The J/P error for the Introverts in MBTI

Article to correct the functions for the Introvert types in MBTI.

We are writing this article to correct a long standing error in the MBTI system with regards to how the functions are attributed to Introvert types. This error should have been corrected a long time ago. It has been a source of confusion and inconsistency. Here we are going to focus primarily on INFJ and INFP types, however this will be true for all the introvert types. We are well versed in Carl Jung, Socionics, and MBTI. 

Let’s look at the introverted functions for INFJ, how they were assigned these functions, how they are in error, and how they misalign with that of Carl Jung’s interpretation of the functions. 

Some of you who are reading this article may not already know that the MBTI is based on Carl Jung’s Psychological Types. That is the origin of psychological types from which the other two systems have adopted. You can not say that MBTI is another system altogether because then you are creating the first major inconsistency which is that you are using all the Jung’s functions and definitions while remaining a separate system. It is not an all together separate system because MBTI functions are from Carl Jung's Psychological types. 

Carl Jung assigned the “rational” or “Judging” functions to Te, Fe, Fi, Ti. With this fact all of the Extroverts lead with their corresponding extroverted function, for example, ESTJ being rational (Judging) type leads with their rational function which is Te and ESTP leads with their irrational (Perceptual) function which is Se. What went wrong for the introverts? Why was INFJ assigned a perceptual leading function like Ni and not it’s corresponding rational function which is Fi? We think that the introvert functions were flipped in error due to an incorrect interpretations of the Jung's functions and then jargon was created to cover up this error along the way. 

To come to understand how the Myers assigned introverts the wrong functions we have to examine if they understood Jung's work and the first error in their lack of understanding is found on page 21 of "Gift Differing" a book by Isabel Myers where she writes "Jung never mentions that the JP difference can be seen in introverts..." This is completely untrue. Jung separates all the functions by Extroverts and Introverted attitude as can be read in Psychological types and he assigns "rational" aka Judging types to their corresponding JP functions for example INFJ being a "rational" Judging type is Fi.  She further goes on to say that "Jung divides the type into rational and irrational; 'rational' type are those whose dominate process is thinking or feeling..." this is also incorrect. According to Psychological type, Jung kicks off an example of rational types as Te or Fe not that introverts MUST contain those two functions in their ego block in order to be rational or Judging J types. This is the major error in the Myer's understanding and interpretation of Jung's work that has led to their error. The reference to Jung's introverted functions is here http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm C. THE INTROVERTED TYPE (III) PECULIARITIES OF THE BASIC PSYCHOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS IN THE INTROVERTED ATTITUDE. (I) THE GENERAL ATTITUDE OF CONSCIOUSNESS 

As for Fi, Jung writes "Introverted feeling is determined principally by the subjective factor. This means that the feeling-judgment differs quite as essentially from extraverted feeling as does the introversion of thinking from extraversion." This would explain why INFJ are very different from ENFJ

For all Rational or J types he writes

5. Recapitulation of Introverted Rational Types

Both the foregoing types are rational, since they are founded upon reasoning, judging functions. Reasoning [p. 496] judgment is based not merely upon objective, but also upon subjective, data. But the predominance of one or other factor, conditioned by a psychic disposition often existing from early youth, deflects the reasoning function." 

Carl Jung was very clear in stating that Fe has a “visible” component to their feelings and INFJ just don’t have that component. And, Jung also mentioned that Fi seems cold to an outsider observer and focuses more on empathy "this feeling appears much less upon the surface and is, as a rule, misunderstood.".  Those who have INFJ friends will often say "this would make sense since they don't look friendly to people."

The Myer's work on the introvert functions was a short cut.  INFJ being introverted, their functions were flipped from that of ENFJ.  If INFJ is the introvert of ENFJ it would be easier to flip the functions from FeNi to NiFe than to assign them their own corresponding J function which is Fi. In "Gift Differing" Isabell writes "They [ENFJ and INFJ as an example of E/I] will then have the same combination of perception and judgement, and their outer lives will be shaped by the same extraverted process." This is how the Myers used FeNi to flip it to NiFe. Again the problem is that when that short cut was taken it tried to explain how INFJ are the introvert of ENFJ which they are not. And, it would also allow them the work of having to explain why Fi belongs to INFJ rather than simply saying "Fe is how they do their extroverted outside living."  

INFJ “lead with their first extroverting function” If FeNi (ENFJ) “lead” with their extroverting function “Fe” and they are ENFJ then what is one who “leads with their first extroverting function”? Isn’t it ENFJ?

