# iei in socionics and intp in mbti?



## peatchy (Feb 21, 2016)

I'm sorry if this should be in another forum, I didn't know where else to ask.

I'm quite certain my socionics type is iei, but relate more to the intp descriptions than infj ones in mbti. I am still very usnure of my mbti type.


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

clefaery said:


> I'm sorry if this should be in another forum, I didn't know where else to ask.
> 
> I'm quite certain my socionics type is iei, but relate more to the intp descriptions than infj ones in mbti. I am still very usnure of my mbti type.


How come you believe to be IEI in socionics?


----------



## peatchy (Feb 21, 2016)

Captain Mclain said:


> How come you believe to be IEI in socionics?


i have almost consistently tested iei, strongly identify with the description given and the beta quadra


----------



## Captain Mclain (Feb 22, 2014)

clefaery said:


> i have almost consistently tested iei, strongly identify with the description given and the beta quadra


Ok.  So if your question is however MBTI and Socionics should be the same then it probably should. But people are stuck that ISTP transfer to SLI or something. Personally I think the error is within MBTI. It is not forced to connect to a bigger picture how all the pieces is connected and such and therefor correct itself. 

Why do you think you might be Ti-dom?? When at the same time you are IEI.


----------



## Cataclysm (Mar 16, 2015)

Where do you see the difference in the functions?


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

clefaery said:


> i have almost consistently tested iei, strongly identify with the description given and the beta quadra


Use MBTI descriptions of the dichotomies, or the official test. Everything else is more or less flawed (mbti and Socionics) when it comes to typing. If you get I over E, F over T, N over S and P over J, then you are an INFP. Okay, so IEI or EII? EII (model A): Fi, Ne, Ti, Se // Te, Si, *Fe*, Ni ... EII uses Fe mostly in private, and IEI uses Fe mostly in public. However, the descriptions of the 'J' dichotomy refer to Te much more than Fe. So IEI is incorrect, if you are sure about your MBTI type.

You cannot be both an Ni dominant type AND an Fi dominant type.

EDIT: INTP vs. IEI (!?) ...lol... you are probably IEI


----------



## owlet (May 7, 2010)

@clefaery I think reading overall general descriptions can be unhelpful at times, as they tend to grab general 'traits' (like with the quadras, which have been said to be "notoriously difficult" to make accurate in this source).
The composites are quite good, I think, as they describe how the IEs are working in each position. Here's one for IEI and one for LII.

I generally don't trust tests, as they tend to change depending on my mood. Here's a description of the JCF, which can help you compare the functions with the IEs.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

I think transferring between one system to another is the most confusing thing about typology. The systems areent really meant to transition into each other, not by their authors, which is a bit annoying when trying to approach different systems.


----------



## Na2Cr2O7 (Dec 23, 2015)

How to convert between MBTI and Socionics:
1. You can't.

IEI-INFp has IEs with the same name as INFJ of the MBTI, but nevertheless its description fits the INFP description of the MBTI. Another example is that Si of socionics can relate to the function Se of the MBTI and vice versa.

It is possible to be an IEI socionics and INTP MBTI. It's just rarer so it seems more unlikely. The functions of MBTI and the IEs ('functions') of socionics may act different even with the same name. (Think of the letter P in Russian. Cyrillic P sounds like Latin R.)

INTP and INFP (MBTI) may come out quite similar. Do try to realize the differences between both type and see whether you might also be an INFP 

I'm an ENTP who falls somewhere between IEI and ILE of socionics.


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Na2Cr2O7 said:


> How to convert between MBTI and Socionics:
> 1. You can't.
> 
> IEI-INFp has IEs with the same name as INFJ of the MBTI, but nevertheless its description fits the INFP description of the MBTI. Another example is that Si of socionics can relate to the function Se of the MBTI and vice versa.
> ...


Most people aren't interested in conversion. They want to know their corresponding Socionics or MBTI type. If you know that your most preferred functions are Ni (dominant) and Fe (auxiliary), then your MBTI type is INFJ and your Socionics type is IEI.

The problem is that people start thinking about Socionics before knowing their MBTI type, and consequently they get confused.

Btw, you cannot be an ENTP in MBTI and an IEI in Socionics.


----------



## Na2Cr2O7 (Dec 23, 2015)

@Tellus

By conversion, I meant by finding the one that corresponds the most with their MBTI (or whatever system) type. I apologize for not clearly expressing myself.

