The reason I keep making arguments is not because I think I'm right and you're wrong. It's because I'm not yet convinced that how I conceive of it in relation to other models and how you do are mutually exclusive concepts. I think the fact that the four letter designation exists in addition to the three letter designation is possible evidence of that. I am under the impression that the 3 letter designation is more precise and that it captures the original essence of the model more fully. I'm under the impression that the 4 letter designation is a translation between the two systems and that it is valid. I'll explain more later. Feel free to correct mw if I am mistaken.


 Calm down. I didn't see it that way. Don't beat yourself up, lol.


----------



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

Diphenhydramine said:


> Calm down. I didn't see it that way. Don't beat yourself up, lol.


Thanks :blushed:

I'm very sick right now, coughing my head off. And I just road in a van with my family for 24 hours. I'm irrational. Tired.


----------



## Diphenhydramine (Apr 9, 2010)

Berdudget said:


> Thanks :blushed:
> 
> I'm very sick right now, coughing my head off. And I just road in a van with my family for 24 hours. I'm irrational. Tired.


 Ouch, 24 hours?! Where the hell were you going?

I was in a bus for 32 hours once. Though - there were stops and changes, at least (none of them longer than 30m anyway...)


----------



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

Diphenhydramine said:


> Ouch, 24 hours?! Where the hell were you going?
> 
> I was in a bus for 32 hours once. Though - there were stops and changes, at least (none of them longer than 30m anyway...)


Florida! It's my first time! :happy:

We did stop to eat a couple times but no sleep. 

Was your trip for fun?


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Berdudget said:


> @_Diphenhydramine_ and @_itsme45_ and anyone else who reads this thread. I just realized that I have made myself look like a raging bitch. I don't have time to explain everything atm, but please allow me to apologize for what it appears I've implied and give me the opportunity to clarify. I do not think I know more than either of you about socionics. There is no question in my mind that you both know more and understand this model far more completely than I do. The reason I keep making arguments is not because I think I'm right and you're wrong. It's because I'm not yet convinced that how I conceive of it in relation to other models and how you do are mutually exclusive concepts. I think the fact that the four letter designation exists in addition to the three letter designation is possible evidence of that. I am under the impression that the 3 letter designation is more precise and that it captures the original essence of the model more fully. I'm under the impression that the 4 letter designation is a translation between the two systems and that it is valid. I'll explain more later. Feel free to correct mw if I am mistaken.
> 
> I don't think either of you have been condescending to me.


Wow I didn't see it like that at all 

What Diphenhydramine said 

Do keep making arguments if you think differently about something, why not?

(I also said before: _Well we disagree here but no worries _ So yeah don't worry. )




Berdudget said:


> Florida! It's my first time! :happy:
> 
> We did stop to eat a couple times but no sleep.
> 
> Was your trip for fun?


Have fun 

24 hour trip is awesome btw. I like that sort of stuff for whatever reason, am I crazy ??


----------



## Diphenhydramine (Apr 9, 2010)

Berdudget said:


> Florida! It's my first time! :happy:
> 
> We did stop to eat a couple times but no sleep.
> 
> Was your trip for fun?


 I took a bus from Luang Prabang in central Laos to Hanoi in Vietnam. Constant delays, poor roads, urgh. Though it was actually pretty fun. I didn't do it on my own luckily. That wasn't even close to my biggest travel nightmare, though. I've been all around the world on planes, boats, trains and buses so I'm used to spending lots of time in enclosed transport spaces, but 24 hours on a van, that isn't nice at all tbh - mostly because I can't read on buses or vans or cars.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Diphenhydramine said:


> I took a bus from Luang Prabang in central Laos to Hanoi in Vietnam. Constant delays, poor roads, urgh. Though it was actually pretty fun. I didn't do it on my own luckily. That wasn't even close to my biggest travel nightmare, though. I've been all around the world on planes, boats, trains and buses so I'm used to spending lots of time in enclosed transport spaces, but 24 hours on a van, that isn't nice at all tbh - mostly because I can't read on buses or vans or cars.


Sounds like a lot of fun, your life 

Staring out the window not an option then? For some reason I can spend quite some time with that without thinking anything. Just constant change of scenery with moving around is nice. Reading, I don't know if that's something that can be practiced or it's an individual issue. I can read on moving vehicles just fine myself and that's the other thing I do when traveling yes.


