Which type is the better...? (Functional comparison and analysis)

[EyeSeeCold]

The MBTI type profiles have earned themselves stereotypes which are not often critiqued, and even when they are, they are never considered according to functional stack.


Let's take ISTP for example. In both Socionics and MBTI, those letters are said to produce a typical mechanic, yet the functions for ISTP differ in both systems. How is it that both TiSe and SiTe can produce the same typical mechanic? How can different functional reasoning lead to the same stereotype?

The primary conclusion is that typology is ambiguous, which I will agree with, but nonetheless I believe the reason this phenomenon occurs is because people don't have a very lucid understanding of the functions and how they work together. Rather, it's the 4 letter temperament person which is clear to us, and we just assume the functional stack to be what it is because that's what MBTI experts tell us.

So going back to the ISTP mechanic, we can say that the reality manifested temperament of ISTP actually does have a higher likelihood of being a good mechanic, but is that due to TiSe or SiTe?


What are the traits of mechanical work?

1. Getting dirty
2. Physical exertion
3. Familiarity with many tools, and the use of those tools
4. Familiarity with many car parts
5. Understanding of the interactions and relationships between the many car parts
6. Perseverance of mental+physical trial and error
7. Experience with car problems
8. Ability to accurately orient objects in space

For the most part, I believe this is an appropriate comprehensive list. So how can we attribute that to Ti(Se) or Si(Te)?


1.) Getting dirty

A mechanic will encounter dirt, grime, grease, oil, and other substances in their line of work. It will be on their hands, face, clothes, and shoes.

Although there is nothing really cognitive about it, it does suggest a person who values or at least is not afraid of the full potential of sensory experience. An argument for Si in the dominant position; on the contrary Ti doubtfully has anything to do with physical contact and the resulting dirtiness, and though there is auxiliary Se, it would not be as influential as dominant Si. - Si > Ti​

2.) Physical exertion

Depending on the complexity of a vehicle project or maintenance task, a mechanic may have to work tirelessly turning wrenches, hauling tires, cranking levers, bending over, crouching down, laying prone etc. It requires a commitment of effective kinesthetic and mental effort to a task until the work is completed, which might have to go through several revisions.

Again there is a primacy of sensory aspects, however there is also a sense of discipline involved. The latter could be an argument for Ti+Se, but I imagine Ti+Se in such a situation to be more inclined towards the planning of such work rather than its execution, the nature of daily mechanical work involves more tactical thinking(short term action) rather than strategic(long range preparation). Si being the sensory function would more likely be accustomed to repetitive physical exertion with Te providing the goal-oriented thinking and motivation. - SiTe > TiSe​

3.) Familiarity with many tools, and the use of those tools

This involves pure exposure, and since males tend to over-represent STs(another case worthy of looking into) , and males are more likely to be exposed to tools in general, there isn't a strong argument either way. However it could be asked whether TiSe or SiTe is more likely to prefer experience or knowledge, and I'd put SiTe first for Si dominance, with practical Te thinking as support. - SiTe > Ti​

4.) Familiarity with many car parts

Same argument as above. - SiTe > Ti​

5.) Understanding of the interactions and relationships between the many car parts

This involves studying diagrams and/or taking cars apart piece by piece and successfully putting them back together. It is mentally grasping the car as a dynamic system.

I think it is no surprise that Ti would be superior here, there is considerable mental effort involved and time required to learn these things to a fluid extent. Even with Si's experiential advantage, it doesn't beat systematic thinking. - Ti > Si (do TiSe types make better engineers than SiTe?)​

6.) Mental+physical trial and error

Because not every car is the same(?), and therefore the problems won't be the same, there is an expectation of having the patience and the knowledge+creative thought to push through novel situations.

While exertion was already attributed to Si, it doesn't account for creative thought, however there is practical Te thinking to help Si. Ti may excel here as it can study the issue and come up with reasonable solutions. For this trait, I'll consider them equally equipped for the job. - SiTe = Ti​

7.) Experience with car problems

Another one of exposure.

Perhaps Si is more likely to experiment and try to fix the issue themselves? At the same time, Ti could be argued as reading up on the issue to approach it methodically the issue and fit it themselves also. I think this one begs the question so I will skip it.​

8.) Ability to mentally orient objects in space

Cars are machine systems with many moving and intricate parts so when working with a car, one must be able to visualize how a certain part or subsystem of parts operate in 3D/4D, especially when (re)constructing a car.

This one is actually tricky. I would say this is probably an advantage of Ne, but neither type has predominant Intuition. I suppose Ti understanding of relationships in combination with Se apprehension of reality could be the dominant pair here. Si is internal sensory perception so there is a chance Si has a relatedness to spatial manipulation by contemplating and conceptualizing its sensory experience but I have a hard time understanding it, so I'll go with TiSe. - TiSe > Si​

In conclusion, SiTe dominated in mechanical aspects 5 to 2. While I am considering things from my own perspective, I didn't see much relation to TiSe overall.