Like learning a language, blindly remembering the alphabets and trying to convert everything there is to your native language will not give the most accurate results. Do try to study one as that language itself, as though you do not have any previous knowledge in your native language since they have been created differently.

For this particular case, lemme focus on IEI and EII, which are mirrors of each other and share no functions.

IEIs social role is the lyricist/romanticist. They are represented by the poet Sergei Esenin.
EIIs social role is the humanist/empath. They are represented by the philosopher Fyodor Dostoyevsky, author of The Brothers Karamazov.

Without saying much about the underlying functions, the word lyricist and poet will remind you of some MBTI Fi-user types like an INFP, while the word humanist and philosopher rings MBTI Ni, perhaps INFJ cause humanism. Oh yes, Dostoyevsky, the quintessential EII-INFj is an MBTI INFJ. Read his works, which will be pretty clear MBTI Ni-Fe, rather than MBTI Fi.

When the functions are analyzed, you'd see that IEI uses Ni-Fe, so they must certainly correspond to MBTI INFJ because their 'functions' look the same: Ni-Fe and Ni-Fe. Like Latin and Cyrillic alphabets, just because something looks the same doesn't mean they must correspond.

Ni-Fe of IEI socionics corresponds to Fi-Ne INFP of MBTI. (Retaining their introversion/extraversion orientation.) Read the descriptions of each type. Like learning a language, just knowing the alphabets would never get anyone far. Alphabets form words and grammar, and that's the essence of that language. 

For example, this is the description of the socionics Fi. This is similar to Fe of MBTI in terms of humanism and social hierarchy.



> Fi is responsible for understanding the quality, nature, and proper maintenance of personal relations; makes moral judgments; and aspires to humanism and kindness. Fi has a strong understanding of the social hierarchy and how people feel about each other, their attitudes of like or dislike, enthrallment or disgust, repulsion or attraction, enmity or friendship.


And this one is for Fe. This is, once again, similar to the Fi of MBTI, especially the 'perception of an emotional state in an individual'.



> Fe is responsible for the perception of an emotional state in an individual and the bodily and linguistic expression of emotions. Fe is able to influence others' emotional condition and to communicate its own, "infecting" others. Fe is used especially in generating and recognizing excitement and enthusiasm.


These two are nowhere similar to their MBTI counterparts, even more similar (by similar, I mean some of the aspects are shared, not identical to the point of interconversion) to each respective ones with the opposite orientation. This means that there is no true corresponding type. There may be correlations, but that is very loose and human, by nature, is unpredictable.




Tellus said:


> Btw, you cannot be an ENTP in MBTI and an IEI in Socionics.











I'm not an IEI. I can relate to both, still leaning on to the ILE side. Statistically, this graph exists, and perhaps, I belong in the outlying 0.13% of the population. Human behavior can't be rationalized, and will never be.


----------



## Tellus (Dec 30, 2012)

Na2Cr2O7 said:


> Ni-Fe of IEI socionics corresponds to Fi-Ne INFP of MBTI. (Retaining their introversion/extraversion orientation.) Read the descriptions of each type. Like learning a language, just knowing the alphabets would never get anyone far. Alphabets form words and grammar, and that's the essence of that language.
> For example, this is the description of the socionics Fi. This is similar to Fe of MBTI in terms of humanism and social hierarchy.
> And this one is for Fe. This is, once again, similar to the Fi of MBTI, especially the 'perception of an emotional state in an individual'.
> These two are nowhere similar to their MBTI counterparts, even more similar (by similar, I mean some of the aspects are shared, not identical to the point of interconversion) to each respective ones with the opposite orientation. This means that there is no true corresponding type. There may be correlations, but that is very loose and human, by nature, is unpredictable.


No, Ni-Fe of IEI socionics _does not_ correspond to Fi-Ne INFP of MBTI. Your viewpoint is based on two particular _descriptions_ of the IM elements/functions. They are not precise enough, and you are not considering all aspects of those descriptions. Here are Aushra's descriptions:

Extraverted ethics
Perceives information about processes taking place in objects — first of all, emotional processes that are taking place in people, their excitation or subduedness, and their moods. This perceptual element implies the ability to know what excites people, and what suppresses them. It defines a person's ability or inability to control his emotional state, and also the emotional states of other people. 

