I'm an EII-Fi in socionics. I don't relate to either the INFP or INFJ descriptions in MBTI. I relate a bit more to the ISTJ. But I was never into MBTI. I went directly into socionics and I've stayed there because it's way more accurate. It can also help to dig into enneagram and psyche yoga.
Ï am EII-Ne, and I am in MBTI INFP. Some MBTI-INFP are in Socionics IEI. You as an EII can only be INFP in MBTI, but many MBTI-INFP are IEI in Socionics
Nicely done, and I totally agree. I feel like people over-think this a bit. One big drawback, though, is that far fewer people know about socionics, so after you make that switch, it can feel a bit more limiting and a bit more stifling - like, suddenly there's a ton of people who you can't "talk type" with anymore. And it's a shame, because I think Socionics offers a valuable, holistic approach for seeing a person, understanding what people are capable of, and embracing a collaborative growth mindset. When done right, Socionics is a major departure from what can often feel like an "intuitives-only" clique in MBTI.
Guys, socionics is just MBTI but boosted. Edit: tbh the only big differences are Si description (mbti is wrong, lol) and all introverted types switching last letter (this is because MBTI chooses it depending on your main extroverted function, for socionics depending on your main function). All the rest are small different deductions based on the same assumptions, but don't think socionics is perfect as well: it's just more accurate. ReEdit: i suggest to use wikisocion as source and Stratyevskaya descriptions (even tho they're sooo long) to begin with
Fe/Fi are goofy in MBTI and are just totally mixed up. Fi in Socionics is lacking too tho tbf. (Edit: in addition to Si which is terribly described in the MBTI)
@@iwrona6258 Si is the most misunderstood function, it's like nobody reads Jung's descriptions anymore. Si can be as detached, weird as Ni, it's your personal inner world connected to the physical world, not being conservative, focusing on details or having good memory
I used Stratiyevskaya's descriptions as well and fail to see how it's any different. I'm Fi-Se in both socionics and mbti, it's clearly describing the same type of person and once I was sure of my mbti stack and looked into socionics, I knew I was ESI right away. Still looked into some other types just in case, that's always a good idea. I think it does depend on how you view mbti, I always viewed it as "Jungian functions in stacks" so it's no wonder I struggle to see the difference with socionics, looks like I was using socionics all along just used different terms (like dominant and inferior rather than base and suggestive) but if you typed by letters only or went by the 16P stereotypes, I can understand relating to different types... People who typed by functions and are somehow convinced that mbti and socionics functions are different really confuse me though, like where did they get their info from? Reddit memes? Like the whole Si = past and therefor all SJs are conservative... Or all Se users are gigachads and good at sports... I myself have mistyped before based on garbage stereotypes like that that have nothing to do with Jung anymore but when you're new and that's the info you get exposed to...
@@vanillexxAre you ISFP in Mbti?I'm quite surprised then.I'm ISFP in Mbti and ESI is nothing I can resonate with. I'm clearly SEI in Socionics which correlates with ISFP descriptions in Mbti.I checked with my ISFP friends .All of them are SEI s in socionics and non of them could relate with ISFj in socionics.I talked to one typing specialist who told me the J and P switch happens only in case in introverted intuitives and not for extroverted types as well as introverted sensor types if one had to get correct descriptions.I read an article based on some study which proved the same. Have you looked into SEI subtypes or done quandra tests?
Thank you for resisting the current fad in typology which is saying that MBTI and Socionics are the same as in the types are the same across the board. I don't know what started this, but I have people talking down to me because I'm saying the obvious- that the systems are different. There are some types, like ENTPs for example, that are pretty close if not virtually the same; but the introverted types are definitely different and many of the extroverted types don't correlate with each other across systems.
Yeah it’s a completely different system! But this reasoning only works because MBTI is such a bad test to begin with if you’re trying to find your true personality type. An MBTI INFP (introverted, intuitive, feeler, perceiver), could easily be an ESTP once they test themselves using cognitive functions. 🤣 However, I will say that after using the cognitive functions to figure out your type, then there shouldn’t be too big of a difference between your MBTI type and your sociotype. For example, if you looked at the cognitive functions and typed yourself an extroverted sensing lead, it’s highly unlikely that you would also be an eii in socionics that’s polr Se. I do believe there’s a correlation there.
Agreed. If Socionics which came out later had simply used different names for the elements and did not adopt the same four letter codes, much of this "they are the same" thinking could have been avoided.
