This is fun: note that J and P are switched for Introverts: ESFj on ISTp: "can't behave properly and never wants to do anything" ENTp on ISTj: "logical but no imagination, no lateral thinking, would be lost without an instruction manual" INTj on ENFp: "lots of crazy, inconsistent ideas, always on the move but in all directions" ISFp on ENFj: "too restless and is all to no good purpose, at the same time is hopeless with real work" ENFj on INTp: "has no idea what impression s/he's making on others, hopeless" ESTp on INTj: "intelligent perhaps but no backbone and unfit for the real world" ISTj on ESFp: "makes absolutely no sense, totally chaotic, a loose cannon" INFp on ESFj: "says and does a lot without ever getting anywhere" ENTj on INFp: "lots of lofty goals but clueless as to how to get there, lives in dream world" ESFp on INFj: "too nice, no backbone, unfit for the real world" ISFj on ESTp: "how can anyone trust them?" INTp on ESTj: "rushes into doing things without knowing where to go" ESTj on ISFp: "lazy and can't do anything right" ENFp on ISFj: "set on their ways, without imagination, or always expecting the worst" INFj on ENTp: "how can anyone trust them?" ISTp on ENTj: "too restless and is all to no good purpose, at the same time is hopeless with real work"
for introverts in order to convert a type from mbti to socionics you switch p and j for extraverts it stays the same i.e INTP in mbti is INTj in socionics and ESTP in mbti is ESTP in socionics
you said bullshit function can not switched because they don't have the same definitions. for example Se in socionics mean achieve a goal, organize it's environment authority seeking , but in MBTI Se mean a desire of sensory stimulation. if you are trying to analysis Socionics with a MBTI framework/definition of function you have not understand anything to socionics
With the John Beebe 8-Functional Model, you can change the nature of these relationships. To me, it is as if the universe acts predetermined (follow static Socionics interrelation patterns) until you put in your free will by applying your consciousness. It is as if the higher power wants us to come alive in consciousness. For instance, the 6th function (of MBTI, not Socionics) of INFP is Ni, and of INFJ is Fi. This function is treated as the witch/warlock, which is viewed with suspicion. However, when you open up to the 6th function, it becomes the wise man/wise woman. Thus, you actually even seek it. So yes, I do have good relationships with INFJs, but then I start to think, "Wait, they like all the same things, but they are going about them all wrong!" However, I had both unconsciously and consciously developed a taste for Ni by reading Carl Jung and Nietzsche, both Ni-users. So I actually seek INFJ advice, whereas not all INFPs do. As a result, our relationships are more meaningful and helpful. Some INFJs are more open to Fi than others, others view it as an abomination. Also the Beebe/MBTI 5th and 6th functions are actually strong functions according to Socionics (I'm not using Socionics order). If we opened up to them they are relatively easier to develop. Thus as an INFP, I can understand Fe and Ni, if I take the time to open up to them and see where they are coming from. The most difficult function is the POLR (MBTI 7th function). For INFP, that is Se, for INFJ, that is Te. I find it challenging to naturally develop this function, I see that I actually have to know about Socionics in order to force myself to realize it has value. If I didn't, I might go my whole life denouncing Se use. However, knowing that Se has value in itself already is personal growth. What I find too is that the more I understand MBTI/Socionics, the more I find Fi annoying when over-expressed, because I can see from other types' standpoint what are Fi's turn-offs, though Fi is my first function.
Beware of MBTI to Socionics conversions. MBTI and Socionics define functions differently, someone may have a best-fit type in MBTI that is different from their best-fit type in Socionics. Take Socionics tests and pin down your best-fit Sociotype mentally separate from your best-fit MBTI type before using Socionics intertype relations.
Psychological Feedback Loops - Not Types does your own MBTI type differ from your socionics type? I know you’re an INTJ in MBTI, so are you not an ILI in socionics? Or do you relate to both Ni + Te in each system?
I love your voice!!! It's so calming and soothing . Your voice feels like a heavy strong steadfast anchor :-) Thank you for all the information it's been very useful!!!
I have just found your channel few days ago and I must say that it is truly invaluable and astonishingly great. I really appreciate your explanation of the in-deterministic and nonrestrictive nature of the socionics in the beginning of the video
+Mitja Kocjancic As an INTP, INFP would be your business relation. ISTP is your kindred. Kindred = same base function, opposing creative function. Business = same creative function, opposing base function.
+Mitja Kocjancic I agree! My best friend is actually a INTP, and i am a INFP. Because we both have the same perceiving functions in the same order, its like we never run out of things to talk about!
Dev Hat, if you're using socionic's labels, then INTp & INFp is exactly the kindred relationships. You're apparently just mixing in the MBTI labels with switched last letters.
First off, i am always amazed by how insightful your videos are. This one has got to be my favorites so far. It has really clarified my ponderings. Would you mind going into how romantic styles are integrated into intertype relations? I feel like taking that into account adds a flavor to each relation.
Anh Ngo I am already working on it -- I was hoping my looking into in the intertype relations might help with my type interaction videos :) I'm glad you enjoyed it!
Michael Pierce hey what you say at certain points and what reads on the screen is different, so what should I go by? Consider annotations to correct please? Thanks for the insightful video!
xxXMathisX6x6x6 no i'm ENTJ/ENTj/LIE. yeah, it's completely unnecessary. socionics already has their three letter naming convention, why did they have intrude on MBTI's and add useless confusion? (i'm a socionics enthusiast over MBTI, though)
I've experienced duality relationship and I've got to say it is true. A wonderful experience to meet your opposite. It is as if we knew each other the moment we glanced into our souls through our eyes
I love the cautioning at the beginning. I saw this a while ago and came to like socionics duality theory in terms of relationships , but it was holding me back a little. Guess I saw/see it as poetic but I'd start to doubt relationships i started could be promising and saw the downsides and got overly technical in my mind about it. The map isn't the territory however valid, revealing and useful it may be
Another great video, I find you the best in your be when it comes to Myers Briggs, and Socionics seems to be heading the same way. I would suggest, however, stating in the beginning of the video that you will be using the MBTI denominations for types. I was a little confused in the beginning until I realised that.
Will you be going into the more mechanical side of the relationships? As in the supervisor has the supervisee's vulnerable function as its first function and therefore exerts psychological pressure on him?
Excellent video! I have been researching the inter-type relationships lately and I have found that you are quite right about almost all of the relationships being perceived as negative. Do you happen to have a source or website that has better descriptions of the inter-type relationships in a more neutral light.
Yeah, I don't buy the whole dual being best idea. Not awful, but there isn't that 'click' that's supposedly supposed to happen. Quasi-identical works quite well in my experience. Totally jive. Kindred is great too. Beneficiary in my experience is not as 'asymmetrical' as presented, unless there's a maturity gap. I feel like making mathematical predictions with the types is going to be really difficult. People are too complicated, and what they want and need is going to be based on experiences, interests, goals, culture, and a million other factors with limited relation to their functions.
@kyo's kitten it's not a matter of liking, it's a matter of function. I don't think people seek their inferior function in others typically. Usually, I think they're seeking it in themselves. And when someone leading with that function is around, it is more likely to be discouraging or at the very least enabling lack of growth where one would find happiness and health in growing. I like ENFJs as an INTP, but I don't find them complimentary at all
The part about third party and contrary makes total sense. My mom is contrary and I could feel the tension rise as we were pulling up to the driveway as a kid, even though no one was home, could just sense that in an environment with others a wrench would be thrown in the works. With my dad was not like this, if anything it was worse when we were alone.
INFJ & INFj here. And married to ESTP / ESTp. I must confess that my "soon-to-be-Ex of 22yrs", is an actual Mid-Range Narcissist, but I cannot EVER believe that an ESTP or ESTp would be a close match to me for ANYTHING. I would never consider this match again. But, I do agree that the definition(s) or description(s) of MY type(s) are much more "in-depth" with Socionics, and are EXTREMELY accurate !!!!
thanks man, nice to see and hear this also in english. the gap beween unstructured but popular in USA MBTI, and very structured but popular only in postsoviet contries Socionics are merging for good, next you should look at the "Psihosofija", I have not found any site that have this system in english, german or spanish, but it is used as a supplement for socionics in Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine, and it puts 24 different possible communication styles on top of every sociotype, so it can be harder or less hard to communicate in those relationships, you just described in your video
My experience has been that the Conflict relation seems impressive and compelling, Superego seems impressive and invoking a bit of fear, Supervision makes me hopeful that they will like me. The painful relations are all kind of a blur. If I experience a duality relation I wonder if I'll feel the person is too good.
This is a good video but I'm confused to why the descriptions at the bottom of the video are different to what you are saying. For example you described semi-duality as INFJ and ESFP, but the description box said INFP and ESFP. Why is that? Plus, if i'm not mistaken I think you may have missed the relationship between INFJ/ISFP or INFP/ISFJ, I'm interested in how those types would generally react to each-other.
Basically socionics switches the p and the j for introverted types. It actually makes a lot of sense since it refers to the leading function INFp (INFJ MBTI) for example leads with Ni, a perceiving function
+ToStand He himself typed himself as INTP or ISTP. His obsession with archetypes was a clear sign of Ni. I think he engaged it more like a tertiary function than a dominant one, like a child with a toy of never-ending appeal. It wasn't something part of his own ego, it was something that he loved. It's hard to group him with ISTP fix-its but INTP doesn't have Ni. It seems clear that Ti was in his ego. In the aspect of socionics called "dimensionality" it's explained that an INTP (INTj) has a grasp of Ni that's as strong as his/her grasp of Ti, it's just not valued as much. So maybe Jung's Red Book was indeed a massive personal leap into his own subconscious using his roundabout grasp of the mechanism of archtypes. Hmm I think ISTP. In old age he lived in a house without electricity, where he made the fire himself etc. etc.. and my ISTP ex-boss was a historian, Jung was well versed in history (+ mythology).