Was Ni assigned to INFJ because they are seen as perceptual and intuitive? But here’s another contradiction. MBTI says that P types are rather disorderly and disorganized yet INFJ are J types who love routine and seek to control their environment, then how does it make any sense that they lead with Ni a P function as their DOMINANT function when the dominant function is the person's leading strong function? MBTI explains this away by saying because their auxiliary function is how they extrovert that is why INFJ are orderly. And, MBTI says INFP goes about the external world in an organized and orderly fashion yet they are P types who lead with a J function but are spontaneous on the outside not that they are spontaneous because they are a P type rather than having a J dominant function. We think that MBTI misunderstood the functions; they are not involved in organization per say but rather in how the functions orient to objects. 

MBTI tests are based on a four group dichotomy (E/I; S/N; T/F; J/P). So someone who takes a test may score introverted, intuitive, feeling, judging because each category is broken down to reveal those four sets of letters and go to read the functions associated with it as “NiFe” and take it for FACT because they didn’t check it’s consistency with Carl Jung’s Psychological Types. INFJ are not NiFe: they are FiNe. External emotional expression is Fe not Fi. We will look at how INFJ use Fi not Fe. And, the way in which INFJ understand other people’s internal motivations is Fi not Ni. 

Simply assigning Ni to INFJ they are introverts, intuitive, and see possibilities, even though they are a J is out of alignment with Jung.

Carl Jung also wrote that Fi types are “calm” this is more visible for INFJ even though INFP look calm too however since INFP are more "emotionally expressive" they are more likely to have Fe as a supporting function since Fe stands for "extroverted emotions". I remember my two INFP cousins and how explosive they can get. And, I remember myself as an INFJ who can get rather shut down, emotionally hurt for a long time on the inside.  MBTI error here is that they want introverts to lead with their "auxiliary" or second function as to make rational types look like they are rational for instance if INFJ lead with "Fe" and they have assigned "Fe" as a rational type then all introverts lead with their auxiliary function even though this does exactly the opposite of what Jung proposed which is that all types lead with their base functions. 

Let’s look at an MBTI book and how it explains the functions for INFJ.

The first book that we first took an interest in is called “Type Talk” it is a wonderful book which is used to type people in Socionics. How is that possible, you’re asking? Well, that is a topic for another article. “Type Talk” is based on the MBTI and it defines the functions parallel to MBTI. On page 13 you are welcome to take an MBTI short test to figure out your type. As I explained above, the test is on a four pair system (E/I; S/N; T/F: J/P). If you take this test pretty objectively you’ll get your type and the book has accurate descriptions of the types starting on page 214. On Page 44 of the book confirms that INFJ are Introverts and Judging. Check! Page 49 of the book confirms that the temperaments are define correctly. Check!

Here we come to the first inconsistency…

On page 67 “judgers remain on task” -  Ni as a dominant function of INFJ do things in an unorganized fashion yet everything about J is “organized and on task” That is the first inconsistency. And MBTI labels INFP as Fi because they get things done in an organized fashion being led by introverted rational type even though they are spontaneous and more like P

On page 167 the book differentiates INFJ by IN and ESTJ by EJ…the second inconsistency is here. INFJ should really be IJ and ESTJ EJ. 

Page 222 the description of INFJ

“The INFJ’s driving force is there iNtuition(N), which is directed inward (I), generating a never-ending stream of possibilities and ideas.”

Apply breaks here!

The "never ending stream of possibilities and ideas" is Ne not Ni according to Carl Jung.

“INFJs feel called upon to render service to humanity (F) in a very orderly and organized way.”

Two inconstancies here…Fe is not external humans. Carl Jung defined Fe as external and visible emotions. Second, the very obvious J component in “orderly and organized way” (Fi) you just said was assigned to INFP because that’s how they go about their external world. 

Let’s look at how Fe manifest and is more visible in INFP; Jung writes “Consequently, in the above-mentioned example, the introverted intuitive, when affected by the giddiness, would not imagine that the perceived image might also in some way refer to himself.” Yup! Jung said “giddiness “ that is a very observable trait in the INFP and INFJ are not so outwardly emotional. We have picked out a YouTube video that will clarify this point. We have saved a lovely video interview between INFP and INFJ friends on YouTube where you will reference their traits corresponds with INFP’s Ni and INFJ’s Fi. The name of the video is on YOUTUBE and you can search for it with it's title "Q&A | INFJ & INFP Friendship" (4w5, 9w1) by Katie Marie. At the 4:30 mark you will find the INFP friend say about herself “I tend to neglect my body.” How often is this trait consistent across the board with other INFPs? We think that you will find it is VERY CONSISTENT. Let’s quote this Ni from Carl Jung “This type is especially liable to neglect ordinary physical needs. They often have little awareness of their own bodily existence or its effect on others. It often appears (especially to the extravert) that reality does not exist for them—they are simply lost in fruitless fantasies.” Also since Fe is associated with external emotions you will see in the video that the INFP is more expressive that makes the Fi a hidden sea of emotions for the INFJ.