So to answer the question, "which type makes a better mechanic?", I have to answer SiTe. If there is an ISTP mechanic temperament out there is it due to a functional stack of TiSe, or really SiTe? I would say the latter.



---
I know some people may consider the topic insignificant within the scope of typology, but this is something I really wish more people concerned themselves with. I would not mind to do another type stereotype (if I can), or if someone else wants to contribute, I just want to hear your thoughts on this idea.

 

[Base groove]

Stereotypological perspective B:

Ti and Se function pairs will be constantly gathering information in real-time from the environment and analyzing. So a TiSe/ISTP will be more effective in novel situations that require real-time problem solving.

The first thing I'd point out is that Se is strongly related to novelty, as well as Ne. It's simply the nature of the extraverted perception to be drawn to novelty, and the difference lies in whether the novelty is sought to discover new relationships (compounding novelties) or if the novelty is sought to gather the data in is present, tangible, relevant form that can be readily utilized (thus intensity or immediate relevance).

Fundamentally, I don't see any congruence between this hypothetical 'major strength' of the ISTP type and auto mechanics. However, if a car were to have a minor issue without any mechanics around, the next best thing would be any given ISTP, either with or without the necessary supply of tools and parts. They are likely very good with diagnostics, interpretation, and troubleshooting.*

Spoiler

I think back to Archie comics where Archie's old jalopy would break down / 'need a tune-up' as a recurring theme. Once, they (A and J) were in the woods on a double date and Archie's car broke down and he took Jughead's belt to replace the fan belt on his car. This is an ISTP/ISTp interaction if you ask me. I can't imagine an ISTp/SiTe mechanic using any part to repair a car that wasn't prescribed by the repair manual, so their usefulness in novel situations that require real-time resource gathering and analysis ... is nil, when compared to the TiSe.

*Here I'd continue to make the argument that an ISTP would not be as likely to 'read-up' on something as you've indicated, as I believe they stereotypically need to learn 'hands-on', by physically interacting with the object of their study. It's my belief that reading about a subject engages the introverted perception functions not the extraverted ones so an ISTp has a natural advantage with regards to procedural understanding or referencing the manual.

Regarding the 'manual' and introverted perception functions ... in the field of auto-mechanics I believe that Si would have a clear and decisive advantage over Ni. This is one area where an individual needs to understand exactly what they're reading in the context they're reading it in. Through study of the manual, an Ni-type would probably try to build a whole-picture understanding of what they've read from cover to cover, or to pick and choose concepts which seem relevant to the individual's understanding. Of course, they are now lacking in important details. They may not remember the correct tension for certain bolts/belts or the correct type of oil for a given engine, but they'll know exactly why (too tight puts strain on the parts or the oil pump injection nozzle is too small for that viscosity of oil etc......) These are things that are relevant and meaningful to the Ni, and enable the Se to fulfill its purpose with a 'generalized' (inductive) understanding of the task.

ISTP mechanic: "tighten those bolts, but not 'too' tight."
ISTp apprentice: "how tight is too tight?"
ISTP mechanic: "What../? Here, just let me do it."


ISTp mechanic: "tighten those bolts to 35 nm with the torque wrench"
ISTP apprentice: "ok...." (comes close, doesn't bother getting it perfect).

 

[nanook]

i have actually changed or expanded my view, to see how mbti can also be seen as being somewhat correct. i mean there isn't just one mbti, there are as many mbtis as there are typologists, but it can be narrowed down to two common mbtis, one of which is just silly, the other one is largely perfectly compatible with socionics, in the sense that for example mbti ISTJ SiTe and socionics ISTp SiTe are identical. i will call the latter one "correct". often people try to combine both mbtis, because they are confronted with both views. if they think in depth, they are "correct" to a degree, but then they fantasize some silly mbti on top of it, as if it were the same, so as to not loose the mbti feeling that they became accustomed to, through the common world of silly cliche-mbti. they don't want to discover that there is a schizophrenic twist in mbti, now that would be scary, especially because discovering it would shed a light on the own schizophrenic split, that introverted typologists tend to have, between their introverted and extroverted persona.


where mbti is correct:

Auxiliary extroversion shapes the effect an introverted type has on society, if he has any effect at all (short of writing genius books), as this effect would be noted by a very superficial observer who lacks empathy:

ISTP TiSe has impact on environment through objective action.

A soldier who will ritually fold the american flag over a coffin (and totally love this shit) has impact on the environment, without even getting dirty. The whole army of reserve officers makes the millitary machine efficient. No need to be rambo. They are Methodological, Consistent, Disciplined and accept Society through their Fe. Can easily appear dominant, by projecting Ti: how you should do things.