It sounds too simplistic, but the "problem" is, it works. The descriptions of relationships are accurate. For me, even a prolonged presence of my dual in my environment helped me naturally relax, before I knew anything about socionics. I think the bigger problem is MBTI. It's simplistic too, but more popular and inaccurate about who your "golden pair" is.
I loved your descriptions but some of the captions were different from the types I understood were in those roles, such as the supervisor and semi-dual. I had an understanding of supervisor being between an INFJ and ENTJ, and the semi-dual being between INFJ and ISTJ (MBTI versions). Either way, the descriptions were fantastic! Thank you
Great video! Can you post more videos about Socionics? I prefer this over MBRI because its more logical and spreads the truth. I also can relate more to Socionics compared MBTI in their descriptions.
Ive totally had that competitive streak with isfjs at work, i suppose because each is strong at each others tersiary and role functions and blind spot maybe, very weird tho the rest i cant say ive experienced exept for sure the benifactor infp. To my intj. Were the only people i talked to for years. Very unhealthy. Glad to be more aware of other people.
As I watch this video, I hear "INTj" where the screen shows INTp. Or I hear ESTj but see ESTp. Why is this, and why has it not been corrected? This video is from 2015 and it's 2022 now, plenty of time to rectify.........Very confusing. Thank you.
My very close relationships with my ENFP best friend, INFP sister and ENFJ fiancée don't really match these at all, and don't appear to work in these ways. On the whole it seems very inaccurate for many of my relationshps; I dismiss Socionics. -ENFP
Muphlon The ENFP description is very spot on and I've been testing ENFP for years. My best friend's results have also been consistent for years, my sister and fiancee have only been tested twice. However, at the end of the day I realize, it means little. Human symbols can't hold the whole, unbastardized truth of reality so any description like this must be taken with several grams of salt. Useful, but only marginally so.
Please don't take the tests anymore. They are misleading, and at best a key into your physiology, but almost never spot on. It's best to learn about the functions and everyday habits that are specific to your type.
What about the two missing interactions? I am an INTJ so i would say INTJ - ISTP is a respect/disrespect relationship and INTJ - ENFP a love/hate relationship. Please give opinions on that, concerning if other types think this is valid as well.
+Liam M I think those correspond to INTJ- INFP for benefit and INTJ-ENFJ for Mirage if i'm not mistaken. You may be misunderstanding because those nomenclatures are in reference to socionics. Nevertheless there are too inter-type connections missing which I'm wondering why and their meanings.
***** You're mistaken. Every type has TWO Benefit relationships. One to their benefit and one to their detriment. The same is true of Supervisor relationships. INTJ-ENFJ is a Supervisor relationship.
+Liam M Well I'm a bit confused because in the Mirage relationship shows INFp - ENTp to which it should correspond to INTJ-ENFJ and on the Supervisor relationship it shows INFp-ESFj to which it should correspond to INTJ-ESTJ. Can you help me then to understand which is which for INTJ? who is my supervisor and supervisee? And who is my benefactor and beneficiary? or point me to written theory if possible? Sorry for the trouble.
+Sem Nome INFp-ENTp is INFJ-ENTP, which corresponds to INTJ-ENFP. INTJs supervise ESTJs. ENFJs supervise INTJs. I learned about the Benefactor relationship on the Socionics Wikipedia page where it's called the Requester relationship. It's also the relationship I understand the least, so bear with me. I believe INTJs benefit INFPs and ISTPs benefit INTJs. However, "benefit" might not be the best word to use here. To my understanding, INFPs "request" INTJs help (not necessarily verbally), but don't value them and essentially use them as means to an end. The reverse is true for ISTPs.
Can somebody explain to me the difference between, say, INTJ and INTj? I didn't know what Socionics was when I watched this, so I looked it up and took a test on it. According to the Myer-Briggs test, I'm definitely an INTJ. However, the Socionics test indicated I'm INTp. I don't understand the lowercase j/p at the end of it, so maybe there isn't any conflict between being INTJ and INTp, but it seems contradictory at first glance, and I'm unable to find how they differ.
+Global Rain For all intents and purposes, the INTJ in Myers Briggs and the INTp in Socionics are referring to the same type; a.k.a. the same series of functions.
+Global Rain in MBTI, the J/P refers the the first extroverted function, so it can be the dominant or the auxiliary in socionics, the j/p refers to the dominant function so an INTJ is an INTp because his dominant is Ni which is a perception function (p) it only changes for introverts, it's the same for extroverts ENTJ = ENTj
I’m married in a “business” relationship (esfp x ENFP) , and I cannot stress enough how accurate this description is. I’m all about the Se/Te and she’s all about the Ne/Te. It is hilarious trying to figure out what the hell the other person is thinking, yet we totally make it work because we respect each other’s views. Very business like! Yet… the business of fun because we are both EPs 🤪
INTP: The only real disagreement I have with this (theory) is that the chart presumes everything is equal. There may be types that are never supervisee for example, or some that perhaps don't have a "conflict" type. In other words, balance should not be necessarily given for the sake of balance.
It makes sense to me, in a steriotypical way how each steriotypical function pairing fits with each other and therefore steriotypically what happens as a result. Of course a underdeveloped \ young or whatever intj may very well find them selves beholdened to the advise and tutilidge of an estj and ive seen istjs who get on ok with an enfj friend of theres. Due to not being to egotistical and also self awareness. Where as the previous relatonship is merely the estj is a master of there feild and the intj while having an overall edge in there way, is still inferior knowledge wise and capability wise.
I've had many moments in the past, where I've questioned whether this cognitive science isn't all just nonsense, on that very premise. If you think about it though, it is all just nature. Strictly speaking, people can't be boxed into types, but if we presume the psychological functions are real, urging us in one direction over another, such symmetry, inversion, repulsion etc. is bound to occur when different people meet one another. Then it becomes a question of relatedness. And that question is always answered with a circle. That is how it is balanced.
DCNH Harmonizers seem to have some kind of "superpower" where they are able to exist at least somewhat peacefully even with their conflictors. But yeah, socionics is correct, that requires 'erasure of the self' to certain degree, and not everyone is capable of that. I think E9s might be better at it than others...
Why are there only 14 relationship types? After looking through the types related to INFp in this video, the ENTj and ISFj are the only ones left out. Do these pairings not have their own unique relationship types? Are they simply that unlikely to interact that it doesn't even actually register to either party in any way? Edit: After thinking about it a moment, I find it interesting that the types left out were the ISFj(ISFP) and ENTj(ENTJ) because these two types are complete opposites of each other (ENTJ=TeNiSeFi, ISFP=FiSeNiTe) and when compared to the INFp (INFJ =NiFeTiSe), all these types have the same preferred perceiving axis, but this is different from the ESFp(ESFP=SeFiTeNi) and INTp(INTJ=NiTeFiSe) in that the ENTJ and ISFP subordinate that preferred axis to a judging axis while the ESFP and INTJ do not. At the same time, this is different from the ISTj(ISTP=TiSeNiFe) and ENFj(ENFJ=FeNiSeTi) because these types have the same preferred judging axis. Now I feel like I'm just rambling here, but I wonder if the absence of the relationship of INFJ to ENTJ and ISFP is because of the difference in the judging axis being paired with the same preferred perceiving axis. Or maybe I'm not onto anything and just rambling while looking at this rather unorganized comment. Edit 2: is it because the Supervisor and Beneficiary relationships are actually 2 relationships (Benefactor and Beneficiary, Supervisor and Supervisee)?
Mirror isn’t correct. It’s graphic is correct but you described INFP-ENFP instead of INFP-ENFJ. These personalities are very similar but my experience has shown a mass amount of friction. The most of any two types. One stops when the other goes and Vice versa. It’s intense rivalry.
In my experience, no. This is a shadow relationship, whereby the preferences are all swapped, but the functions are all the same (Ego and Super Id are merely swapped.) What this means is, they can't have quite such a fulfilling relationship marked by endless conversations like INFP/INTP, but they can attend to one another's needs, given the right conditions.
@@hugoclarke3284 estj hates infp's traits that infp values the most in himself. My experience with estj is horrible. Even though infps are indecisive (victimous attitude) and they tend to listen to advices which seem professional to them (they trust others' experiences) as for estj they hate to provide broad explanation to make infp feel safe with such an adivce, they just command and don't give a fuck. Types with lead Te often require from others the same level of understanding of the subject (since they think their understanding is self-evident) and infps often try to look at the subject from different sides. I don't see how infp and estj can live/work together. Their attitudes and workstyles are incredibly different and imcompatible.