Jung calls Ni the dreamer and “deep” when he writes “intuitive tries to relate himself to his vision, when he is no longer satisfied with mere perception and its æsthetic shaping and estimation, but confronts the question: What does this mean for me and for the world? What emerges from this vision in the way of a duty or task, either for me or for the world? The pure intuitive who represses judgment or possesses it only under the spell of perception never meets this question fundamentally, since his only problem is the How of perception. He, therefore, finds the moral problem unintelligible, even absurd, and as far as possible forbids his thoughts to dwell upon the disconcerting vision. It is different with the morally orientated intuitive. He concerns himself with the meaning of his vision…” this corresponds with the MBTI description of INFP rather than INFJ and this is how Fi was mixed up with Ne in the MBTI.  Myers Briggs associated this deep quality with Fi rather than with Ni. The INFJ will admit that they are more of the realist.

What is Ni if it's not ideas and possibilities? Ni is the person making up scenarios and situations in their own mind. It is a random gathering of possibilities of the situation inside the person's own mind that is undefined and unending. 

Like perceiving the event unfold in ways. Ne is gathering external ideas and perceiving the essence of an object or a purpose for it without it's external physical qualities. For instance, an INTp who has Ni may "forward" you of an impending disaster since they've been letting the situation evolve in their mind and what will come out is the warning. And INFJ may go watch a cooking video to gather ideas from the external environment. Here't the thing with Socioonics that's correct BOTH INFP and INFJ do Ni. They can both make up scenarios and forward others, however the difference is in values of Fi and Fe in these type. The Fe makes INFP watch people's emotional responses more carefully and their Ni dominant function loses their connection to their physical self and not take care of their health while the Ni function in INFJ can also expand on the scenario in their mind but only momentarily as the tie to Fi is more of a dominant function for INFJ. Fi means relating back to relationships and people rather than the event as it would for INFP. Fe in INFP would make them more silly, goofy, emotionally light, respect the social environment and INFJ would be more individual or friend and family focused regardless of the nature of the emotional environment. This emotional environment that is being "not disrupted" makes INFP more aware of External Feelings and INFJ stand for self justice regardless of the environment. INFJ will say "It's not right that you're hurting my friend" Judgment of the situation would make them overlook that the situation itself is taking place in a group of people and that they are enforcing moral values is also the purpose of their stance.

The reason why INFJ (being FiNe) look more N is because the Fi is a hidden subject that dissolves into an inner world causing someone like an INFJ to look like they are more about ideas and possibilities since Fi is making self assessed judgements about the world. These judgements will sound off and come out if the INFJ is passionate about a cause or get preachy.

We conclude our point here about the error in these two type and we believe that it is true across the board for all the others introverts as well. Simply flipping the functions from the Extrovert type is not correct since now the introvert leads with a dominant perceptual function which does not correspond with Jung's J function for the introvert, and causes confusion is jargon to explain away their preferred processing. 

In the definition of both systems for INFJ, that is in MBTI and Socionics, INFJ are referred to as "the empath" who helps others with their emotions yet in MBTI helping others with their emotions is attributed to Fe while in Socionics it is attributed to the empathetic quality of Fi. We believe that the definitions for Fe, Ne, and Ni in MBTI are incorrect. Having made incorrect label of functions MBTI had no choice but to make loose definitions that have been loosely defined and somewhat vague while that of Socionics corresponds that of Jung and is more accurate of INFJs. The same goes for Ni in INFPs. 

Here are some concerns for our article: 

"MBTI was created by Meyers and Briggs. They decided to add the J/P to the 3 letter code. It is not present in Jung or Socionics as it only uses 3 letters none of them refer to J/P. They decided that the J/P was to tell everyone what your first extroverted function was- whether it is your dominant or auxiliary. But you can't change the system just because you want to. All you do is confuse people. The nomenclature doesn't belong to you."

My response is: 

We are changing the system. 

To address the above concern about the dominant and auxiliary functions, Jung writes,

"Conversely, an irrational type [meaning a type like INFP] demands a stronger development of the rational auxiliary function [such as their Fe] [p. 517] represented in consciousness, in order to be sufficiently prepared to receive the impact of the unconscious. This is why in the MBTI Isabel Myers often refers to INFP as having feelings. They do and she does too since she's INFP - there's a big Fe in her stacking as Jung's Psychological type suggests.

You see "disruption in harmony" is Fe rather than Fi. So I feel like MBTI got the functions wrong. INFJ are Fi and INFP are Fe for that reason. And the reason why something bother's the INFJ so deeply is because it disrupts their moral compass internally aka "It's wrong to do that to my friend" (my relationships, someone I care about who is important to me).