Your videos are really great, I actually found your channel while you were on your hiatus and I still subscribed hoping you'd come back and you did not long after! Lucky me! You've been putting out great content and I hope you continue to do so. Best of luck to you :) I hope your audience who are serious about typology are openminded enough to consider Socionics as it really is the more comprehensive, albeit, dense system of the two (although not as inscrutable as people seem to think it). All the off-shoots and infighting over which model or dichotomies to ignore/promote can be tiresome but it's valuable to have even a rudimentary understanding of it if type and personality are of interest to someone. In any case, a lot of people use MBTI now for ITR which has been lifted from Socionics and haphazardly applied to MBTI, creating a lot of confusion and outright misconceptions that undermine its application entirely. I think the Socionics community can appear combative and hostile even, quite a bit of dogmatic language and hubris. Some practitioners like to tie themselves into knots, ever-complicating it in an attempt to perfect it to the point of incomprehensibility. Whilst the MBTI community can be quite fluffy, superfluous, and self-indulgent. I hope your straight forward plain speak explanations can help diversify the dialogue in both typology communities. Cheers!
Oh my God! the MBTI INFJ to Socionics ESE was my experience going into socionics🤣 I felt so ashamed of it at first, like, how can an Ni PoLR type think they're an Ni hero lol But everything made sense at the end...
And, people blame measurements for their/our own disingenuous/inaccurate answers. To be fair, I think there are zero realistic measurement diagnostics; questions should be more scenario oriented, & account for: "both, neither, depends-with more drop downs as a result of this response," & "none of the above/doesn't apply/don't care-lol" responses.
I’ve been diving down the socionics rabbit hole a lot. It’s a bit confusing to get into after first learning mbti. But the intertype relations are so interesting
Thank you so much for talking more about Socionics :) I feel like after 10 years of consuming MBTI content I still have 0 clue what type I am supposed to be? Now I read through the Socionics types and I feel like LSI is a good fit for me after like 3 weeks of being into it... Maybe my opinion will change too but for now I am happy haha :) It's also thanks to your videos about the quadras. I felt like I might me INTJ due to sucky Fe but there is nooooo way I am Gamma hahahah So again thank uuuuu
This video so good and clear THANKS you Se users or Sp people are so straightforward, clear, and non confusing. But yes switching from MBTI to socionics is confusing for beginners, but all in all my take is that socionics is better than MBTI, MBTI is overly generalized, and mostly composed by stereotypes reasons why people hate MBTI these days. After they approach socionics
Great video as always ! You and Leon Tsao are two of my favorite UA-camrs that discussing MBTI and Socionics in harmony coexistence, also in the way I can comprehend ( since I have Ti demonic...😅😅😅). I like Socionics in how they recognized the subtypes. INFP/EII can be a Fi subtype that resembles ISFJ/ISFp, the wholesome type. Or can be a Ne subtype that resembles INTJ/INTp, the bada** type. Feeling grateful to find subtypes descriptions made by Meged & Ovcharov, I identify myself with Ne subtype descriptions which really describing myself deeper from any descriptions ever offered by MBTI side- even up to my body constitution. Thank you for this great video !
For me, Socionics is super confusing, because they use terms which make sense & all, but, the mirror type thing twists my brain too much. To me, mirror type, means exactly what it says: Our Cognitive Mirror; Fe/Fi, Si/Se...etc etc... Extraverts, usually wanna look/appear introverted (with exceptions, of course).. Introverts, usually wanna appear/be accepted as/for more extraverted attributes.. I.E. how we make ourselves up when we look in the mirror. Socionics Mirror types are just the introverted/extroverted of themselves.. Which, makes zero sense (literally & conceptually). However, when we look at Socionics mirror types, at face value, it makes total sense: ENTj/INTp. Until we realize that INTp = INTJ, that is. What's more, INTp is more accurate, because INTJ's first function, IS actually P... To me, ENTj/INTj, are mirror types. But, according to Socionics, no. Also, I don't like limiting variables/factors. The Romance styles, are helpful, but, limiting. There are so many more ways people show romantic interest in one another. It reminds me of The 4 Love Languages. Some peoples Love Language is: Affection; that could encompass all 4 Love languages (in no particular/consistent order), depending on mood. I never thought I'd say this, but after all these (11) years, I'm thinking/feeling like Objective Personality has it (most) Right.
Hey Aimee I've been loving your content. ISTP here, been into mbti for over 15 years, learned a bit of socionics back in the day but I never got into it. But as I've been keeping track of my relationship experiences and types I have my doubts about golden pair, silver pair and etc.. I have had a relationship with an ENFP, duality according to socionics, and I had the mind blow they specify with duality relationships. If possible make a video about your opinion on duality and mbti pairs and what your opinions is to what makes the most sense according to functions complementing eachother. Thank you
I'm happy in your case it worked out well, but using your MBTI type to find your socionics dual is a recipe for disaster. The types are not the same between the two systems and there is no one to one translation. To anyone reading, please study Socionics by itself, and find your type there, in order to apply Socionics theory to your relationships.