ISTP TiSe jumps out of plane.

A rather false cliche, ISTP would probably sooner be a trials biker and leave the paraglyding to the ESTP. But logically correct: Se is sporty. And as a solder, he would certainly be capable of jumping out of the god damn plane. He might have a panic attack, but he has the reflexes to land without injury.

where mbti is false/silly:

"ISTP TiSe is easygoing, spontaneous, chaotic and not dominant. therefore ISTP would not be a tight ass officer with OK leadership qualities"

Such cliches are simply transferred from some Intuitive Perceivers to all P types, that's why they are wrong. As if P could possibly mean the same thing in ENFP and ISTP. Silly mbti. ISTP TiSe is clean, orderly and diligent. Highly efficient, when he bothers to do something at all. Not dirty and lazy at all. But can handle and master objective reality as it is, throuh immediate extroverted reaction. He is probably fit, jogging every day is a possibility.

likewise, for ISTJ SiTe, aux extroversion shapes the impact that is obvious to the superficial observer. ISTJ has impact through objective judgement.

ISTJ SiTe will bring order to environment. your car mechanic brings oder to the garage and will teach the apprentice to be on time, even if he himself may be less punctual. because he does not like to adapt to chaos, he likes to be able to understand his environment, like he tries to understand a car. it needs to be predictable. the function of the apprentice ought to be exactly defined, likewise the function of the master engineer, himself is defined. ideally according to competency. this is objective judgement, the subject is confined to clear and rigid boundaries of what he can or can not do, in general, based on what he is familiar with.

(in contrast the TiSe type can always "try to pull things off", because in his view, competency is situative, as is his adaptability, thus dynamic, unpredictable like the performance of an athlete, can't be judged in advance or in general. TiSe can have unfounded confidence in the sense of being daring, should always be strong, SiTe has experience based confidence, could be great or humble)


where mbti is false:
"ISTJ SiTe has rigid interiority." This is just a predjudice, based on how he reacts to unfamiliar stimuly, which overwhelms him. He needs things to be familiar, but many things are familiar to him (he can master his OWN huge chaos) and he is always trying to expand, but looking for meaningfull additions, not just anything (ideally he might be the owner of an antique items shop). He is imaginative and sensitive and likes to explore strange worlds of video games, with which he familiarizes himself like a chaotic role playing geek, etc.


where socionics is correct:

ISTJ SiTe aka ISTp, the mechanic, can be an artist or can be a punk to society, due to his extreme sensitivity, which is not shared by the extroverted ways of society. he is driven by perception, by the desire to add new impressions into his subjective ductus. he only manages his close environment as much as it needs to be managed, he has no ambition to be dominant in society and his political views are more likely liberal than conservative, (though if you were to force him into dominance, he would probably become oppressive). in other words, he is quite easygoing about the many things around him, that simply don't concern his expertise. he will drink a tea/whisky and let life be and zone out.


likewise ISTP TiSe aka ISTj, the soldier, demands methodological consistency from his environment, also demands the ability to be self responsible through methodological strategy (Ti) and diligence (Se), when he derives values from himself, egocentrically, and projects them onto others, as most people do, early in life. he is a bit of a tight ass motherfucker and clearly comes across as judgemental in that sense.

where mbti or more specifically podlair are generally correct:

JiPe types are "adaptive", they need external stimuli to be activated, need to be invited or involved by something outside of them selves, or else they would just be toads. they look around and see, where they are needed. but are not limited to be slaves, as they can become experts who define and restructure whatever they choose to get involved into. thus, they can be a boss or rather a manager, if thinking type, or a talk show moderator or group therapy therapist, if feeling type.

PiJe types are "directive", they have their own internal drive, like INFJ jodorowsky (watch the docu about his attempt to direct the movie dune), they can create or attract their own environment, driven by their own passion. They can be demanding of others and activate others. As a moderator or boss, they employ or provoke.

 

[Brontosaurie]

i always pictured Jodorowsky as ENTP but INFJ makes sense also.

 

[nanook]

actually he seems more like INTJ/INTp NiTe with his snarling smile, but he still seems like a good example for fully subjective (introverted) directiveness. much like friggin dali. both are not really in close social resonance with anyone. and do their own insane (introverted) thing.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

nanook, I agreed with your post in full, or at least there is not much I conflict with. I don't have any specific comments at the moment, but in the meantime it serves as a good followup of where I was going.

Stereotypological perspective B:

Ti and Se function pairs will be constantly gathering information in real-time from the environment and analyzing. So a TiSe/ISTP will be more effective in novel situations that require real-time problem solving.