@@endofjourney665 Sounds like you're basing your understanding of ESTJ on some unhealthy relationship(s). I agree that friction is pretty much inevitable when INFP and ESTJ have to interact on a regular basis. Although that might at first seem related to having the opposite dominant function of one another, I believe that this is actual a source of mutual respect, in that types tend to overcompensate with their conscious value of the inferior function. The INFP admires decisiveness and assertiveness, provided that it is "for a noble cause", while the ESTJ admires a sense of deep meaningfulness, provided that it is not some "fairy tale bullshit". The real source of friction, in my opinion, is the communication styles born from the auxiliary function. ESTJ communicate with recollection of past experiences and hearing the experiences of others, which soon gets tiring for the INFP. The INFP communicates with ideas and "what ifs", which are a waste of time for the ESTJ. As a result of being direct opposites, they are able to counterbalance one another in some ways, and most importantly, are capable of learning to avoid stepping on one another's toes. This would be harder if they did not share the exact same functions. For example, INFP and INFJ can get on with each other very well being both intuitive feeling types, yet they tend to arrive at similar conclusions from drastically different thought processes, and when friction does occur, it seems to be very unexpected and disconcerting.
@@hugoclarke3284 I know russian and even though I prefer Jungian Typology, I've read a lot from socionics perspective (since it's predominant typology in the russian internet). INFP and INFJ have quasi-identity relationship which can be described as 'coexisting with complete misunderstanding of each other'. I had a very close infj friend and, yes, we tend to care about the same things but in different ways. The easiest person to talk to as for me is INTP. We do everything verbally even though we care about different things. Both are victimous (although, again, in different ways). I can't do anything with ESxJs. They never get my jokes, and their jokes to me are very primitive. They often automatically explain the jokes... Also both try to control everything. My mother was ESFJ and she was trying to conform me very hard. For a long time I rejected myself until I grew up and started being defensive and independent. By the way, you seem to understand the topic well. May we talk on private somehow? Chatting via whatsapp or whatever? Plus I guess you play Paladins as well :)
@@endofjourney665 I'm interested in socionics too! I definitely think it hits on some truth and there are some great insights to be drawn from it. And your perspective as an INFP correlates with my own. Are you Russian or did you learn the language? It seems terribly difficult. Sure, I have whatsapp but idk how to message you it privately on youtube?
Thanks a lot! This is really a great video. However, I can't believe what the socionic theory says about the MBTI INFJ & MBTI ESFJ relationship. According to Socionic, it is the worst relationship. I am an INFJ and My best friends are ESFJ's. In fact my buddy (whom I have known for 20 years) is an ESFJ. I will have to dig deeper to understand why socionic reach this conclusion. Because this just doesn't apply to me :)
Paul Christian Kreitz haha yes, that's possible but I think it's more complicated then that so you're an INFP male ? I don't know if you'll get along with an ESTJ woman, because of gender roles. and I think socionics has a indeed a point with duality, but I think keirsey is more right with his N-N, S-S pairing (INFP - ENTJ for example) so if I take the example of the ENTJ male, it would be an INFP female and with an ENTJ female it would be an INTJ male maybe and an INFP male it would be with an ENFP female maybe or another INFP female the idea is to keep the perception letter and the judgement axis so N with N, S with S, TJ with TJ or FP, FJ with FJ or TP and this with taking into account gender
I tried INFP + INTJ, it's pretty cool but a little lacking connection wise I think. Er, the Fi/Te connection is good but there's a gap between the other functions. N/N is cool but what if Ne/Ni is not as good as Ne/Si where the other person also has the Si/Ne somewhere in their stack? ESTJ is a little scary for me but I think an ESTJ Si-subtype (Socionics) would suit me a lot better than a Te-subtype. I'm Ne-subtype. For me the gender issue only comes up when the two are the SAME gender. Male dominance stuff. Buut I don't actually have experience with a female to compare to.
Paul Christian Kreitz I don't know. Maybe you're right. As for different perception functions, well yeah, I don't know maybe they'd lead to the same thinking ? Even though it's not the same process ? I really can't say. Yes if you take into account subtypes, maybe you can make it work. Interesting stuff.
If the INFJ's beneficiary can be found by switching the last two letters -- INTP -- how is the INTP's beneficiary then found? Same question for the supervision relationship.
Thought about it. I guess the INFJ's benefactor would be ISFP and supervisor would be ENTJ. P.S. That is, the benefactor of type x has as its 1st function x's inverted 2nd and its 2nd function as x's 4th. The supervisor of type x has as its 1st function x's inverted 3rd and its 2nd function as x's 1st. P.P.S. So the INTP's beneficiary would be ISTJ and the ESFJ's supervisee would be... ISTJ again. Assuming my reasoning is correct, I wonder if that is noteworthy. P.P.P.S. Patterns... Patterns everywhere... O_o
Supervision you take the creative/2nd function (ne) as the supervisee's lead and switch to the other axis pair (ti/fe fi/te). Or you just take your mirror and your supervisor is their dominant pair switched; your supervisee is the mirror's non-dominant pair switched. Benefactor you take the mobilizing (mbti's 3rd) as the beneficiary's lead and switch to the other axis pair also (ti/fe te/fi). Or you take your activation and your benefactor is their dominant pair switched; your beneficiary is the activation's non-dominant pair switched.
I'm just screwing around here but I think I've found an easy way to calculate the Socionics' relationships by comparing the Socionics' Temperaments (IxxJ, IxxP, ExxP, or ExxJ) and the Quadras of the two parties. It's easier than it sounds but some (okay lots of) explanation is needed first. (P.S. I am going to use MBTI notation for this post to make it simpler for myself. For example an IxxJ, or an IJ, refers to a group of introverts whose dominant function is a form of introverted perception) The first thing needed is the relationship between the two types' Socionic temperaments. Temperament (again, in MBTI notation) is simply whether you are an IxxJ, IxxP, ExxP, or ExxJ. Some temperaments understand each other better than others. For the purposes of this post I will label the relationships between the temperaments, but please understand I'm making these up as I go and no one uses these terms but me. -The relationship between individuals of the same temperament have a "Same" temperament relationship. (GASP!) (An INFJ and an ISTJ, ISFJ, INFJ, or INTJ) -The relationship between temperaments that only share their Introversion or extraversion have a temperament relationship that is a "Shared Attitude." (An INFJ and an ISTP, ISFP, INFP, or INTP) -The relationship between two temperaments who are not both introverted or extraverted but are both dominantly rational (T or F) or Irrational (S or N) have a temperament that is of a "Shared Outlook." (An INFJ and an ESTP, ESFP, ENFP, or ENTP) -Finally the relationship between two different temperaments that don't have either a "Shared Attitude" or "Outlook" have a "Conflicting" temperament relationship. (An INFJ and an ESTJ, ESFJ, ENFJ, or ENTJ) (I was tempted to name these after Demosthenes' hierarchy of foreignness -- Utlanning, Framling, Raman, and Varelse respectively -- but the fact that only war is advised for dealing with Varelse seemed a little extreme. Still...) The second thing that matters is knowing the relationship between the quadras of the two types. Again, this is easier than it sounds. A quadra is a socionics term for a group of people who prefer the same functional axis'. What Michael Peirce calls the Philosophers, Saints, Royalty, and Free Spirits Socionics calls the Alphas, Betas, Gammas, and Deltas. So in review: -Alphas (or Philosophers) prefer Ti/Fe and Si/Ne -Betas (or Saints) prefer Ti/Fe and Ni/Se -Gammas (or Royalty) prefer Fi/Te and Ni/Se -Deltas (or Free Spirits) prefer Fi/Te and Si/Ne Like the temperaments the quadras have relationships too, and again I am going to label them with my own not-used-by-anyone-else terminology: -People of the same quadra have a "Same" quadra relationship. (So two Beta, or an INFJ and an INFJ, ISTP, ESTP, or ENFJ) -People from different quadras who prefer the same Perception axis have a "Same Perception Axis" quadra relationship. (Betas (Saints) and Gammas (Royalty) because both prefer the Ni/Se perception axis. As an example an INFJ and an INTJ, ISFP, ESFP, or ENTJ) -People from different quadras who prefer the same Judgment axis have a "Same Judgment Axis" quadra relationship. (Betas (Saints) and Alphas (Philosophers) have this because both prefer the Ti/Fe judgment axis. As an example an INFJ with an ISFJ, INTP, ENTP, or ESFJ) -Finally, people from different quadras who do not prefer any similar functional axis' would have a "Conflicting" quadra relationship. (Betas (Saints) and Deltas (Free Spirits) because they share no common functional axis'. An example would be an INFJ with an ISTJ, INFP, ENFP, or ESTJ) (Note: Michael Peirce's "Heavy Mole" video jives well here in understanding the quadra relationships.) There's one final difficulty in figuring the socionics relationship, and I only discovered it at the 11th hour of writing this post. Knowing the quadra relationship is key, and certainly illuminates some of the differences between the quadra groups, but at the level of individual relationships an individual's preference to use one function over another complicates which of the shared quadras is used how. In other words a type's Dominant and Auxiliary functions affect how a type relates to a member of another quadra. I feel like my explanation isn't explaining so let me throw an example at you. An INFJ is a Beta (or Saint) with Ni dom and Fe aux. The quadra that shares a preference for the Ni/Se axis of his dominant function (the Gammas or Royalty) will have a different relationship to the INFJ than the quadra that shares a preference for the Ti/Fe axis of his auxiliary (Alphas or Philosophers). This complication only affects the relationships the individual has with the quadras that have one axis in common. So one more example to nail this down, an INFP is a Delta (or Free Spirit) with Fi dom and Ne Aux. The quadra that shares his dominant Fi/Te axis (the Gammas or Royalty) will have a different relationship to him than the quadra that shares his Auxiliary Si/Ne axis (the Alphas or Philosophers). Now finally to the calculation. 1) Figure out the temperament relationship between the subject and type in question. (Same, Shared Attitude, Shared Outlook, or Conflicting) 2) Figure out the quadra relationship between the subject and the type in question. (Same quadra, Shared Judgment Axis, Shared Perception Axis, or Conflicting) 3) Figure out which of the two "Shared Axis" quadras correspond with the subjects dominant and Auxiliary functions. (For example because an INFJ is Ni Dominant the "Shared Perception Axis" quadra corresponds with his dominant function and the "Shared Judgment Axis" quadra corresponds with his auxiliary function.) 4) Consult this table: Quadra Temperament Relationship Ex -same -same Identity INFJ -same -attitude Activity ISTP -same -outlook Duality ESTP -same -conflicting Mirror ENFJ -shared dom axis -same Kindred INTJ -shared dom axis -attitude Benefactor ISFP -shared dom axis -outlook Semi-Duality ESFP -shared dom axis -conflicting Supervisee ENTJ -shared aux axis -same Business ISFJ -shared aux axis -attitude Beneficiary INTP -shared aux axis -outlook Mirage ENTP -shared aux axis -conflicting Supervisor ESFJ -conflicting -same Super-Ego ISTJ -conflicting -attitude Quasi-Identity INFP -conflicting -outlook Contrary ENFP -conflicting -conflicting Conflict ESTJ (Note: as the table is laid out it can be seen that each of the quadras have a distinct collection of relationships. For example, no matter the type, the "Conflicting" quadra will always have the same four relationships in it: the Super-Ego, Quasi-Identity, Contrary, and Conflict. The same can be said for the other three quadras. Each temperament also has its own collection of relationships. For example no matter the type the relationships in the "Shared Outlook" temperament are always Duality, Semi-Duality, Mirage, and Contrary. A better table could be made as a four by four square with temperament relations on one axis and quadra relations on the other.)