Hey Aimee, I really like your content! You've helped a lot through my journey of understanding better the whole typology thing. Your explanations are easy to understand (at least for me, kinda get confused when there are too many complicated terms, so I'm very greatful for the examples and straight-to-the-point approach). I have a small question, tho. Imo, Socionics' descriptions about the cognitive functions are more complete than the MBTI ones. I also love how the same function may appear different depending on the functions they are paired with (Ex: Fi+Si VS Fi+Ni). The thing is, I think I've always seen most of the functions the way socionics describes them, eventhough I didn't knew much about it before. When I listen to your descriptions and read more about them in other socio-sites, I'm like "yeah ikr". Maybe I was lucky that the mbti sources I consulted were not superficial about the cf descriptions? Or maybe I saw the two descriptions and kinda fused them in my head cause I found some common ground, I'm not sure. My question is, is it alright to believe the socionics descriptions are like the updated version of the mbti ones? I'm not sure if I'm explaining myself correctly. Anyways, thank you! Looking forward for new videos
I never got why people think the systems are the same. Socionics is interpersonal while MBTI is cognitive. Completely different theories. Also Socionics is much more specific about how each element displays itself.
As different as it is, I think there is a correlation between the type descriptions that can’t be ignored, and this existence of a correlation is what dissatisfies people coming from MBTI. Especially because firstly, MBTI promotes themselves to be an accurate tool for “discovering the self.” And secondly, there’s a lot of bias in the MBTI descriptions themselves, which gets people emotionally hooked to a single type. For example, the rarity of the INFJ. So not only are people getting emotionally attached to a type, but then they realize that in order to truly “discover themselves,” their initial reason for getting into MBTI, they may have to detach from their type, and look into socionics to get a more accurate depiction of the 16 archetypes.
Respectfully, i disagree with you, i yhink you are steriotyping. Mbti and the 16 personalitys test are NOT the same thing, everyone in mbti comunity knows that u gotta learn ur cognitive functions to know what ur type is, NOT TAKE ANY TEST, and NOT trust the description sm, u gotta trust more the cognitive functions descriptions. I can see why u think mbti is less complex than soscionics, but fr tho, why stick with one typology sistem? Yk, ofc, mbti is not gonna fully cover ur personality, thats why we have enneagram, subtype, tritype, soscionics, big five, and more. An example of this, my sis is an infj, she didnt related to the 16personalities description of infj, so she just was mistyped, but thwn, she discovered Enneagram, and she discovered she is an infj 5w4, Sp 5, and then she readed cognitive functions and indeed she was infj, mbti is not just what X type does, are mental process that we as individuals preffer and others not sm(cognitive functions) So yeah, why stick with one? Eatch typology sistem brings one ingredient to the table, we just gotta know how to combine it to make the perfect cake!(Our personality) But yeah, anyways here is my typology of myselft yet Isfp 6w5 sx/sp 649 ELVF Phregmatic dominant neutral good(i still gotta search more hehehe)❤
@@Dubi777 I literally said the systems are not the same in the opening of my video. 💀 If you’re disagreeing with the fact that I said there should be a correlation between the different systems, then we’re just going to have to agree to disagree. There are just some correlations that are questionable, like ESFJ EII 7. I said that if there are huge discrepancies like this, then I don’t think your typing is accurate. And from my experience typing people, you would be surprised how many people have huge discrepancies in their type like this, especially after learning about socionics.
@@amalksuresh2538 the fact that people using socionics is very inagurating and they think this is the solution or very accurate mbti think again in every structure of socionics there are just 2 cognitive function the other 2 is conjctive function may confuse people i support you need to read dario nardi and linda berens book before answering your next question
I am working on updating all my videos this year. 😊 I’m not super proud of my older videos anymore, as the information was quite outdated and only touched the surface of what I know now. And there isn’t any point in watching them if that’s the case. So stay tuned! And thank you for sticking around this long. 🙏🏼
I don’t think I believe in the “Team MBTI, Team Socionics, Team BB”type of jurisdiction, or following one particular system that might explain cognitive functions better than others. Because at the end of the day, they’re all attempts to explain the same phenomenon, which we all know are the 16 personalities. I think of it like math problems. If we look at the essence of the solution, there’s really only one correct conclusion (most of the time at least), but the approach to getting there will be different depending on what method is used. It could be through an existing system that can be structurally taught, a hodgepodge based on an individual person’s understanding, or even the creation of an entirely new system.