"11. The Principal and Auxiliary Functions

Accurate investigation of the individual case consistently reveals the fact that, in conjunction with the most differentiated function, another function of secondary importance, and therefore of inferior differentiation in consciousness, is constantly present, and is a -- relatively determining factor. [p. 514]"

Because Isabel Myers incorrectly understood Jung's interpretation of Introverted functions she made a wrong system assigning Fe- the "first extroverting" function aka the Auxiliary function to INFJ when Jung very specifically says that the auxiliary function is of LESSER role. The most differentiated function is the person's first and foremost function, first function determine whether they are of the J group or P. In INFJ it is Fi because they are introverts and J and Ne is the auxiliary since the Fi is the rational function led by a lessor non competing auxiliary Ne. MBTI makes the auxiliary function the most differentiated function as to explain away an error in understanding what is being led by a rational function because they thought all rationals Js have Fe or Te which is wrong. "11. The Principal and Auxiliary Functions

Accurate investigation of the individual case consistently reveals the fact that, in conjunction with the most differentiated function, another function of secondary importance, and therefore of inferior differentiation in consciousness, is constantly present, and is a -- relatively determining factor. [p. 514]"

And now, we have aligned both MBTI and Socionics and they both correspond with that of Jung's work.  In both systems INFJ and EII are the quiet and calm person who is a "good counselor" meaning they listen to other peoples emotions and problems and want to "empathize" with them and who are above all humanists. 

The INFP in Socionics, with their NiFe, are the lyricists who are the ”deep and romantic person" who gives way to their imagination and often complains about their physical state (as they ignore their body). Sounds familiar? It should!

If you want to read all of Jung's work on Psychological Types you may find that here http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm

This has been a collaborative effort from Nolan Clark (INFJ); Timmy Wong (ESTP) and Maritsa Darmandzhyan (INFJ)

LSE or LSI

LSE: aren't usually meticulous about cross checking for accuracy; care more about efficiency and getting as much things done as possible (a side effect of expansive energy); factors important aspects of the problem into a solution very fast and organizes/structures things.

LSE are quite capable of looking at the things they have to do and prioritize, doing the most important thing first, but unlike the LSI, LSE, with their Extraverted Feeling role function, can stop to consider other people's feelings, are less impulsive, work with an easier, more methodical pace, having more preference towards Si rather than Se. Hence, the LSE isn't likely to drive the energy of their workers "overboard" focusing more on comfort and convenience of work. LSE are also more willing to take up and do things one at a time as opposed to 20 things at a time like the LSI.

LSE, with their weak orientation to dynamic introverted intuition, keep their eyes on the time.

LSI: check for logical accuracy presented by internal mistrust of what people show them or what they see; care more about priority over efficiency, as long as the most important thing is done now ; gathers a lot of information, follows this process of inquiry: doubts arise about an issue, seeks clarity through inquiry to understand and clarify the topic, formulates steps to act, repeats these steps in instructions to others. LSI always verify what people tell them if it doesn't sound right to them. LSI cross check documents to catch or eliminate discrepancies and look at what matches. Doesn't always take things at face value. Keeps information close to themselves. I often observe the type in an "analysis paralysis" mode.

LSI are busy conveying their understanding, category, or structure of the issues to others and in the process, they may interrupt others to repeat themselves or to make sure that what they are trying to say is getting through to the others; unlike LSE, LSI keep themselves busy; with the great expansive energy of Se, they are constantly focusing on details and mobilizing for tasks; these tasks usually circle around in their heads and they act on them impulsively, without thinking of the bigger consequences of things. They have an ability to not forget their errands, they can do as many things at a time, are abrupt and forward with others without really considering people's feeling objectively.

LSI, with their weak orientation to static extraverted intuition, miss out on how events can develop, potentially, focusing on the immediate detailed tasks at hand.

If I gave an LSE and LSI an example: I want to construct a test, there are common types and uncommon types, there are more of one than the other, I could study either one type or two to compare; how would you structure my study? Because an LSE can factor in all variables at once and because they are good at structuring WORK, they can give you the beginning model and help you set the pace of work. 

The common LSE response for structuring my test is:

1. The most common type will give you more data. Study the most common type first.

2. Study more than one common type, two at a time, because you'll have something to compare data to.

3.  Gather enough data, not too much so as you won't get gridlocking in information without taking time to interpret it.

LSI:

(In less of an organized fashion says):

Sort people by type or quadra, by sample size, study one at a time, spend an average amount of time (prefering Ni -prioritizing and time valuing) on each; to compare, you'll need two types, some things may be off; generally observe each type and after that go into more specifics of each type. 