This makes sense. My friend is an ISFJ, and I am an ISFJ. We have this exact relationship, but there is no ... exotic about it. It gets boring without external stimulation. Really. Boring. Lol.
You are an INFJ, correct? So, if the INFP is supposedly your "Quasi" and therefore someone you can never truly "get," how were you able to make an incredibly accurate type video summarizing the INFP personality? (At least I found it to be accurate to me personally.)
That's a good question, and I'm flattered you found it so accurate! I think that there is a difference between my theoretical understanding of INFPs vs. my in-the-moment ability to understand them. So just because I understand the structures, doesn't mean I now find them to be natural to me. It still seems unnatural to how I tend to go about things, and the friction caused by these different methods is the "just not getting" the other person. But, I also think that as I've learned more and more even that notion is fading away.
Michael Pierce Michael, like your video. By the way you mixed the types up for some of the examples. For mirror you put infp and enfj yet in your description you pointed out just a swap of e/i. -Intp (for what's its worth you can now put this example in your ti system of intps act.)
LilRachelK INFp with a lowercase last letter means nothing, all types within socionics have that. A mirror type would be the opposite first and last letters. INFp's mirror cognitive function wise is ENFj.
Sunsoak The lowercase letter is important because some people aren't aware that Socionics has a different approach to defining judging/perceiving in introverts than MBTI does, so we need a way to tell them apart. INFp isn't the same thing functionally as INFP, etc.
I'm still unsure as to how I stand on the socionics relationships. A lot of them appear to make sense initially, but hold up poorly in reality. A lot of the supposedly "bad" relationships actually work best for me; as an MBTI INTP I'm supposed to supervise ENFPs, in reality I feel like I learn a great deal from them and these actually tend to be the people I get along with the easiest. The otherway around though, ESTPs (my supervisors) annoy me greatly, so I guess that makes sense xD. Then these supposedly near ideal relationships with ESFJ or ISFJ rarely capture my attention. ISFJs while nice, and easy to be around, conversation flows easily but really is not very interesting. Like ISTJs I find them too stuck in their ways and mundane in their ambitions. ESFJs I find very nice and comfortable to be around, but again ultimately quite boring as well... I believe these intertype relationships are most accurate if you look at interactions between types that are still developing (children and teenagers). My best friend as a kid was almost definitely an ESTJ and would for me thus be an illusionary relationship. While we had fun playing and being idiots together, working on school projects together was annoying as hell xD.
In addition, these relationship descriptions seem to also be very prone to confirmation bias. Just reading all the comments below is a great example where they looked at the MBTI type and not socionics. Similarly my ISFP girlfriend (who types herself as ESFP) looked up ours and found duality between INTp and ESFp and thought it described us perfectly. Really, the description of a dual relationship to me describes the early stages of falling in love...
Unoriginal Panda No, an ISTP (MBTI) would be an ISTj/LSI (Socionics). The MBTI function stacking for the ISTP would still be the same as in Socionics. (Ti-Se-Ni-Fe) It's just the labels that are different.
It would have helped to write both MBTI and Socionics terms during the descriptions. When you say a type, I'm unsure if it's Socionics or MBTI. If it's Socionics, because of unfamiliarity with this much less popular system means I cannot easily know what type it is in terms of something more familiar.
Michael, so how do you handle entjs as a infj? I always try to remember supervision shifts that when comfortable a entj mimicks an INFJ just like an infj mimicks a esfj. I have known 2 entjs that i got along with really well actually 3 and for some reason they try really hard to stay in my life alot more than i care about them so whats up with that?
Interestingly, I believe the relationships of "Benifit" always happen with an IJ+IP or EJ+EP relationship, while the relationships of "Supervision" happen with an IJ+EJ or IP+EP relationship (Using MBTI notation. Socionics would call the second an Ip+Ej or Ij+Ep relationship). In fact all the IJ+EJ relationships seem difficult except perhaps the "Mirror" relationship. To an INFJ the ENTJ is the "Supervisor," The ESFJ is is the "Supervisee," and the ESTJ is the "Conflict" relationship. Similarly an IJ+EP or IP+EJ relationship (Ip+Ep or Ij+Ej in socionics) is described seems to be easier. To an INFJ a relationship with an ENFP is a "Contrary," one with an ENTP is a "Mirage," an ESFP is a "Semi-Dual," and an ESTP is a "Dual." The more I learn about Jungian Typology the more I find that the IJ, IP, EP, and EJ groups (On the socionics wiki they call these the termperments) really help in determaining type and in understanding the relationships between types. For example it took me a long time to figure out my own type, but I knew pretty quick that I was some kind of IP. It's quite possible I missed it but a video on the characteristics of the IJs, IPs, EPs, and EJs would be fascinating.
Hey Dude, love your work. I'm an INFJ as well. Sorry to be the one to tell you but in this video you have written INFP and then you state the other type as it's intertype but you "say" INFJ, in the audio so the intertype is incorrect in the audio not the written intertype on the screen. Hope that makes sense. Apart from that - excellent stuff. Thank you...
This is fun: note that J and P are switched for Introverts:
ESFj on ISTp: "can't behave properly and never wants to do anything"
ENTp on ISTj: "logical but no imagination, no lateral thinking, would be lost without an instruction manual"
INTj on ENFp: "lots of crazy, inconsistent ideas, always on the move but in all directions"
ISFp on ENFj: "too restless and is all to no good purpose, at the same time is hopeless with real work"
ENFj on INTp: "has no idea what impression s/he's making on others, hopeless"
ESTp on INTj: "intelligent perhaps but no backbone and unfit for the real world"
ISTj on ESFp: "makes absolutely no sense, totally chaotic, a loose cannon"
INFp on ESFj: "says and does a lot without ever getting anywhere"
ENTj on INFp: "lots of lofty goals but clueless as to how to get there, lives in dream world"
ESFp on INFj: "too nice, no backbone, unfit for the real world"
ISFj on ESTp: "how can anyone trust them?"
INTp on ESTj: "rushes into doing things without knowing where to go"
ESTj on ISFp: "lazy and can't do anything right"
ENFp on ISFj: "set on their ways, without imagination, or always expecting the worst"
INFj on ENTp: "how can anyone trust them?"
ISTp on ENTj: "too restless and is all to no good purpose, at the same time is hopeless with real work"
I love it!
+Type Tips These are examples of the Supervisor relationship (just thought I'd clarify).
are you sure the J and P were switched?
for introverts in order to convert a type from mbti to socionics you switch p and j for extraverts it stays the same i.e INTP in mbti is INTj in socionics and ESTP in mbti is ESTP in socionics
you said bullshit function can not switched because they don't have the same definitions. for example Se in socionics mean achieve a goal, organize it's environment authority seeking , but in MBTI Se mean a desire of sensory stimulation. if you are trying to analysis Socionics with a MBTI framework/definition of function you have not understand anything to socionics
Identity : 1:54
Quasi-Identity : 3:22
Mirror : 4:33
Contrary : 5:33
Kindred : 6:56
Benefit : 8:18
Supervision : 10:00
Mirage (Illusionary) : 11:26
Business : 11:27
Semi-Duality : 13:16
SuperEgo : 14:30
Activity : 15:19
Conflict : 16:15
Duality : 17:20
With the John Beebe 8-Functional Model, you can change the nature of these relationships. To me, it is as if the universe acts predetermined (follow static Socionics interrelation patterns) until you put in your free will by applying your consciousness. It is as if the higher power wants us to come alive in consciousness. For instance, the 6th function (of MBTI, not Socionics) of INFP is Ni, and of INFJ is Fi. This function is treated as the witch/warlock, which is viewed with suspicion. However, when you open up to the 6th function, it becomes the wise man/wise woman. Thus, you actually even seek it. So yes, I do have good relationships with INFJs, but then I start to think, "Wait, they like all the same things, but they are going about them all wrong!" However, I had both unconsciously and consciously developed a taste for Ni by reading Carl Jung and Nietzsche, both Ni-users. So I actually seek INFJ advice, whereas not all INFPs do. As a result, our relationships are more meaningful and helpful. Some INFJs are more open to Fi than others, others view it as an abomination. Also the Beebe/MBTI 5th and 6th functions are actually strong functions according to Socionics (I'm not using Socionics order). If we opened up to them they are relatively easier to develop. Thus as an INFP, I can understand Fe and Ni, if I take the time to open up to them and see where they are coming from. The most difficult function is the POLR (MBTI 7th function). For INFP, that is Se, for INFJ, that is Te. I find it challenging to naturally develop this function, I see that I actually have to know about Socionics in order to force myself to realize it has value. If I didn't, I might go my whole life denouncing Se use. However, knowing that Se has value in itself already is personal growth. What I find too is that the more I understand MBTI/Socionics, the more I find Fi annoying when over-expressed, because I can see from other types' standpoint what are Fi's turn-offs, though Fi is my first function.