I interested in mbti or socionic just for my self, what indication if I'm in burnout state or depression state or to make boundaries line with my time and my values, and try to regulate my own energy, at least I don't want to affect others with my negative energy, but sometimes it slipped my radar when in discussion or debate. Always try to learn body language but failed. Only recognises 2 coin of vibe energy ( positive and negative). I don't know what my type either. 😂
@@beatofmyown у Гуленка есть некоторые различия с обычной соционикой, так как зачастую используется модель А, а он создал новое направление называемое Гуманитарной соционикой, и как бы развил модель G. его теории хороши, но как носитель языка на котором он говорит я скажу так что сам он очень плохо типирует :D что могут подтвердить много людей. читая его описания и теории вы сразу будете уже в его новой системе с моделью G мне нравится в соционике одна школа, которая объясняет все довольно просто. у людей есть 8 линз восприятия, и так как мы не можем их наблюдать напрямую, мы смотрим на их проявления в жизни. самое прямое проявление это речь. как мы думаем так и говорим. поведение же скорее может быть тенденцией, поэтому по нему типировать неправильно к сожалению нет английского варианта сайта или их видео. вот для примера небольшие "шпоргалки для соционика", как они их сами называют :D когда пытаетесь определить тип другого человека ИНТРОВЕРСИЯ повествование "через себя", описание внешнего мира через призму своего восприятия рефлексия, субъективное восприятие одна тема раскрывается вглубь ЭКСТРАВЕРСИЯ повествование "через других": описание внешнего мира через призму восприятия других объективное восприятие, основанное на сравнении объектов и людей восприятие «вширь»: много тем «по верхам» ИНТУИЦИЯ речь абстрактная, феноменализирующая, теоретизирующая, контекст расширяется рассуждает в общих категориях, о том, что было или будет потенциально отвечает на вопросы, заходя «издалека», в общем СЕНСОРИКА речь предметно-конкретная, о том, что реально происходит множество деталей и подробностей, легко пересказать и запомнить то, что говорилось из-за большого количества «сенсорных зацепок» www.andrewbozhko.com/shpargalka_socionika вот еще одна хорошая их страничка с словарем, помимо "шпоргалки" и страниц с типами www.andrewbozhko.com/slovar_socionika может быть некоторая проблема с копированием или переводом, так как у них заблокирована эта возможность, но есть расширения позволяющие разблокировать на странице возможность выделения или копирования с:
The best way to be typed is to be typed by somebody else, and this doesn’t have to be through a video call or with me specifically. So another recommendation is to ask your peers to make a strengths/weaknesses list about you, and you can DM me through IG what they wrote. I can share with you my thoughts.
INTP LSI is not only possible; it is common. Shadow divergent auxiliary INTP in Cognitive Personality Theory often manifests itself as INFJ-like in cognition, as this subtype is one where the critic rises in position to overtake the dominant. In such a person, the Ni-Ti pairing absorbs information in bite-sized pieces using Ti-Si to create a granular logical framework that is then projected to make statements about a large portion of reality. If these statements entail the creation of universal laws (Socionics Ti) and a strong commitment to act righteously according to them (Socionics Se), then the only possible Sociotype that such a person could occupy is the LSI.
I'm an EII-Fi in socionics. I don't relate to either the INFP or INFJ descriptions in MBTI. I relate a bit more to the ISTJ. But I was never into MBTI. I went directly into socionics and I've stayed there because it's way more accurate. It can also help to dig into enneagram and psyche yoga.
Ï am EII-Ne, and I am in MBTI INFP. Some MBTI-INFP are in Socionics IEI. You as an EII can only be INFP in MBTI, but many MBTI-INFP are IEI in Socionics
@@futureplanet6910 "You as an EII can only be X in MBTI". Untrue.
@@llunavermella_bloodmoon What can an EII (= INFj) (Socionics) be in MBTI? Or is it impossible to transfer between these two models? Thanks.
Do you know your enneagram subtype?
@@futureplanet6910Yes, i’m an mbti INFP and IEI in socionics. I think in general EII & IEI can both be mbti INFJ & INFP
Nicely done, and I totally agree. I feel like people over-think this a bit.
One big drawback, though, is that far fewer people know about socionics, so after you make that switch, it can feel a bit more limiting and a bit more stifling - like, suddenly there's a ton of people who you can't "talk type" with anymore.
And it's a shame, because I think Socionics offers a valuable, holistic approach for seeing a person, understanding what people are capable of, and embracing a collaborative growth mindset. When done right, Socionics is a major departure from what can often feel like an "intuitives-only" clique in MBTI.