----------



## Diphenhydramine (Apr 9, 2010)

itsme45 said:


> Sounds like a lot of fun, your life
> 
> Staring out the window not an option then? For some reason I can spend quite some time with that without thinking anything. Just constant change of scenery with moving around is nice. Reading, I don't know if that's something that can be practiced or it's an individual issue. I can read on moving vehicles just fine myself and that's the other thing I do when traveling yes.


 Lol maybe, sometimes I wish everything had transpired "normally" tho.

Staring out of the window is what I usually do. The reading is something to do with balance - I know that some people have no problems and others are fine. Supposedly it's to do with how the brain prefers to concentrate on perceiving the movements in the road so it can balance out vision - if I start to read it can't do that and it gets very confused.


----------



## itsme45 (Jun 8, 2012)

Diphenhydramine said:


> Lol maybe, sometimes I wish everything had transpired "normally" tho.
> 
> Staring out of the window is what I usually do. The reading is something to do with balance - I know that some people have no problems and others are fine. Supposedly it's to do with how the brain prefers to concentrate on perceiving the movements in the road so it can balance out vision - if I start to read it can't do that and it gets very confused.


Well I have the same problem with my life ;p

Um, what do you mean by "perceiving movements in the road"?


----------



## RoSoDude (Apr 3, 2012)

Berdudget said:


> I've experienced this same confusion reading the descriptions of INFj and INFp in comparison to the descriptions of INFP and INFJ. When I first read these descriptions, I insisted that I was an INFj. But, upon further inspection, I came to the conclusion that this is not the case, based on the differing models.
> 
> It appears to me that you are making the argument that because people do not recognize themselves in the descriptions of types, this proves that the types do not correlate between systems. Correct me if I am wrong about that. But I challenge this argument. I do not think it is sound. This is why.
> 
> ...


Sorry it took so long to get back to you... your post was long :tongue:

No, but this is right. To be honest, I don't feel the naming convention is much to focus on. Yeah, you flip the p/j from P/J for introverts in Socionics because of this. But the original naming convention was the three-letter capitals, designating the functions in the order that they appear in the Ego block (as per the Kiersey ideal that you note), with the final letter designating whether that function is introverted or extroverted. So an INTj is an LII, and an INFp is an IEI. The only real difference between this convention and the MBTI-based four-letter naming is that the four letter version uses j/p to denote the order of the rational/irrational functions, which is implicit in the three-letter version. And different letters for functions, but that's even less critical.

Though many do disagree that Socionics and MBTI types are mutually congruent on the basis of type descriptions as you said, others go further and say that the functions themselves are different, even if the models are the same, which means your point about the naming convention is no longer relevant. They'll say that Socionics Se descriptions are so very different from descriptions of western Se, and so on.

But we can look at this in the same that we look at the parallels between the function models -- they may display the information in different ways or even examine slightly different components of types, but they are essentially getting at the same underlying concept. All function models are essentially trying to describe how various elements of personality create a certain structure for other elements, and there's the same pattern no matter which way you slice it. In the case of functions, we can isolate two types of information (rational/irrational), split up each category (Sensing/Intuition and Logic/Ethics or Thinking/Feeling if you prefer), and further split them up by whether they are introverted or extraverted. Do the descriptions really matter, then? I see no reason why they would. They can be helpful in relating the theory to actual personality, but they are not the critical insight to the theory, as I've said before. Socionics and Western Se are only different, in my opinion, because they are looking at different aspects of the function, but at it's core it is still "physical information that is absolute and external in nature), or again, however you want to define it.

This is all me basically agreeing with you, but just refining the point, because as you wrote it, one could still invoke the "Ah, but what if those functions aren't the same" argument. And to be honest, if you don't accept that the models are the same and that thus the functions are also the same (just by analagous thinking), or vice versa, then yes, Socionics and Western Jungian types are different. That is a logically valid and sound argument. I just find it boring and undescriptive, and I think it's basically missing the whole point of typology.



> [...the rest of your post...]


You two with your Se bonding. I find it all very confusing. I only exhibit spatial thinking of that sort to the most minimal degree. Leading a child (or more than one) through a crowd sounds positively terrifying.


----------



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

itsme45 said:


> Ah so how did you decide on INFp / IEI?