Beware of MBTI to Socionics conversions. MBTI and Socionics define functions differently, someone may have a best-fit type in MBTI that is different from their best-fit type in Socionics. Take Socionics tests and pin down your best-fit Sociotype mentally separate from your best-fit MBTI type before using Socionics intertype relations.
Psychological Feedback Loops - Not Types does your own MBTI type differ from your socionics type?
I know you’re an INTJ in MBTI, so are you not an ILI in socionics? Or do you relate to both Ni + Te in each system?
I love your voice!!! It's so calming and soothing . Your voice feels like a heavy strong steadfast anchor :-)
Thank you for all the information it's been very useful!!!
I have just found your channel few days ago and I must say that it is truly invaluable and astonishingly great. I really appreciate your explanation of the in-deterministic and nonrestrictive nature of the socionics in the beginning of the video
The part about kindred relationships really makes sense to me. I'm an INTP and I find INFPs by far the easiest to talk to for hours.
+Mitja Kocjancic As an INTP, INFP would be your business relation. ISTP is your kindred. Kindred = same base function, opposing creative function. Business = same creative function, opposing base function.
+Mitja Kocjancic I agree! My best friend is actually a INTP, and i am a INFP. Because we both have the same perceiving functions in the same order, its like we never run out of things to talk about!
I agree -INFP
Dev Hat, if you're using socionic's labels, then INTp & INFp is exactly the kindred relationships. You're apparently just mixing in the MBTI labels with switched last letters.
This video’s stunningly-brilliant. We’d be lost without you, Pierce.
First off, i am always amazed by how insightful your videos are. This one has got to be my favorites so far. It has really clarified my ponderings. Would you mind going into how romantic styles are integrated into intertype relations? I feel like taking that into account adds a flavor to each relation.
Anh Ngo I am already working on it -- I was hoping my looking into in the intertype relations might help with my type interaction videos :) I'm glad you enjoyed it!
Michael Pierce hey what you say at certain points and what reads on the screen is different, so what should I go by? Consider annotations to correct please? Thanks for the insightful video!
xxXMathisX6x6x6 for introverts, socionics switches the j and p. For example, MBTI INTP = Socionics INTj
Anh Ngo
great, another layer of complexity! Are you MBTI INTP btw? Because I am. :p
xxXMathisX6x6x6 no i'm ENTJ/ENTj/LIE. yeah, it's completely unnecessary. socionics already has their three letter naming convention, why did they have intrude on MBTI's and add useless confusion? (i'm a socionics enthusiast over MBTI, though)
I've experienced duality relationship and I've got to say it is true. A wonderful experience to meet your opposite. It is as if we knew each other the moment we glanced into our souls through our eyes
I love the cautioning at the beginning. I saw this a while ago and came to like socionics duality theory in terms of relationships , but it was holding me back a little. Guess I saw/see it as poetic but I'd start to doubt relationships i started could be promising and saw the downsides and got overly technical in my mind about it. The map isn't the territory however valid, revealing and useful it may be
Another great video, I find you the best in your be when it comes to Myers Briggs, and Socionics seems to be heading the same way. I would suggest, however, stating in the beginning of the video that you will be using the MBTI denominations for types. I was a little confused in the beginning until I realised that.
*best in UA-cam
Will you be going into the more mechanical side of the relationships? As in the supervisor has the supervisee's vulnerable function as its first function and therefore exerts psychological pressure on him?
Excellent video! I have been researching the inter-type relationships lately and I have found that you are quite right about almost all of the relationships being perceived as negative. Do you happen to have a source or website that has better descriptions of the inter-type relationships in a more neutral light.
dak00lestnerd The ones that I would recommend, for what its worth, are wikisocion.org, sociotype.com, and the16types.info in their socionics sections.
Yeah, I don't buy the whole dual being best idea. Not awful, but there isn't that 'click' that's supposedly supposed to happen.
Quasi-identical works quite well in my experience. Totally jive.
Kindred is great too.
Beneficiary in my experience is not as 'asymmetrical' as presented, unless there's a maturity gap.
I feel like making mathematical predictions with the types is going to be really difficult. People are too complicated, and what they want and need is going to be based on experiences, interests, goals, culture, and a million other factors with limited relation to their functions.
@kyo's kitten it's not a matter of liking, it's a matter of function. I don't think people seek their inferior function in others typically. Usually, I think they're seeking it in themselves. And when someone leading with that function is around, it is more likely to be discouraging or at the very least enabling lack of growth where one would find happiness and health in growing. I like ENFJs as an INTP, but I don't find them complimentary at all
The part about third party and contrary makes total sense. My mom is contrary and I could feel the tension rise as we were pulling up to the driveway as a kid, even though no one was home, could just sense that in an environment with others a wrench would be thrown in the works. With my dad was not like this, if anything it was worse when we were alone.
INFJ & INFj here. And married to ESTP / ESTp. I must confess that my "soon-to-be-Ex of 22yrs", is an actual Mid-Range Narcissist, but I cannot EVER believe that an ESTP or ESTp would be a close match to me for ANYTHING. I would never consider this match again. But, I do agree that the definition(s) or description(s) of MY type(s) are much more "in-depth" with Socionics, and are EXTREMELY accurate !!!!
These videos are always so interesting.
thanks man, nice to see and hear this also in english.
the gap beween unstructured but popular in USA MBTI, and very structured but popular only in postsoviet contries Socionics are merging for good, next you should look at the "Psihosofija", I have not found any site that have this system in english, german or spanish, but it is used as a supplement for socionics in Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine, and it puts 24 different possible communication styles on top of every sociotype, so it can be harder or less hard to communicate in those relationships, you just described in your video
My experience has been that the Conflict relation seems impressive and compelling, Superego seems impressive and invoking a bit of fear, Supervision makes me hopeful that they will like me. The painful relations are all kind of a blur. If I experience a duality relation I wonder if I'll feel the person is too good.
This is a good video but I'm confused to why the descriptions at the bottom of the video are different to what you are saying. For example you described semi-duality as INFJ and ESFP, but the description box said INFP and ESFP. Why is that?
Plus, if i'm not mistaken I think you may have missed the relationship between INFJ/ISFP or INFP/ISFJ, I'm interested in how those types would generally react to each-other.
INFJ=INFp in socionics, while ESFP=ESFp in socionics. Hes converting from MBTI to Socionics
Basically socionics switches the p and the j for introverted types. It actually makes a lot of sense since it refers to the leading function INFp (INFJ MBTI) for example leads with Ni, a perceiving function
And it's funny how accurately the super-ego relationship describes Freud (ISTJ) and Jung (INFJ)
+John Barnes some people say jung was an INTP
+ToStand He himself typed himself as INTP or ISTP. His obsession with archetypes was a clear sign of Ni. I think he engaged it more like a tertiary function than a dominant one, like a child with a toy of never-ending appeal. It wasn't something part of his own ego, it was something that he loved.
It's hard to group him with ISTP fix-its but INTP doesn't have Ni.
It seems clear that Ti was in his ego.
In the aspect of socionics called "dimensionality" it's explained that an INTP (INTj) has a grasp of Ni that's as strong as his/her grasp of Ti, it's just not valued as much. So maybe Jung's Red Book was indeed a massive personal leap into his own subconscious using his roundabout grasp of the mechanism of archtypes.
Hmm I think ISTP. In old age he lived in a house without electricity, where he made the fire himself etc. etc.. and my ISTP ex-boss was a historian, Jung was well versed in history (+ mythology).
Paul Christian Kreitz
I think the guy knew functions and himself enough to know how to type himself, so yeah he's either ISTP or INTP I agree.
ToStand Hahaha what are you talking about?
John Barnes
haha so now you answer, so here's the key :p
Omg. Your voice is asmr gold.
What is the kindred relationship for INTj /intp
Socionics forgets that people are more than their type and tries to be too uniform in deciphering type relations.
It sounds too simplistic, but the "problem" is, it works. The descriptions of relationships are accurate. For me, even a prolonged presence of my dual in my environment helped me naturally relax, before I knew anything about socionics.
I think the bigger problem is MBTI. It's simplistic too, but more popular and inaccurate about who your "golden pair" is.
a table of contents could be useful thanks
I loved your descriptions but some of the captions were different from the types I understood were in those roles, such as the supervisor and semi-dual. I had an understanding of supervisor being between an INFJ and ENTJ, and the semi-dual being between INFJ and ISTJ (MBTI versions). Either way, the descriptions were fantastic! Thank you
Great video! Can you post more videos about Socionics? I prefer this over MBRI because its more logical and spreads the truth. I also can relate more to Socionics compared MBTI in their descriptions.