I'm usually a lurker, but I'm commenting on your page b/c I think your content is interesting and to help with the algorithm 😋
Thank you!
Guys, socionics is just MBTI but boosted.
Edit: tbh the only big differences are Si description (mbti is wrong, lol) and all introverted types switching last letter (this is because MBTI chooses it depending on your main extroverted function, for socionics depending on your main function). All the rest are small different deductions based on the same assumptions, but don't think socionics is perfect as well: it's just more accurate.
ReEdit: i suggest to use wikisocion as source and Stratyevskaya descriptions (even tho they're sooo long) to begin with
yeah Si never made sense to me in MBTI
Fe/Fi are goofy in MBTI and are just totally mixed up. Fi in Socionics is lacking too tho tbf.
(Edit: in addition to Si which is terribly described in the MBTI)
@@iwrona6258 Si is the most misunderstood function, it's like nobody reads Jung's descriptions anymore. Si can be as detached, weird as Ni, it's your personal inner world connected to the physical world, not being conservative, focusing on details or having good memory
I used Stratiyevskaya's descriptions as well and fail to see how it's any different. I'm Fi-Se in both socionics and mbti, it's clearly describing the same type of person and once I was sure of my mbti stack and looked into socionics, I knew I was ESI right away. Still looked into some other types just in case, that's always a good idea.
I think it does depend on how you view mbti, I always viewed it as "Jungian functions in stacks" so it's no wonder I struggle to see the difference with socionics, looks like I was using socionics all along just used different terms (like dominant and inferior rather than base and suggestive) but if you typed by letters only or went by the 16P stereotypes, I can understand relating to different types...
People who typed by functions and are somehow convinced that mbti and socionics functions are different really confuse me though, like where did they get their info from? Reddit memes? Like the whole Si = past and therefor all SJs are conservative... Or all Se users are gigachads and good at sports... I myself have mistyped before based on garbage stereotypes like that that have nothing to do with Jung anymore but when you're new and that's the info you get exposed to...
@@vanillexxAre you ISFP in Mbti?I'm quite surprised then.I'm ISFP in Mbti and ESI is nothing I can resonate with. I'm clearly SEI in Socionics which correlates with ISFP descriptions in Mbti.I checked with my ISFP friends .All of them are SEI s in socionics and non of them could relate with ISFj in socionics.I talked to one typing specialist who told me the J and P switch happens only in case in introverted intuitives and not for extroverted types as well as introverted sensor types if one had to get correct descriptions.I read an article based on some study which proved the same. Have you looked into SEI subtypes or done quandra tests?
Thank you for resisting the current fad in typology which is saying that MBTI and Socionics are the same as in the types are the same across the board. I don't know what started this, but I have people talking down to me because I'm saying the obvious- that the systems are different. There are some types, like ENTPs for example, that are pretty close if not virtually the same; but the introverted types are definitely different and many of the extroverted types don't correlate with each other across systems.
Yeah it’s a completely different system! But this reasoning only works because MBTI is such a bad test to begin with if you’re trying to find your true personality type. An MBTI INFP (introverted, intuitive, feeler, perceiver), could easily be an ESTP once they test themselves using cognitive functions. 🤣
However, I will say that after using the cognitive functions to figure out your type, then there shouldn’t be too big of a difference between your MBTI type and your sociotype.
For example, if you looked at the cognitive functions and typed yourself an extroverted sensing lead, it’s highly unlikely that you would also be an eii in socionics that’s polr Se. I do believe there’s a correlation there.
Agreed. If Socionics which came out later had simply used different names for the elements and did not adopt the same four letter codes, much of this "they are the same" thinking could have been avoided.
In MBTI I was an ENFP but in reality, I was EIE in Socionics.
Your videos are really great, I actually found your channel while you were on your hiatus and I still subscribed hoping you'd come back and you did not long after! Lucky me! You've been putting out great content and I hope you continue to do so. Best of luck to you :)
I hope your audience who are serious about typology are openminded enough to consider Socionics as it really is the more comprehensive, albeit, dense system of the two (although not as inscrutable as people seem to think it). All the off-shoots and infighting over which model or dichotomies to ignore/promote can be tiresome but it's valuable to have even a rudimentary understanding of it if type and personality are of interest to someone. In any case, a lot of people use MBTI now for ITR which has been lifted from Socionics and haphazardly applied to MBTI, creating a lot of confusion and outright misconceptions that undermine its application entirely.