Evidence for Socionics

According to the study by Anthony C. Little and David I. Perrett published by the British Psychological Society in 2007 (http://www.alittlelab.stir.ac.uk/pubs/Little_07_personality_composites.pdf), there is evidence for a measurable correlation between physical characteristics and personality traits. In other words, physical traits can predict, with some accuracy, personality characteristics of the individuals that displays them, and these personality characteristics are found with a measurable degree of consistency within individuals who bear these physical traits.

Americans seem more reluctant in general to accept socionics, particularly in its European-originated VI-centric iteration. This would seem, at least partly, to be based on the culturally instilled centrality of the individual to American society; a society so inherently predicated on the power and primacy of the individual personality and will would naturally be inclined to suspicion of a personality science that professed the ability to easily quantify persons into relatively inflexible finite groups.  

Socionics is not MBTI

Socionics is not an adjunct to the MBTI, nor are its findings synonymous, even though both systems result in 16 separate personality type designations. 

The following research on the MBTI will show you that this test is an unreliable measure of personality type:

http://www.indiana.edu/~jobtalk/Articles/develop/mbti.pdf

MBTI measures personality with a written test consisting of yes or no questions, in which the test taker answers according to their agreement or disagreement with the declarative statement meant to indicate the personality. The problem with this test is that it relies upon numerous questions that are no way indicative of personality.


An example of one of these questions "You are usually the first to react to a sudden event:
the telephone ringing or unexpected question"  (http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp) is used to relate with extraversion. A person may be in an especially "excited" and in an energetic mood in a given moment which would cause them to react faster; that is not a measure of extraverted typical attitude, as indicated by Carl Jung's Psychological Types; not everybody's behavior is the same at any given moment and Carl Jung was very specific in mentioning that in his work. 


In addition, the MBTI separates personality types in a way that results in types which are inconsistent with the actual differentiation of human psychological patterns. Human psychological patterns are not divided along the lines of eight dichotomies of E/I, S/N, T/F, and J/P. Socionics measures the dichotomies together; they are measured in tandem, as they should be, for instance, Extraverted Thinking (Te). 


Furthermore, Socionics has a Visual Identification component, which identifies types not by the test taker's choice of answers, or by the test taker's particular preference for personality orientation, but simply by the configuration of the test subject's physical features. One can only assume that a test taker is answering the questions in a manner consistent with their actual emotions and thoughts, and that those answers are not being adversely affected by unique circumstances influencing the test taker's mood at the time of the test. But, even with all the makeup and hair pieces money can buy, looks fundamentally do not lie. The basic structure of the face and the orientation of the spinal column to the skull, which are key factors in accurate Visual Identification, can not be altered short of expensive and painful surgery. 

Introduction to Socionics

Derived from Carl Jungs Psychological Type and Antoni Kepinski's Information Metabolism, Aushra Augustinavichute formed Socionics to explain and differentiate 16 personality types, their interactions in interpersonal relationships and within society as a whole.  

Socionics benefits individuals by helping them to determine relationships, potential careers and social atmosphere that would be most conducive to their natural aptitudes and abilities.

Within the larger social context, Socionics can serve as a guide to the most productive and constructive means of interaction between persons of different types within the framework of larger social constructs. 

In the more immediate personal level, Socionics illustrates that every individual of any personality type has particular aptitudes and abilities that not only benefit society as a whole but also connect, in near perfect harmony, with individuals of a different complimentary type. These individuals, known as duals, combine their strengths with those of their dual to produce a collective partnership equipped to deal with virtually any interpersonal or inter-social situation in a constructive and productive fashion. 

It is my belief that the correct application of Socionics personality study can point the way to a generalized increase in individual self awareness and interpersonal and inter-social harmony. This science possess broad ranging positive implications to improve human interaction in realms as diverse as romance, career and aptitude counseling, and even harmonious conducting of the American party political process; there are not two ideals against each other, but 16.

This site will serve as both a generalized introduction to Socionics and an in depth examination of the 16 Socionics personality types. My hope is that through the explication of these types (complete with illustrative examples from both my own hands on research and from the personality type manifestations of well known figures in politics and popular culture), this site will serve to guide readers in determining their own types, those of the individuals in their lives, and how to use this science to better their lives and the world around them. 

Two Base Functions: Te and Se by Rasputin

Te - Extravert Thinker; Judging function
Se - Extravert Sensing; Perceiving function

Extraverted logic (Te)......external dynamics of objects: focus on activity of objects (location, time, speed, etc.), what we refer to as objective parameters, leading to patterns that we call algorithms and methods. Objective parameters are like variables in an equation that form an active system occupied with variables whose values are real people and objects.


Extraverted sensing (Se)......external statics of objects: (share, texture, impact, force, etc.), what we refer to as properties of an object or objective traits, leading to action toward objects via mobilization or arrangement, manipulation of force to achieve desired results.