Gotta love the music you generally choose.
Ive totally had that competitive streak with isfjs at work, i suppose because each is strong at each others tersiary and role functions and blind spot maybe, very weird tho the rest i cant say ive experienced exept for sure the benifactor infp. To my intj. Were the only people i talked to for years. Very unhealthy. Glad to be more aware of other people.
I have a conflict relationship with my mom and we're pretty good. (Not trying to contradict anything)
i have a conflict relationship with my mom, and i can attest to the contrary, it is hell
Finally! Thank you man ive been looking for a video like this for some time. (INFP aka eii)
As I watch this video, I hear "INTj" where the screen shows INTp. Or I hear ESTj but see ESTp. Why is this, and why has it not been corrected? This video is from 2015 and it's 2022 now, plenty of time to rectify.........Very confusing. Thank you.
Hej Michael. Great video! I don't understand which type has a Benefit-relation with the INFJ?
klaramolitva INTP. Benefits have the third and fourth letter swapped, according to the examples in the video.
My very close relationships with my ENFP best friend, INFP sister and ENFJ fiancée don't really match these at all, and don't appear to work in these ways. On the whole it seems very inaccurate for many of my relationshps; I dismiss Socionics. -ENFP
+Namaka Lis Hey, all power to you!
maybe you're not an ENFP... or you mistyped your people.
Muphlon The ENFP description is very spot on and I've been testing ENFP for years. My best friend's results have also been consistent for years, my sister and fiancee have only been tested twice. However, at the end of the day I realize, it means little. Human symbols can't hold the whole, unbastardized truth of reality so any description like this must be taken with several grams of salt. Useful, but only marginally so.
Please don't take the tests anymore. They are misleading, and at best a key into your physiology, but almost never spot on.
It's best to learn about the functions and everyday habits that are specific to your type.
What about the two missing interactions? I am an INTJ so i would say INTJ - ISTP is a respect/disrespect relationship and INTJ - ENFP a love/hate relationship. Please give opinions on that, concerning if other types think this is valid as well.
+Sem Nome Those aren't missing. They are Benefit and Mirage, respectively.
+Liam M I think those correspond to INTJ- INFP for benefit and INTJ-ENFJ for Mirage if i'm not mistaken. You may be misunderstanding because those nomenclatures are in reference to socionics.
Nevertheless there are too inter-type connections missing which I'm wondering why and their meanings.
***** You're mistaken. Every type has TWO Benefit relationships. One to their benefit and one to their detriment. The same is true of Supervisor relationships.
INTJ-ENFJ is a Supervisor relationship.
+Liam M Well I'm a bit confused because in the Mirage relationship shows INFp - ENTp to which it should correspond to INTJ-ENFJ and on the Supervisor relationship it shows INFp-ESFj to which it should correspond to INTJ-ESTJ. Can you help me then to understand which is which for INTJ? who is my supervisor and supervisee? And who is my benefactor and beneficiary? or point me to written theory if possible? Sorry for the trouble.
+Sem Nome INFp-ENTp is INFJ-ENTP, which corresponds to INTJ-ENFP.
INTJs supervise ESTJs. ENFJs supervise INTJs.
I learned about the Benefactor relationship on the Socionics Wikipedia page where it's called the Requester relationship. It's also the relationship I understand the least, so bear with me.
I believe INTJs benefit INFPs and ISTPs benefit INTJs. However, "benefit" might not be the best word to use here. To my understanding, INFPs "request" INTJs help (not necessarily verbally), but don't value them and essentially use them as means to an end. The reverse is true for ISTPs.
Can somebody explain to me the difference between, say, INTJ and INTj? I didn't know what Socionics was when I watched this, so I looked it up and took a test on it. According to the Myer-Briggs test, I'm definitely an INTJ. However, the Socionics test indicated I'm INTp. I don't understand the lowercase j/p at the end of it, so maybe there isn't any conflict between being INTJ and INTp, but it seems contradictory at first glance, and I'm unable to find how they differ.
+Global Rain For all intents and purposes, the INTJ in Myers Briggs and the INTp in Socionics are referring to the same type; a.k.a. the same series of functions.
+Global Rain in MBTI, the J/P refers the the first extroverted function, so it can be the dominant or the auxiliary
in socionics, the j/p refers to the dominant function
so an INTJ is an INTp because his dominant is Ni which is a perception function (p)
it only changes for introverts, it's the same for extroverts
ENTJ = ENTj
C.S. Joseph: I sense a disturbance in the Force
I’m married in a “business” relationship (esfp x ENFP) , and I cannot stress enough how accurate this description is. I’m all about the Se/Te and she’s all about the Ne/Te. It is hilarious trying to figure out what the hell the other person is thinking, yet we totally make it work because we respect each other’s views. Very business like! Yet… the business of fun because we are both EPs 🤪
Is this really how supervisory relations play out? That negatively?
INTP: The only real disagreement I have with this (theory) is that the chart presumes everything is equal. There may be types that are never supervisee for example, or some that perhaps don't have a "conflict" type.
In other words, balance should not be necessarily given for the sake of balance.
Chris Schiebelbein Yup, the problem with theory first - you get stuck in symmetry that may be quite forced in places.
But what makes you presume that things are not equal?
+Chris Schiebelbein we need data
It makes sense to me, in a steriotypical way how each steriotypical function pairing fits with each other and therefore steriotypically what happens as a result. Of course a underdeveloped \ young or whatever intj may very well find them selves beholdened to the advise and tutilidge of an estj and ive seen istjs who get on ok with an enfj friend of theres. Due to not being to egotistical and also self awareness. Where as the previous relatonship is merely the estj is a master of there feild and the intj while having an overall edge in there way, is still inferior knowledge wise and capability wise.
I've had many moments in the past, where I've questioned whether this cognitive science isn't all just nonsense, on that very premise.
If you think about it though, it is all just nature. Strictly speaking, people can't be boxed into types, but if we presume the psychological functions are real, urging us in one direction over another, such symmetry, inversion, repulsion etc. is bound to occur when different people meet one another. Then it becomes a question of relatedness. And that question is always answered with a circle. That is how it is balanced.
DCNH Harmonizers seem to have some kind of "superpower" where they are able to exist at least somewhat peacefully even with their conflictors. But yeah, socionics is correct, that requires 'erasure of the self' to certain degree, and not everyone is capable of that. I think E9s might be better at it than others...
Do you think Jon Snow and Ygritte is one example of dual relationship?
I have a conflict relationship with my brother
another person Me too. It really blows, especially if you're still living together.
the caption doesnt always match up with your words. when you say something is [xxxj] and it shows [xxxp].
NEVERMIND I TOTALLY FORGOT THE INTROVERT THING
Cole Phelps and Roy Earle from la noire is a good example of a super ego relation (Cole Phelps being the LSE and Roy being the EIE)
Amazing photos!
What type would be the complete opposite like INTJ + ESFP?
duality
Christopher Lee thanks!
+mechanesthesia
TiNeSiFe = INTP (INTj)
FiSeNiTe = ISFP (ISFj)
this is pretty opposite to me. not sure which this is called.
+cor Super-ego
Why are there only 14 relationship types? After looking through the types related to INFp in this video, the ENTj and ISFj are the only ones left out. Do these pairings not have their own unique relationship types? Are they simply that unlikely to interact that it doesn't even actually register to either party in any way?
Edit: After thinking about it a moment, I find it interesting that the types left out were the ISFj(ISFP) and ENTj(ENTJ) because these two types are complete opposites of each other (ENTJ=TeNiSeFi, ISFP=FiSeNiTe) and when compared to the INFp (INFJ =NiFeTiSe), all these types have the same preferred perceiving axis, but this is different from the ESFp(ESFP=SeFiTeNi) and INTp(INTJ=NiTeFiSe) in that the ENTJ and ISFP subordinate that preferred axis to a judging axis while the ESFP and INTJ do not. At the same time, this is different from the ISTj(ISTP=TiSeNiFe) and ENFj(ENFJ=FeNiSeTi) because these types have the same preferred judging axis.
Now I feel like I'm just rambling here, but I wonder if the absence of the relationship of INFJ to ENTJ and ISFP is because of the difference in the judging axis being paired with the same preferred perceiving axis. Or maybe I'm not onto anything and just rambling while looking at this rather unorganized comment.
Edit 2: is it because the Supervisor and Beneficiary relationships are actually 2 relationships (Benefactor and Beneficiary, Supervisor and Supervisee)?
Your "Edit 2" was correct.
Mirror isn’t correct. It’s graphic is correct but you described INFP-ENFP instead of INFP-ENFJ. These personalities are very similar but my experience has shown a mass amount of friction. The most of any two types. One stops when the other goes and Vice versa. It’s intense rivalry.
My mom and I are the mirror relation. It makes so much sense now
I think INFP and ESTJ is probably the worse dynamic out there.
In my experience, no. This is a shadow relationship, whereby the preferences are all swapped, but the functions are all the same (Ego and Super Id are merely swapped.)
What this means is, they can't have quite such a fulfilling relationship marked by endless conversations like INFP/INTP, but they can attend to one another's needs, given the right conditions.