I think the Socionics community can appear combative and hostile even, quite a bit of dogmatic language and hubris. Some practitioners like to tie themselves into knots, ever-complicating it in an attempt to perfect it to the point of incomprehensibility. Whilst the MBTI community can be quite fluffy, superfluous, and self-indulgent. I hope your straight forward plain speak explanations can help diversify the dialogue in both typology communities.
Cheers!
Oh my God! the MBTI INFJ to Socionics ESE was my experience going into socionics🤣
I felt so ashamed of it at first, like, how can an Ni PoLR type think they're an Ni hero lol
But everything made sense at the end...
I’ve seen this happen so many times in my typing sessions, and I’ve experienced this personally as well. 🤣
The problem whit typology in my opinion is that people see the functions as individuals whit their own "personality"
And, people blame measurements for their/our own disingenuous/inaccurate answers. To be fair, I think there are zero realistic measurement diagnostics; questions should be more scenario oriented, & account for: "both, neither, depends-with more drop downs as a result of this response," & "none of the above/doesn't apply/don't care-lol" responses.
I’ve been diving down the socionics rabbit hole a lot. It’s a bit confusing to get into after first learning mbti. But the intertype relations are so interesting
Thank you so much for talking more about Socionics :)
I feel like after 10 years of consuming MBTI content I still have 0 clue what type I am supposed to be?
Now I read through the Socionics types and I feel like LSI is a good fit for me after like 3 weeks of being into it... Maybe my opinion will change too but for now I am happy haha :)
It's also thanks to your videos about the quadras. I felt like I might me INTJ due to sucky Fe but there is nooooo way I am Gamma hahahah
So again thank uuuuu
Glad my videos helped! 😊
If you still don't know your type have Aimee type you. She's one of the few that I'd recommend.
This video so good and clear
THANKS you Se users or Sp people are so straightforward, clear, and non confusing.
But yes switching from MBTI to socionics is confusing for beginners, but all in all my take is that socionics is better than MBTI, MBTI is overly generalized, and mostly composed by stereotypes reasons why people hate MBTI these days. After they approach socionics
Great video as always !
You and Leon Tsao are two of my favorite UA-camrs that discussing MBTI and Socionics in harmony coexistence, also in the way I can comprehend ( since I have Ti demonic...😅😅😅).
I like Socionics in how they recognized the subtypes. INFP/EII can be a Fi subtype that resembles ISFJ/ISFp, the wholesome type. Or can be a Ne subtype that resembles INTJ/INTp, the bada** type.
Feeling grateful to find subtypes descriptions made by Meged & Ovcharov, I identify myself with Ne subtype descriptions which really describing myself deeper from any descriptions ever offered by MBTI side- even up to my body constitution.
Thank you for this great video !
For me, Socionics is super confusing, because they use terms which make sense & all, but, the mirror type thing twists my brain too much. To me, mirror type, means exactly what it says: Our Cognitive Mirror; Fe/Fi, Si/Se...etc etc... Extraverts, usually wanna look/appear introverted (with exceptions, of course).. Introverts, usually wanna appear/be accepted as/for more extraverted attributes.. I.E. how we make ourselves up when we look in the mirror. Socionics Mirror types are just the introverted/extroverted of themselves.. Which, makes zero sense (literally & conceptually). However, when we look at Socionics mirror types, at face value, it makes total sense: ENTj/INTp.
Until we realize that INTp = INTJ, that is. What's more, INTp is more accurate, because INTJ's first function, IS actually P... To me, ENTj/INTj, are mirror types. But, according to Socionics, no.
Also, I don't like limiting variables/factors. The Romance styles, are helpful, but, limiting. There are so many more ways people show romantic interest in one another. It reminds me of The 4 Love Languages.
Some peoples Love Language is: Affection; that could encompass all 4 Love languages (in no particular/consistent order), depending on mood. I never thought I'd say this, but after all these (11) years, I'm thinking/feeling like Objective Personality has it (most) Right.
3:35 - relating to vague online description is probably the dumbest decision you can ever made in your life ; AKA barnum effect syndrom
Hey Aimee I've been loving your content. ISTP here, been into mbti for over 15 years, learned a bit of socionics back in the day but I never got into it. But as I've been keeping track of my relationship experiences and types I have my doubts about golden pair, silver pair and etc.. I have had a relationship with an ENFP, duality according to socionics, and I had the mind blow they specify with duality relationships. If possible make a video about your opinion on duality and mbti pairs and what your opinions is to what makes the most sense according to functions complementing eachother. Thank you
I'm happy in your case it worked out well, but using your MBTI type to find your socionics dual is a recipe for disaster. The types are not the same between the two systems and there is no one to one translation. To anyone reading, please study Socionics by itself, and find your type there, in order to apply Socionics theory to your relationships.