Se is less introspective than Te because it focuses more on taking immediate action before thinking first due to it's orientation to apprehend external statics of objects, it's as though there is a compulsion to enact the external dynamics of objects once their statics are apprehended. Te apprehends external dynamics of objects, already seeing how force is shared between objects as a system and seeking to implement statics of objects through proper analysis and organization into a system.

This makes the Te more introspective function and the Se more active, spontaneous function. Te is still concerned with action, but planned action, action coordinated with the system, hence the notion of proper action, the proper way to do things, and concern with how things are arranged...all of which can be seen to derive from principle, the implementation of principles.

Introvert or Extravert?

Extraverted people are more outwardly directed;  the movement of libido or personality moves outward; which means they seek out objects, words, situations, characters of the outward world and Introverts move these things inwards drawing these things within them and in relation to themselves, essentially relating everything of the external world to their self, where they become the center of their observations; hence, for Introverts, libido is inward directed. Best way to imagine this is if there is  breath within the person and it is flowing outwards and trying to reach as much space outside as possible, this would be Extraverts; while for the Introverts this breath already exists outside and the introvert is trying to breath it inwards.

Level of activity, inward directed or outward directed, distinguished Extraversion or Introversion; for instance, I'm an classic Introverted attitude; I do a lot of reading but even thought this amount of work is energy and productivity I am doing it for different purposes; I, unlike Extraverts, am not looking at stuff outside of me, more stuff I just want to get down and share; a typical Extraverted blog like The MovieZombie (themoviezombie.blogspot.com) draws on information, or FACTS and observations, while mine is more based on internal intuition, my gut about things.

Se PoLR in EII type

Reference Sites to Socionics

Socionics.org
Socionics-Filatove, Y.E. (She is also EII/INFj type)
Socionics Type Desriptions
http://66.196.80.202/babelfish/translate_url_content?lp=ru_en&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fsocionics.kiev.ua%2Farticle%2Fgul_destiny%2F&.intl=us

A Matter of Attraction

I looked at the interpretation of attraction and feelings and there seems to be four catagories.


1. NT's sensing and ethical elements are poorly developed, as I have mentioned before; these types don't choose to love; love is outside themselves and so it just happends. It's neither conscious nor is it subconscious. My mom's an INTp and she says, that for her, she is just there that she doesn't think about love, it's just there.

2. NF's feelings are conscious but their attraction is subconscious. They always know their feelings but can't figure out why they are attracted to something. They may find the strangest things to be beautiful and pleasing even when others have rejected them for their esthetic unpleasantness. For NF types love is in the heart, sprit, soul, and body...it is in entirety of all of the being.

ES's openly admit physical attraction.

3. ST's know when they are attracted; their attraction in conscious, but they can't control their feelings because they are not subject to conscious control - feelings exist independently of their logic ( their mind); feelings are in their heart.

4. SF's are aware of their feelings and of the feelings of other's. These feelings for them exist in their every cell; they can easily tell what and why they are attracted and what they are feeling in its every aspect.


Although ideally, I would love to live in a world where duals interacted more frequently and hence had greater opportunity to find love amongst one another, in our vast world this is not possible (except in the internet dating world). When it comes to love, yes, you have to be attracted and get that special feeling, but when it comes down to decision making, many people seem to be at a complete loss for what to do; this is where Socionics is important. In choosing a life long partner, one must realize that love is independent of feelings and should be independent of making important decisions; you may go through phases in a long term relationship where you love the person you are with but can't stand them and an instinct to flee sets in. These feelings go through stages and love is always there, so sticking it through, emotional times will bring feelings back and forth and all the way around. Dual relations require honesty and open communication, they are no exception to conscious involvement in the relationship by both halves of the whole.

Dualizing by Maritsa Darmandzhyan

Dualizing is an interesting process. In order for dual pairs to merge and become one, all psychological restrictions must be removed. Psychological restrictions include emotional distance and closing up. Every dual pair will dualize differently.

Dualizing is an actual process...if a part of a motor is missing, for example, it will not work as it should.

We, whether we want to or not, have a piece of our motor missing. That piece is not in control of running us as a physical being (as in giving me life, air , lungs etc) it is a motor piece for a psychological well-being.

This psychological function serves different needs for different people, a mechanism of completing...this can be seen in task management...for example ask yourself this question...in a long term relationship, what tasks, simple everyday ones, would you like the other person to take care of?

If a person is not dualized they don't look like anything that their dual will want because they are in an unnatural state, physically and mentally. This is very observable.

Here's how I dualized with a dual...