@@hugoclarke3284 estj hates infp's traits that infp values the most in himself. My experience with estj is horrible. Even though infps are indecisive (victimous attitude) and they tend to listen to advices which seem professional to them (they trust others' experiences) as for estj they hate to provide broad explanation to make infp feel safe with such an adivce, they just command and don't give a fuck. Types with lead Te often require from others the same level of understanding of the subject (since they think their understanding is self-evident) and infps often try to look at the subject from different sides. I don't see how infp and estj can live/work together. Their attitudes and workstyles are incredibly different and imcompatible.
@@endofjourney665 Sounds like you're basing your understanding of ESTJ on some unhealthy relationship(s). I agree that friction is pretty much inevitable when INFP and ESTJ have to interact on a regular basis.
Although that might at first seem related to having the opposite dominant function of one another, I believe that this is actual a source of mutual respect, in that types tend to overcompensate with their conscious value of the inferior function. The INFP admires decisiveness and assertiveness, provided that it is "for a noble cause", while the ESTJ admires a sense of deep meaningfulness, provided that it is not some "fairy tale bullshit".
The real source of friction, in my opinion, is the communication styles born from the auxiliary function. ESTJ communicate with recollection of past experiences and hearing the experiences of others, which soon gets tiring for the INFP. The INFP communicates with ideas and "what ifs", which are a waste of time for the ESTJ.
As a result of being direct opposites, they are able to counterbalance one another in some ways, and most importantly, are capable of learning to avoid stepping on one another's toes. This would be harder if they did not share the exact same functions. For example, INFP and INFJ can get on with each other very well being both intuitive feeling types, yet they tend to arrive at similar conclusions from drastically different thought processes, and when friction does occur, it seems to be very unexpected and disconcerting.
@@hugoclarke3284 I know russian and even though I prefer Jungian Typology, I've read a lot from socionics perspective (since it's predominant typology in the russian internet). INFP and INFJ have quasi-identity relationship which can be described as 'coexisting with complete misunderstanding of each other'. I had a very close infj friend and, yes, we tend to care about the same things but in different ways.
The easiest person to talk to as for me is INTP. We do everything verbally even though we care about different things. Both are victimous (although, again, in different ways).
I can't do anything with ESxJs. They never get my jokes, and their jokes to me are very primitive. They often automatically explain the jokes... Also both try to control everything. My mother was ESFJ and she was trying to conform me very hard. For a long time I rejected myself until I grew up and started being defensive and independent.
By the way, you seem to understand the topic well. May we talk on private somehow? Chatting via whatsapp or whatever? Plus I guess you play Paladins as well :)
@@endofjourney665 I'm interested in socionics too! I definitely think it hits on some truth and there are some great insights to be drawn from it. And your perspective as an INFP correlates with my own. Are you Russian or did you learn the language? It seems terribly difficult.
Sure, I have whatsapp but idk how to message you it privately on youtube?
Thanks a lot! This is really a great video. However, I can't believe what the socionic theory says about the MBTI INFJ & MBTI ESFJ relationship. According to Socionic, it is the worst relationship. I am an INFJ and My best friends are ESFJ's. In fact my buddy (whom I have known for 20 years) is an ESFJ. I will have to dig deeper to understand why socionic reach this conclusion. Because this just doesn't apply to me :)
which one is the best ?
*****
yes, according to socionics
+ToStand Then you're asking for our opinions? Mine is, these explanations were on-point and I need to find me an ESTj dual lol.
Paul Christian Kreitz
haha yes, that's possible
but I think it's more complicated then that
so you're an INFP male ? I don't know if you'll get along with an ESTJ woman, because of gender roles.
and I think socionics has a indeed a point with duality, but I think keirsey is more right with his N-N, S-S pairing (INFP - ENTJ for example)
so if I take the example of the ENTJ male, it would be an INFP female
and with an ENTJ female it would be an INTJ male maybe
and an INFP male it would be with an ENFP female maybe or another INFP female
the idea is to keep the perception letter and the judgement axis
so N with N, S with S, TJ with TJ or FP, FJ with FJ or TP
and this with taking into account gender
I tried INFP + INTJ, it's pretty cool but a little lacking connection wise I think. Er, the Fi/Te connection is good but there's a gap between the other functions. N/N is cool but what if Ne/Ni is not as good as Ne/Si where the other person also has the Si/Ne somewhere in their stack? ESTJ is a little scary for me but I think an ESTJ Si-subtype (Socionics) would suit me a lot better than a Te-subtype. I'm Ne-subtype.
For me the gender issue only comes up when the two are the SAME gender. Male dominance stuff. Buut I don't actually have experience with a female to compare to.
Paul Christian Kreitz
I don't know. Maybe you're right. As for different perception functions, well yeah, I don't know maybe they'd lead to the same thinking ? Even though it's not the same process ? I really can't say.
Yes if you take into account subtypes, maybe you can make it work.
Interesting stuff.
If the INFJ's beneficiary can be found by switching the last two letters -- INTP -- how is the INTP's beneficiary then found? Same question for the supervision relationship.
Thought about it. I guess the INFJ's benefactor would be ISFP and supervisor would be ENTJ.
P.S. That is, the benefactor of type x has as its 1st function x's inverted 2nd and its 2nd function as x's 4th. The supervisor of type x has as its 1st function x's inverted 3rd and its 2nd function as x's 1st.
P.P.S. So the INTP's beneficiary would be ISTJ and the ESFJ's supervisee would be... ISTJ again. Assuming my reasoning is correct, I wonder if that is noteworthy.
P.P.P.S. Patterns... Patterns everywhere... O_o
TheGerogero I'm actually not sure how the conversion works, but these are the rings of benefit and supervision relations:
Benefit:
ENTP --> ENFJ --> ESFP --> ESTJ --> (ENTP)
ISFJ --> ISTP --> INTJ --> INFP --> (ISFJ)
INTP --> ISTJ --> ISFP --> INFJ --> (INTP)
ESFJ --> ENFP --> ENTJ --> ESTP --> (ESFJ)
Supervision:
ENTP --> ISTP --> ESFP --> INFP --> (ENTP)
ISFJ --> ENFJ --> INTJ --> ESTJ --> (ISFJ)
ESFJ --> ISTJ --> ENTJ --> INFJ --> (ESFJ)
INTP --> ENFP --> ISFP --> ESTP --> (INTP)
Supervision you take the creative/2nd function (ne) as the supervisee's lead and switch to the other axis pair (ti/fe fi/te).
Or you just take your mirror and your supervisor is their dominant pair switched; your supervisee is the mirror's non-dominant pair switched.
Benefactor you take the mobilizing (mbti's 3rd) as the beneficiary's lead and switch to the other axis pair also (ti/fe te/fi).
Or you take your activation and your benefactor is their dominant pair switched; your beneficiary is the activation's non-dominant pair switched.
I'm just screwing around here but I think I've found an easy way to calculate the Socionics' relationships by comparing the Socionics' Temperaments (IxxJ, IxxP, ExxP, or ExxJ) and the Quadras of the two parties. It's easier than it sounds but some (okay lots of) explanation is needed first.
(P.S. I am going to use MBTI notation for this post to make it simpler for myself. For example an IxxJ, or an IJ, refers to a group of introverts whose dominant function is a form of introverted perception)
The first thing needed is the relationship between the two types' Socionic temperaments. Temperament (again, in MBTI notation) is simply whether you are an IxxJ, IxxP, ExxP, or ExxJ. Some temperaments understand each other better than others. For the purposes of this post I will label the relationships between the temperaments, but please understand I'm making these up as I go and no one uses these terms but me.
-The relationship between individuals of the same temperament have a "Same" temperament relationship. (GASP!)
(An INFJ and an ISTJ, ISFJ, INFJ, or INTJ)
-The relationship between temperaments that only share their Introversion or extraversion have a temperament relationship that is a "Shared Attitude."
(An INFJ and an ISTP, ISFP, INFP, or INTP)
-The relationship between two temperaments who are not both introverted or extraverted but are both dominantly rational (T or F) or Irrational (S or N) have a temperament that is of a "Shared Outlook."
(An INFJ and an ESTP, ESFP, ENFP, or ENTP)
-Finally the relationship between two different temperaments that don't have either a "Shared Attitude" or "Outlook" have a "Conflicting" temperament relationship.
(An INFJ and an ESTJ, ESFJ, ENFJ, or ENTJ)
(I was tempted to name these after Demosthenes' hierarchy of foreignness -- Utlanning, Framling, Raman, and Varelse respectively -- but the fact that only war is advised for dealing with Varelse seemed a little extreme. Still...)
The second thing that matters is knowing the relationship between the quadras of the two types. Again, this is easier than it sounds. A quadra is a socionics term for a group of people who prefer the same functional axis'. What Michael Peirce calls the Philosophers, Saints, Royalty, and Free Spirits Socionics calls the Alphas, Betas, Gammas, and Deltas. So in review:
-Alphas (or Philosophers) prefer Ti/Fe and Si/Ne
-Betas (or Saints) prefer Ti/Fe and Ni/Se
-Gammas (or Royalty) prefer Fi/Te and Ni/Se
-Deltas (or Free Spirits) prefer Fi/Te and Si/Ne
Like the temperaments the quadras have relationships too, and again I am going to label them with my own not-used-by-anyone-else terminology:
-People of the same quadra have a "Same" quadra relationship.
(So two Beta, or an INFJ and an INFJ, ISTP, ESTP, or ENFJ)
-People from different quadras who prefer the same Perception axis have a "Same Perception Axis" quadra relationship.