Since the translation between the two systems seems valid to me, I used it. Until that point, I trusted that the intertype dynamics descriptions were true but I didn't recognize them in my relationships when I was reading them as though I were the INFj. When I looked at it again considering myself to be the INFp, the dynamics became highly recognizable. Though, I did recently discover I had the relations of benefit backwards. To my credit, my ISFj brother is 5 years younger than me and he looked up to me for that reason. And the most intimate relationships I have with the INTj's in my life are all long distance. I was intensely codependent and they have helped me to get clear about my own needs and wants and thoughts. I have genuinely benefited from their friendship. So I forgive myself for getting it backwards. Besides, the intertypes dynamics are not all-inclusive descriptions of relationships anyway.



> No, my argument is that the dichotomies and function definitions clearly cannot be the same. Consider how an ISTJ in MBTI is suddenly supposed to change either the fourth dichotomy or the functions when going to socionics type ISTj or ISTp. The person is still the same person, with the same psyche... :/


This is how I experienced it. I will explain my perspective and then drop it.

When I read the INFp description, it sounded "wrong" because I was used to conceiving of myself as the schedule-minded "J" of the MBTI system. I started to ask myself how these two descriptions could both be simultaneously accurate. I looked inside myself and realized I am not mentally organized. My thoughts are all over the place. I literally try to hold all information at all times in space that I may reach for whichever piece seems interesting and so that I can tie that together to whichever other piece seems interesting. If my physical environment is in disarray, I have great difficulty thinking straight (I see this as falling into the category of my weak Se). If a person has a strong opinion about my disheveled environment, I feel deeply shamed (Fe reaction). I prefer to have as few things as possible so that I don't have to feel responsible for them. I like nearly empty rooms. If I feel the need to think, I like quiet and stillness. But I am not naturally organized or schedule minded. These are things that I experience external pressure to conform to. My inner world, my dominant function, the part of me no one can really observe, is disconnected from these things. When I looked at the INFp description from this vantage point, it made perfect sense to me that the two descriptions can sound so different and yet be simultaneously accurate.




> How I see it, is that MBTI analyses the person (say ISTJ) differently from socionics, in a different framework, where the same thing in reality means two different things between the two theories. So this ISTJ has property X of their cognitive thinking (or their behavioural patterns if that's what you prefer to analyse instead, apparently this is up to who you're talking to ), this will be part of function Y in MBTI and function Z in socionics. But the issue is even more complex than that, this is just the surface of it. If it was as simple as the same things distributed in different functions, that would perhaps be what you called structural difference, though it would still be significant. But it's not just about distribution in such a sense, it's about a lot more. You might want to study socionics more to see what I mean. (I don't know how deep you've got into it so far.)
> 
> Also, a note, it's not good practice to switch MBTI type into socionics type along those guidelines. You simply have to start from zero when typing yourself in socionics because the correlations between the systems aren't that great. Not good enough to rely on them so much.


I will take the time to do this. When I get home I look forward to digging deeper.






> Heh ok, I skimmed that thread, I guess not a lot of info in it. I really don't know what those situations were like exactly but yeah trying to start up some convo or something can never hurt.  Maybe you'll be pleasantly surprised


I think I will be!

I'm using a borrowed laptop and the battery is about to die. So I'm going to stop here for now. Will answer the fun stuff soon!


----------



## Berdudget (Mar 24, 2011)

RoSoDude said:


> Sorry it took so long to get back to you... your post was long :tongue:
> 
> No, but this is right. To be honest, I don't feel the naming convention is much to focus on. Yeah, you flip the p/j from P/J for introverts in Socionics because of this. But the original naming convention was the three-letter capitals, designating the functions in the order that they appear in the Ego block (as per the Kiersey ideal that you note), with the final letter designating whether that function is introverted or extroverted. So an INTj is an LII, and an INFp is an IEI. The only real difference between this convention and the MBTI-based four-letter naming is that the four letter version uses j/p to denote the order of the rational/irrational functions, which is implicit in the three-letter version. And different letters for functions, but that's even less critical.
> 
> ...


As I was typing my argument I realized, "this is a perfect example of the point he was making about the structure." 

Have you heard the word sapiosexual? There's something about one's ability to articulate one's thoughts clearly and coherently. Even if you'd been completely tearing my argument to pieces I still would have gotten drunk off the articulateness (articulation?)

*spontaneously orgasms* :laughing:




> You two with your Se bonding. I find it all very confusing. I only exhibit spatial thinking of that sort to the most minimal degree. Leading a child (or more than one) through a crowd sounds positively terrifying.


It *is* terrifying.


----------