An undualized ESTj can not spot his or her dual based on simple language, written or verbal. All people look and act pretty much the same (observe a line of individuals at the supermarket, for instance) It's foreign, unusual, they don't or can't understand why the person is not cooperating with them to answer their question...when he slows down or stops and when his dual speeds up and opens up then the process of dualizing between an ESTJ and INFj starts...the brain of the ESTj processes her words; INFj begins to speak confidently, not being afraid that she will be judged or pressured...she feels trusted and confident when otherwise she is reserved and untrusting.

One day, a friend of mine, who is LSE/ESTj, took an entire day to meditate and connect.

You can't dualize if you don't want to be around one another and speak to each other. It requires complete honestly and complete trust in one another. We started off with removing all inhibitions about our selves and who we were, being completely honest. We accepted one another, for how we looked, no matter how we viewed each other physically or mentally...we did not cast any judgments. For him, he had to get over that I didn't look physically glamorous to him and I had to get over that he wasn't ethical, which was a BIG deal to be because INTEGRITY is number one to me.

We asked and received. Duality is a whole, it is one unit and everything in it works as one. So one person wants to give, the other wants to receive. If you remove yourself from your dual you can’t offer what they want to receive, it won’t work. Ask the person to read your wants…I asked in my mind…I need food, I’m hungry…the other person concentrates and reads, or feels the want or need and then reacts.

Ask them to read your mind (what do I want, what do I need, what should we do, where are we going, how are we doing this, why, who, etc.) with as few words exchanged as possible, as often as possible for the mechanism, that connective psychological function to take over…soon that becomes automatic and you don’t have to try consciously. Because the psychological process of duals are subconscious wishes and desires, they can intuitively connect with what the other half desires.

Soon, you will be standing across the room from your dual and with a single glance or exchange the other person will automatically know what's going on and why, and they will act accordingly. I know dualizing is not easy to explain, it is more understanding that one is the other’s subconscious; conscious and subconscious functions in duals are reversed. Dualized duals have been able to read the thoughts and feelings of their dual; for instance, we sometimes wish or have the desire to be embraced, your dual wants to kiss you...you see how that works?



We are all preprogrammed for our dual, it’s society that messes us up, by teaching us all sorts of things that we hold true in spite of their uselessness to not only us but causes us to eventually wonder if the way we are makes any sense.

ID TYPE Visual Identification by Rod Novichkov

Well VI is identifying people's type, there are 16. This method is identification without the use of a verbal test.

1. j and p type is observed in a side view picture of an individual; this has to do with how the spinal cord is attached to the base of the human brain.

2. The frontal lobe of the brain is shaped in two ways, flat or round; this translates into having a flat broad forehead with protruding superciliary arch for T types and round forehead for F types.
Wikipedia (Links)
Orbitofrontal_cortex
"It has even been proposed that the human OFC has a role in mediating subjective hedonic experience [1]." This is very much true of ESTj personality types..male and female.

3. Visual processing determines S or N types . N types have the ability to cross their eyes independent of one eye or the other to observe a wider periphery vision; S types are unable to do this function. Many ST's are able to observe everything in their field of vision at once; N doesn't work this way...they may look but not see.

4. The last element is E or I; this is behavioral and it's a little difficult to tell in a person but very observable in a photograph; an E type will be very focused at the camera and I type will seem rather removed, in their mind, melancholic. This is the hardest function to decipher but once you get good practice you will actually see that type of people look very much like one another. So you won't need to look at I or E any more...type will be very apparent.

Visual Identification of J and P types in Socionics

Will attach pictures soon.

Visual Identification of INFJ / EII personality type

Just like myself, these celebrities are also INFJ / EII personality type; I have included side shots of them with clear indiction of their Rational orientation, which is one class of human beings. It is natural for Rationals to often have heads that slightly lean forward, when standing up, except for ESTj/LSEs who stick their chest out when walking or rather flex their back muscles back.

Mottos that I live my life by are kindness, love, generosity, wishing well, helping when I can, compassion, sympathy, empathy, and fighting for those less fortunate, towards all mankind, striving for a simple way of living out of respect and appreciation for the environment and forwarding all of these values to all other living creatures we inhabit the earth with. I believe these are the positive traits of an INFj/EII type. In Socionics, there is not good and bad type and every type does come with particular traits that they are not naturally geared towards; I believe that by learning each other's types we may find strength and inspiration in others that we don't have in our selves. EIIs, though humanist and compassionate, also have their set of weak traits that they confront, just like with all types. But, being a positivist, I'm more inclined to focus on the "good" parts of myself, so take that as you will.

INFj's are often capable of experiencing consuming emotions, they can appear consumed and distracted, this is also true to the way that Robin Wright Penn has described herself in interviews. Please read the life of Van Gogh and you will get a look at how this internal emotional state works http://cvc.csusb.edu/VincentVanGogh.htm.