The first thing I'd point out is that Se is strongly related to novelty, as well as Ne. It's simply the nature of the extraverted perception to be drawn to novelty, and the difference lies in whether the novelty is sought to discover new relationships (compounding novelties) or if the novelty is sought to gather the data in is present, tangible, relevant form that can be readily utilized (thus intensity or immediate relevance).

Fundamentally, I don't see any congruence between this hypothetical 'major strength' of the ISTP type and auto mechanics. However, if a car were to have a minor issue without any mechanics around, the next best thing would be any given ISTP, either with or without the necessary supply of tools and parts. They are likely very good with diagnostics, interpretation, and troubleshooting.*

Spoiler

I think back to Archie comics where Archie's old jalopy would break down / 'need a tune-up' as a recurring theme. Once, they (A and J) were in the woods on a double date and Archie's car broke down and he took Jughead's belt to replace the fan belt on his car. This is an ISTP/ISTp interaction if you ask me. I can't imagine an ISTp/SiTe mechanic using any part to repair a car that wasn't prescribed by the repair manual, so their usefulness in novel situations that require real-time resource gathering and analysis ... is nil, when compared to the TiSe.

The point about Se and novel situations I agree with, but real-time analysis should apply more to SeTi than TiSe, as the sensory aspect comes first with supportive thinking. With Ti in the primary position, would it not seek to build a comprehensive mental mastery which is by nature detached from in-the-moment action?

I'm not saying TiSe can't functionally take on novel situations, but that it would have to over-rely on Se, whereas dominant Si as a sensory perception function is always and inherently approaching reality from a hands-on situational perspective. With regards to adaptability(as in the Archie scenario), Si is Irrational and Si with supportive practical Te thinking should excel in accidental/contingent situations unlike orderly Rational Ti(unless of course TiSe has prepared a contingency plan).

*Here I'd continue to make the argument that an ISTP would not be as likely to 'read-up' on something as you've indicated, as I believe they stereotypically need to learn 'hands-on', by physically interacting with the object of their study. It's my belief that reading about a subject engages the introverted perception functions not the extraverted ones so an ISTp has a natural advantage with regards to procedural understanding or referencing the manual.

Okay, within the context of perception/judgment functions, I agree that Si/Ni is more information based than Ti/Fi. But reading a book about cars takes time away from actually interacting with the car, so would Si being a sensory function really take to the manual quicker than Ti being a thinking/logic function? The only way I can see that is if you consider Te; if a problem is straightforward it's more practical & less time-consuming to reference the manual.

Regarding the 'manual' and introverted perception functions ... in the field of auto-mechanics I believe that Si would have a clear and decisive advantage over Ni. This is one area where an individual needs to understand exactly what they're reading in the context they're reading it in. Through study of the manual, an Ni-type would probably try to build a whole-picture understanding of what they've read from cover to cover, or to pick and choose concepts which seem relevant to the individual's understanding. Of course, they are now lacking in important details. They may not remember the correct tension for certain bolts/belts or the correct type of oil for a given engine, but they'll know exactly why (too tight puts strain on the parts or the oil pump injection nozzle is too small for that viscosity of oil etc......) These are things that are relevant and meaningful to the Ni, and enable the Se to fulfill its purpose with a 'generalized' (inductive) understanding of the task.

I don't disagree here.

ISTP mechanic: "tighten those bolts, but not 'too' tight." (uncertain experiential quality > clearly defined quality, Si > Thinking)
ISTp apprentice: "how tight is too tight?" (asking for a clearly defined quality, Thinking > Sensing)
ISTP mechanic: "What../? Here, just let me do it." (inability to communicate instinctual ability with a preference for self-reliance, Si > Thinking)


ISTp mechanic: "tighten those bolts to 35 nm with the torque wrench" (clearly defined quality, Thinking > Sensing)
ISTP apprentice: "ok...." (comes close, doesn't bother getting it perfect).

 

[nanook]

I think TiSe is a reliable mechanic to take care of the airplaines at the base, while SiTe is the car lover who has crazy oldtimers that need special care. Si, subjective sensation is probably not really all that gifted at rotating precise objective shapes around in his mind, not an engineer at all, probably clumsy and much more gifted at being a cook and wine connoisseur. but has the patience to maintain a database of odd car parts and where to receive them, so i do see him owning a garage. he could do in pottery or stone masonry as well, something that requires a lot of subjective remembrance of routines. is patient with the horses in front of the plow. Si is probably including the internal feel of how a screw goes tight along the clock, but not so much the ability to tell the distance of 5 inches by looking at it (actually, i hardly believe this myself, since it involves memory). how to apply stickers to a car, with a subjective eye? he is probably slow at work, because he needs to compensate for his subjectivity. he likes hie routine action, while he is singing a song. i'm really making all of this up, i just speculate what subjective (introverted) sensation might be.