# EIIs: What's your Myers-Briggs type?



## Pseudolonewolf (Dec 1, 2012)

I'm still rather new to socionics, but I've become enamoured with it because EII fits me so well, and explains so many of the difficulties I've had in really connecting with certain people even when our Myers-Briggs types were supposedly similar or the same.

I'm an INFJ in Myers-Briggs terms, and I asked in the INFJ forum here a while back what socionics type they are or got on a test. They all said either EII or IEI, with a fairly even balance between the two. It went a long way towards explaining why I could never relate to the supposed INFJ traits like "goes out of their way to look after other people" and "the first to make sure everyone's okay in a crisis" and such (which seem like socionics-Fe stuff).

Just now, I saw an INFP on this forum with their socionics type as EII, so I wondered whether this type is strongly linked to INFJ and INFP.

So yes! If you are EII, what's your Myers-Briggs type?

(I'd also be curious about as many of your other personality type things as you know, since I haven't really seen a gathering of EIIs before so I don't know what they are like...)


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

@Pseudolonewolf

You will get a divided answer. There are people who will say that INFP is EII because Fi is the dominant function in both and both use Ne secondary. These are the ones who consider this according to function theory, which is unproven and shaky ground, it doesen't matter what system one uses it in. Functions seem solid as a concept, but the translation to reality can fail because we can't measure it in any output people give *TLTR: behaviour is not a good indicator for function preference.*

Some others and in this myself included ascribe more to the trait / behaviour model, in which I-E is measured in where one gains energy (good predictor of this is behaviour) and so on for all dichotomies.

Now socionics doesen't have a J-P split, because J-P doesen't exist in the original idea behnd the function theory. *What Socionics has is a RATIONAL-IRATIONAl split.*

Rational or judging functions: Fe-Fi; Te-Ti
Irrational or percieving functions: Ne-Ni; Se-Si

*EII has Fi as the base function thus it will be rational*, which is similar to J in descriptions, but its not really those.

*IEI has Ni as the base function which is a irrational function and the irrationa*l descriptions will sound similar to P, but they are not describing P, which is something else entierly.

*We are using irrational and rational in psychological terms and the layman meanings do not apply here.*

*Here is what we understand under these two terms:* Socionics :: Rationality / Irrationality

*BASICALLY:* Irrational dominants are adaptive, reactive and flexible, more dependent on new information, while rational doms are more active, decicive, follow through and rigid (less dependence on new info and more on preconceptions) People can be disorganized and unstructured while at the same time being active, decisive, will tend to follow through and will take a rigid stance on things. 

*^^ to conclude:* One can be any combination of Judging-Percieving <--> Rational-Irrational and this specific thing is what leads me to believe that either function theory is false or either one or the other system uses function order incorrectly.

*Personally I think MBTI function order is broken as INFPs make no sense being considered as adaptive since they use Fi as a dominant function, which makes them rigid in their preconceptions aka VALUE SYSTEM, which means they are LESS ADAPTIVE then INFJs.*

*EII= MBTI INF-Fi-(P or J) <=== THE ETHICAL INTROVERT
IEI=MBTI INF-Ni-(P or J)<=== THE INTUITIVE INTROVERT*


----------



## Pancreatic Pandora (Aug 16, 2013)

@FreeBeer Your explanation of the theory is good and all but I think what he is looking for is what MBTI types do the actual EIIs in this forum correspond with, and not the theoretical correlation between the two types.


----------