The typical EII look is being wistful, enigmatic, and some will say they look distracted or their head in the clouds, although not as much as their perceptual look a likes, IEI, would look; their faces aren't very excessively animated because they internalize their emotions, hence internal ethical types. EII empathize with how how others feel; they feel that others should be able to tell how they feel as well; they don't feel like they need to broadcast their emotions; the external quality and the way they look draws people to get to know them. People are intrigued, and want to find out more about them because of the enigmatic and mysterious quality.

  

If you are an INFj type and you are experiencing turbulent emotions please write to me, seek professional help, have friends around, and do not isolate yourself under any circumstance. You'll notice that there aren't as many male EII/INFj types.

INFJ / EII women:

Vanessa Paradis
Maria Shriver
Gisele Bundchen
Jane Fonda
Shannyn Sossamon
Robin Wright
Mackenzie Phillips
Maritsa Darmandzhyan (myself)
Michelle Obama
Holland Taylor

A pic of Holland Taylor showing off her type...
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3332086528/nm0852466


INFj/EII men:
Hayden Christensen
Guy Pearce
Scott Weiland

IM ( Information Metabolism ) Maritsa Darmandzhyan

A good understanding of Informational Metabolism (IM) will allow good understanding of Socionics; it is the building block that makes Socionics work. What IM does for Socionics is that it gives tools to recognizing which type a person is.  If Socionics is the building, IM is the bricks, giving it structure and helping make sense of Socionics. There are 8 functions of IM called Information functions (IF).  All human beings have access to these functions, but what determines their type is the one that has primacy.  These are:

Extraverted Thinking (Te)
Introverted Thinking (Ti)
Extraverted Sensing (Se)
Introverted Sensing (Si)
Extraverted Feeling (Fe)
Introverted Feeling (Fi)
Extraverted Intuition (Ne)
Introverted Intuition (Ni)

You can't pick and choose a function base on what you prefer. Your dominant functions are inherent you can't say "I like this better, so I'm going to make this my dominant function and do it." Mistyping others is common in Socionics because behaviors are being interpreted trough their own filters. This is where Visual Identification is important, because it's not open to suggestive interpretation. A good example of a mistypable situation is when a person acts outside their typical element, by being strongly emotional at certain times and if caught in that moment, the typist may interpret that behavior to belong to one function over another.

People who don't use Visual Identification will look for superficial symbols of what they consider to be type, such things as superficial mood/facial characteristics, certain attitudes displayed at certain times, which are all highly inaccurate methods of determining type. These inaccurate methods are often used by many Socionics Visual Identification sites.

We don't know why in the sequence of our genes we have such extreme markers that tie personality to morphology (the way we look), and this topic is subject to extensive study to learn where and how each human came from.

The reason why written tests fail at accuratly picking the person's type is that in one example a person may remain cool and aloof on the outside, but burn with all kinds of emotions on the inside, but every once in a while let one out and if you are typing with a subjective tool like behavioral observation and you don't catch the person in the element you are likely to think of them as any of the IM  functional description.

Can you see the introverted functions of any person? How about the thoughts of of a certain individual? Don't forget that in Socionics a person who is of one type may seem like another and display characteristics of another, and vice-versa. You can tell by the way they live- LSE/ESTj live clutter free, neat, EFFICIENT, effective, maximize, organized, routines for things like preparing and cooking their food without the interuption of another person, while ESE/ESFJ like having people prepare the same food in the kitchen with them, want to look like they are efficient and buy many books to read on efficiency.

This goes back to the tree in the forest scenario. When a tree falls in the forest how do you know it made a sound?

Some IM elements are in the subconscious- you can miss a person's type very easily if you judge them based on their behavior and actions of the moment. If you are picking your type you choose the functions that look good; I know I like dark circles, you may mistype yourself and others in Socionics.

How about the descriptions that you want to look like behind every element; well, how about the ones your society or our society values as being "strong" or "desirable"?There is also the issue of elements that are more so developed in individuals with the same type or the issue of birth order (as psychologists like to assume that it makes a difference in a child's personality), or the environment and the way a person was raised that stunts or develops one element more then the others.

How about hormones and how a person's sex, race, nationality, traditions, socio-economic status, education, finance, and most importantly how is the person is effected by the relationships that surround him or her? and etc.

Once a type is a whole, IM elements disappear into the background. When a person reads description of types, they relate to most of them because we have behaviors of all types withing us and descriptions of type are not often written in the "language" (I will discuss type related language later) of the individual who is reading the descriptions.

Type says you are one more and that's the one you should focus on developing.VI is so accurate because type is connected to morphology (genes) and specific characteristics/traits, you will see when you are typed and read a good descriptions of your type that that really "clicks". So what can you see? You can see certain behaviors through your own personal filter, that may or may not mean much in terms of typing in Socionics.