Hey Aimee, I really like your content! You've helped a lot through my journey of understanding better the whole typology thing. Your explanations are easy to understand (at least for me, kinda get confused when there are too many complicated terms, so I'm very greatful for the examples and straight-to-the-point approach).
I have a small question, tho. Imo, Socionics' descriptions about the cognitive functions are more complete than the MBTI ones. I also love how the same function may appear different depending on the functions they are paired with (Ex: Fi+Si VS Fi+Ni). The thing is, I think I've always seen most of the functions the way socionics describes them, eventhough I didn't knew much about it before. When I listen to your descriptions and read more about them in other socio-sites, I'm like "yeah ikr". Maybe I was lucky that the mbti sources I consulted were not superficial about the cf descriptions? Or maybe I saw the two descriptions and kinda fused them in my head cause I found some common ground, I'm not sure. My question is, is it alright to believe the socionics descriptions are like the updated version of the mbti ones? I'm not sure if I'm explaining myself correctly.
Anyways, thank you! Looking forward for new videos
Freaking fantastic video ❤
I never got why people think the systems are the same. Socionics is interpersonal while MBTI is cognitive. Completely different theories. Also Socionics is much more specific about how each element displays itself.
As different as it is, I think there is a correlation between the type descriptions that can’t be ignored, and this existence of a correlation is what dissatisfies people coming from MBTI. Especially because firstly, MBTI promotes themselves to be an accurate tool for “discovering the self.” And secondly, there’s a lot of bias in the MBTI descriptions themselves, which gets people emotionally hooked to a single type. For example, the rarity of the INFJ. So not only are people getting emotionally attached to a type, but then they realize that in order to truly “discover themselves,” their initial reason for getting into MBTI, they may have to detach from their type, and look into socionics to get a more accurate depiction of the 16 archetypes.
Respectfully, i disagree with you, i yhink you are steriotyping.
Mbti and the 16 personalitys test are NOT the same thing, everyone in mbti comunity knows that u gotta learn ur cognitive functions to know what ur type is, NOT TAKE ANY TEST, and NOT trust the description sm, u gotta trust more the cognitive functions descriptions.
I can see why u think mbti is less complex than soscionics, but fr tho, why stick with one typology sistem? Yk, ofc, mbti is not gonna fully cover ur personality, thats why we have enneagram, subtype, tritype, soscionics, big five, and more.
An example of this, my sis is an infj, she didnt related to the 16personalities description of infj, so she just was mistyped, but thwn, she discovered Enneagram, and she discovered she is an infj 5w4, Sp 5, and then she readed cognitive functions and indeed she was infj, mbti is not just what X type does, are mental process that we as individuals preffer and others not sm(cognitive functions)
So yeah, why stick with one? Eatch typology sistem brings one ingredient to the table, we just gotta know how to combine it to make the perfect cake!(Our personality)
But yeah, anyways here is my typology of myselft yet
Isfp 6w5 sx/sp 649 ELVF Phregmatic dominant neutral good(i still gotta search more hehehe)❤
@@Dubi777 I literally said the systems are not the same in the opening of my video. 💀
If you’re disagreeing with the fact that I said there should be a correlation between the different systems, then we’re just going to have to agree to disagree. There are just some correlations that are questionable, like ESFJ EII 7.
I said that if there are huge discrepancies like this, then I don’t think your typing is accurate. And from my experience typing people, you would be surprised how many people have huge discrepancies in their type like this, especially after learning about socionics.
1st time hearing this. I am going to look into it myself :-)
Great video
2:58 TRUE AF!
i dont understand why people still belive this strctural of socionics because of content creator that people belive its very accurcy than mbti
Then stay in MBTI.
okey catfishing content creator @@beatofmyown
@@limueljohn8599It seems like MBTI catfished you too. Lol.
@@amalksuresh2538 the fact that people using socionics is very inagurating and they think this is the solution or very accurate mbti think again in every structure of socionics there are just 2 cognitive function the other 2 is conjctive function may confuse people i support you need to read dario nardi and linda berens book before answering your next question
Aimee what happened to ur vids ;(
I am working on updating all my videos this year. 😊 I’m not super proud of my older videos anymore, as the information was quite outdated and only touched the surface of what I know now. And there isn’t any point in watching them if that’s the case. So stay tuned! And thank you for sticking around this long. 🙏🏼
@@beatofmyownSheeeesh RESPECT! Cant wait to ur upcoming vids!
I don’t think I believe in the “Team MBTI, Team Socionics, Team BB”type of jurisdiction, or following one particular system that might explain cognitive functions better than others. Because at the end of the day, they’re all attempts to explain the same phenomenon, which we all know are the 16 personalities.