Introverted ethics 
This is the subjective relationship between two carriers of potential or kinetic energy that shows the level of attraction (or repulsion) between one object or subject and another object or subject. Thanks to this IM element a person feels which objects attract him and which repel him. You might say that this perceptual element conveys information about objects' need or lack of need of each other and about the presence or absence of mutual or one-way needs.

Socionics IM elements correspond to _definitions_ of the information aspects (which are necessary, otherwise Socionics would be pointless): Fi = internal statics of fields, and Fe = internal dynamics of objects. Hence, Socionics Fi cannot correspond to MBTI Fe.


----------



## Nothing1 (Jan 22, 2014)

peatchy said:


> i have almost consistently tested iei, strongly identify with the description given and the beta quadra


Maybe you should explore typology as an IEI until you have information that leads you elsewhere. It took me some time to correctly type with socionics. With mbti, I kept typing as INFP along with INFJ depending on which test I took. Learning about the quadras really helped me. Apparently, I'm intellectually challenged as I didn't understand most questions either test asked, especially socionics. It took someone rephrasing the dichotomies (really hating that word right now) and functions into metaphors before I understood.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

They're two different systems that share a common basis (Jung). While I think it's logical for most people to come up the same in both systems, I don't think there's any particular reason individuals should _have_ to type the same in both systems. But that does sort of depend on whether you believe in absolute or relative type. I'm a relativist myself.


----------



## Mr.Tambourine Man (May 26, 2016)

peatchy said:


> I'm quite certain my socionics type is iei, but relate more to the intp descriptions than infj ones in mbti. I am still very unsure of my mbti type.


So am I, and I'm in a similar position myself. In MBTI I relate very strongly to most descriptions of INTP, but also to some INFJ definitions, but in socionics I'm a definite IEI. Before I go on, I'd also like to point out that I don't think there's anything wrong with identifying partially with several types (as long as you're not narcissistically picking out the best bits from each).

The way I feel is that many MBTI descriptions stress behaviors and personal qualities in people which A) are easily relatable to a variety of people (especially intellectual qualities which many of us want to see in ourselves like "rational" or "objective") and B) are not directly related to thought process (i.e. you don't need to be a Ti-dom to be interested in understanding the world, there are many environmental factors also at play there).

I also think that many of us use our functions to varying degrees (for instance, I think I have as much if not more of a handle on my tertiary Ti than my auxiliary Fe, largely due to upbringing, yet I'm quite sure I'm not a LII).

Lastly, I would say that INFJs are usually portrayed as mystical and removed which I think is completely misleading to an INFJ who might be reading those definitions. It wouldn't make sense for you to feel mysterious to yourself. I think this is a large part of the reason INFJs mistype (we tend to be more concept oriented observers (Ni) than most descriptions would lead you to believe, this also explains the frequent T or P results) Similarly, those who might find satisfaction in being _perceived_ as rare and mysterious are more inclined to identify as INFJ.

I think there are more INFJs out there than "statistics" would suggest and I also think we're not as removed and incredibly wise as stereotyped.

The moral of this story (at least for me) is that the function-based framework is much more useful than the inconsistent, but flattering, behavioral descriptions that you'll find around the web for INFJs and INTPs.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

peatchy said:


> I'm sorry if this should be in another forum, I didn't know where else to ask.
> 
> I'm quite certain my socionics type is iei, but relate more to the intp descriptions than infj ones in mbti. I am still very usnure of my mbti type.


The intuitive subtype of IEI has an accent on Ti hidden agenda, and for this reason may identify with Ti and think it's their leading function.

If you aren't sure whether you are perceiving, irrational Ni-leading (IEI) or rational, judging Ti-dom (INTP) then you need to study the theory further and do some more introspection (because for sure you can't be both irrational and rational lead!) and pay less attention to type profiles. Plenty of people out there for whom their type profiles aren't that great of a match, though yes that can be disorienting.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

cyamitide said:


> The intuitive subtype of IEI has an accent on Ti hidden agenda, and for this reason may identify with Ti and think it's their leading function.


I think what you mean is that Ni subtypes think more, which could cause them to believe they are Ti. But Ti, as I understand it, isn't about "thinking" in and of itself. What I'm trying to say is that I dunno if Ni-IEI has a greater "accent on hidden agenda", I don't know what you mean when you say a greater accent on a function. Fe-IEI values Fe and Ti more, but they are less likely to spend time thinking, reflecting, contemplating etc so they are less likely to mistake themselves for an "introverted thinking" type.


----------