(Betas (Saints) and Gammas (Royalty) because both prefer the Ni/Se perception axis. As an example an INFJ and an INTJ, ISFP, ESFP, or ENTJ)
-People from different quadras who prefer the same Judgment axis have a "Same Judgment Axis" quadra relationship.
(Betas (Saints) and Alphas (Philosophers) have this because both prefer the Ti/Fe judgment axis. As an example an INFJ with an ISFJ, INTP, ENTP, or ESFJ)
-Finally, people from different quadras who do not prefer any similar functional axis' would have a "Conflicting" quadra relationship.
(Betas (Saints) and Deltas (Free Spirits) because they share no common functional axis'. An example would be an INFJ with an ISTJ, INFP, ENFP, or ESTJ)
(Note: Michael Peirce's "Heavy Mole" video jives well here in understanding the quadra relationships.)
There's one final difficulty in figuring the socionics relationship, and I only discovered it at the 11th hour of writing this post. Knowing the quadra relationship is key, and certainly illuminates some of the differences between the quadra groups, but at the level of individual relationships an individual's preference to use one function over another complicates which of the shared quadras is used how. In other words a type's Dominant and Auxiliary functions affect how a type relates to a member of another quadra.
I feel like my explanation isn't explaining so let me throw an example at you. An INFJ is a Beta (or Saint) with Ni dom and Fe aux. The quadra that shares a preference for the Ni/Se axis of his dominant function (the Gammas or Royalty) will have a different relationship to the INFJ than the quadra that shares a preference for the Ti/Fe axis of his auxiliary (Alphas or Philosophers). This complication only affects the relationships the individual has with the quadras that have one axis in common.
So one more example to nail this down, an INFP is a Delta (or Free Spirit) with Fi dom and Ne Aux. The quadra that shares his dominant Fi/Te axis (the Gammas or Royalty) will have a different relationship to him than the quadra that shares his Auxiliary Si/Ne axis (the Alphas or Philosophers).
Now finally to the calculation.
1) Figure out the temperament relationship between the subject and type in question. (Same, Shared Attitude, Shared Outlook, or Conflicting)
2) Figure out the quadra relationship between the subject and the type in question. (Same quadra, Shared Judgment Axis, Shared Perception Axis, or Conflicting)
3) Figure out which of the two "Shared Axis" quadras correspond with the subjects dominant and Auxiliary functions. (For example because an INFJ is Ni Dominant the "Shared Perception Axis" quadra corresponds with his dominant function and the "Shared Judgment Axis" quadra corresponds with his auxiliary function.)
4) Consult this table:
Quadra Temperament Relationship Ex
-same -same Identity INFJ
-same -attitude Activity ISTP
-same -outlook Duality ESTP
-same -conflicting Mirror ENFJ
-shared dom axis -same Kindred INTJ
-shared dom axis -attitude Benefactor ISFP
-shared dom axis -outlook Semi-Duality ESFP
-shared dom axis -conflicting Supervisee ENTJ
-shared aux axis -same Business ISFJ
-shared aux axis -attitude Beneficiary INTP
-shared aux axis -outlook Mirage ENTP
-shared aux axis -conflicting Supervisor ESFJ
-conflicting -same Super-Ego ISTJ
-conflicting -attitude Quasi-Identity INFP
-conflicting -outlook Contrary ENFP
-conflicting -conflicting Conflict ESTJ
(Note: as the table is laid out it can be seen that each of the quadras have a distinct collection of relationships. For example, no matter the type, the "Conflicting" quadra will always have the same four relationships in it: the Super-Ego, Quasi-Identity, Contrary, and Conflict. The same can be said for the other three quadras. Each temperament also has its own collection of relationships. For example no matter the type the relationships in the "Shared Outlook" temperament are always Duality, Semi-Duality, Mirage, and Contrary. A better table could be made as a four by four square with temperament relations on one axis and quadra relations on the other.)
This makes sense. My friend is an ISFJ, and I am an ISFJ. We have this exact relationship, but there is no ... exotic about it. It gets boring without external stimulation. Really. Boring.
Lol.
The last one gave me hope 🎈
You are an INFJ, correct?
So, if the INFP is supposedly your "Quasi" and therefore someone you can never truly "get," how were you able to make an incredibly accurate type video summarizing the INFP personality? (At least I found it to be accurate to me personally.)
That's a good question, and I'm flattered you found it so accurate! I think that there is a difference between my theoretical understanding of INFPs vs. my in-the-moment ability to understand them. So just because I understand the structures, doesn't mean I now find them to be natural to me. It still seems unnatural to how I tend to go about things, and the friction caused by these different methods is the "just not getting" the other person. But, I also think that as I've learned more and more even that notion is fading away.
Michael Pierce Michael, like your video. By the way you mixed the types up for some of the examples. For mirror you put infp and enfj yet in your description you pointed out just a swap of e/i. -Intp (for what's its worth you can now put this example in your ti system of intps act.)
Sunsoak INFp (lowercase p)= INFJ.
INFJ and ENFJ are mirrors.
LilRachelK INFp with a lowercase last letter means nothing, all types within socionics have that. A mirror type would be the opposite first and last letters. INFp's mirror cognitive function wise is ENFj.
Sunsoak The lowercase letter is important because some people aren't aware that Socionics has a different approach to defining judging/perceiving in introverts than MBTI does, so we need a way to tell them apart.
INFp isn't the same thing functionally as INFP, etc.
I'm still unsure as to how I stand on the socionics relationships. A lot of them appear to make sense initially, but hold up poorly in reality. A lot of the supposedly "bad" relationships actually work best for me; as an MBTI INTP I'm supposed to supervise ENFPs, in reality I feel like I learn a great deal from them and these actually tend to be the people I get along with the easiest. The otherway around though, ESTPs (my supervisors) annoy me greatly, so I guess that makes sense xD. Then these supposedly near ideal relationships with ESFJ or ISFJ rarely capture my attention. ISFJs while nice, and easy to be around, conversation flows easily but really is not very interesting. Like ISTJs I find them too stuck in their ways and mundane in their ambitions. ESFJs I find very nice and comfortable to be around, but again ultimately quite boring as well...
I believe these intertype relationships are most accurate if you look at interactions between types that are still developing (children and teenagers). My best friend as a kid was almost definitely an ESTJ and would for me thus be an illusionary relationship. While we had fun playing and being idiots together, working on school projects together was annoying as hell xD.
In addition, these relationship descriptions seem to also be very prone to confirmation bias. Just reading all the comments below is a great example where they looked at the MBTI type and not socionics. Similarly my ISFP girlfriend (who types herself as ESFP) looked up ours and found duality between INTp and ESFp and thought it described us perfectly. Really, the description of a dual relationship to me describes the early stages of falling in love...
So, there are 14 relationships? That irritates me to no end.
Can ISTP(mbti) be ISTp/SLI(socionics)?
Unoriginal Panda No, an ISTP (MBTI) would be an ISTj/LSI (Socionics).
The MBTI function stacking for the ISTP would still be the same as in Socionics. (Ti-Se-Ni-Fe)
It's just the labels that are different.
Yes, they can be.
These relations are only 14 for me an INTP remains only ENFP and ISTJ. What about these two types? what kind of relationship would I have with them?
It would have helped to write both MBTI and Socionics terms during the descriptions. When you say a type, I'm unsure if it's Socionics or MBTI. If it's Socionics, because of unfamiliarity with this much less popular system means I cannot easily know what type it is in terms of something more familiar.
Michael, so how do you handle entjs as a infj? I always try to remember supervision shifts that when comfortable a entj mimicks an INFJ just like an infj mimicks a esfj. I have known 2 entjs that i got along with really well actually 3 and for some reason they try really hard to stay in my life alot more than i care about them so whats up with that?
Interestingly, I believe the relationships of "Benifit" always happen with an IJ+IP or EJ+EP relationship, while the relationships of "Supervision" happen with an IJ+EJ or IP+EP relationship (Using MBTI notation. Socionics would call the second an Ip+Ej or Ij+Ep relationship).
In fact all the IJ+EJ relationships seem difficult except perhaps the "Mirror" relationship. To an INFJ the ENTJ is the "Supervisor," The ESFJ is is the "Supervisee," and the ESTJ is the "Conflict" relationship. Similarly an IJ+EP or IP+EJ relationship (Ip+Ep or Ij+Ej in socionics) is described seems to be easier. To an INFJ a relationship with an ENFP is a "Contrary," one with an ENTP is a "Mirage," an ESFP is a "Semi-Dual," and an ESTP is a "Dual."
The more I learn about Jungian Typology the more I find that the IJ, IP, EP, and EJ groups (On the socionics wiki they call these the termperments) really help in determaining type and in understanding the relationships between types. For example it took me a long time to figure out my own type, but I knew pretty quick that I was some kind of IP. It's quite possible I missed it but a video on the characteristics of the IJs, IPs, EPs, and EJs would be fascinating.
these are so accurate :)
my Kindred is the dullest relationship in the drawer
Hey Dude, love your work. I'm an INFJ as well. Sorry to be the one to tell you but in this video you have written INFP and then you state the other type as it's intertype but you "say" INFJ, in the audio so the intertype is incorrect in the audio not the written intertype on the screen. Hope that makes sense. Apart from that - excellent stuff. Thank you...
#SocionicsModelG
Your examples of for an INFJ are incorrect for kindred, business, partial dual and mirage. Love the video though.
Bruh, Socionics is not science.
Too many mistakes in your speech