I think of it like math problems. If we look at the essence of the solution, there’s really only one correct conclusion (most of the time at least), but the approach to getting there will be different depending on what method is used. It could be through an existing system that can be structurally taught, a hodgepodge based on an individual person’s understanding, or even the creation of an entirely new system.
I interested in mbti or socionic just for my self, what indication if I'm in burnout state or depression state or to make boundaries line with my time and my values, and try to regulate my own energy, at least I don't want to affect others with my negative energy, but sometimes it slipped my radar when in discussion or debate. Always try to learn body language but failed. Only recognises 2 coin of vibe energy ( positive and negative). I don't know what my type either. 😂
Does aimee y still do typing sessions? Id like to do one eventually
So you've always used socionics to type people instead of mbti? Cool
I mean, if people are going to get upset with me because I didn’t type them like I vs E or S vs N, then oh well. Lol. 🤷🏻♀️
Could I have the links to the websites where I can read more about socionics? I would like to read from websites that are accurate and recommended.
I personally got typed by Viktor Gulenko and I’ve been reading his content ever since. :) socioniks.net/en/
@@beatofmyown у Гуленка есть некоторые различия с обычной соционикой, так как зачастую используется модель А, а он создал новое направление называемое Гуманитарной соционикой, и как бы развил модель G. его теории хороши, но как носитель языка на котором он говорит я скажу так что сам он очень плохо типирует :D что могут подтвердить много людей. читая его описания и теории вы сразу будете уже в его новой системе с моделью G
мне нравится в соционике одна школа, которая объясняет все довольно просто. у людей есть 8 линз восприятия, и так как мы не можем их наблюдать напрямую, мы смотрим на их проявления в жизни. самое прямое проявление это речь. как мы думаем так и говорим. поведение же скорее может быть тенденцией, поэтому по нему типировать неправильно
к сожалению нет английского варианта сайта или их видео. вот для примера небольшие "шпоргалки для соционика", как они их сами называют :D когда пытаетесь определить тип другого человека
ИНТРОВЕРСИЯ
повествование "через себя", описание внешнего мира через призму своего восприятия
рефлексия, субъективное восприятие
одна тема раскрывается вглубь
ЭКСТРАВЕРСИЯ
повествование "через других": описание внешнего мира через призму восприятия других
объективное восприятие, основанное на сравнении объектов и людей
восприятие «вширь»: много тем «по верхам»
ИНТУИЦИЯ
речь абстрактная, феноменализирующая, теоретизирующая, контекст расширяется
рассуждает в общих категориях, о том, что было или будет потенциально
отвечает на вопросы, заходя «издалека», в общем
СЕНСОРИКА
речь предметно-конкретная, о том, что реально происходит
множество деталей и подробностей, легко пересказать и запомнить то, что говорилось из-за большого количества «сенсорных зацепок»
www.andrewbozhko.com/shpargalka_socionika
вот еще одна хорошая их страничка с словарем, помимо "шпоргалки" и страниц с типами www.andrewbozhko.com/slovar_socionika
может быть некоторая проблема с копированием или переводом, так как у них заблокирована эта возможность, но есть расширения позволяющие разблокировать на странице возможность выделения или копирования с:
You seem to be ESE more than SEE
Have you observed her causal-deterministic thinking style, as opposed to vortical-synergetic? That indicates SEE more than ESE.
hi, i was wanting to be typed but i don’t really do well in video calls. are there any alternatives?
The best way to be typed is to be typed by somebody else, and this doesn’t have to be through a video call or with me specifically. So another recommendation is to ask your peers to make a strengths/weaknesses list about you, and you can DM me through IG what they wrote. I can share with you my thoughts.
@@beatofmyown okay, will do so
I agree with this.
Hello!, Is it possible for me to be An INTP(infj tendencies) and an LSI?
Btw, for what i know, LSI fits better with the ISTJ type
I don’t think INTP LSI is possible. LSI is for TJ’s and ISTP’s
INTP LSI is not only possible; it is common. Shadow divergent auxiliary INTP in Cognitive Personality Theory often manifests itself as INFJ-like in cognition, as this subtype is one where the critic rises in position to overtake the dominant. In such a person, the Ni-Ti pairing absorbs information in bite-sized pieces using Ti-Si to create a granular logical framework that is then projected to make statements about a large portion of reality. If these statements entail the creation of universal laws (Socionics Ti) and a strong commitment to act righteously according to them (Socionics Se), then the only possible Sociotype that such a person could occupy is the LSI.