INTP/INTJ poll

[viche]

Please carefully read through these profiles and answer the poll questions. Even if you think you now your type I would advise to read the profiles first just to double check and be sure.

MBTI INTP: http://typelogic.com/intp.html
MBTI INTJ: http://typelogic.com/intj.html
Socionics LII: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=LII
Socionics ILI: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=ILI

 

[EyeSeeCold]

*Disregarding the fact that everyone here comes from an MBTI background and will attach to the one with the first sign of similarity.

I told you a lot of people who's crossed over successfully acknowledges the ambiguity of the descriptions. You would know this if you ever visited the16types, which you still haven't done. Why do you feel that you don't need the perspectives of others? Isn't closing yourself to the opinions of others fostering ignorance(no disrespect)?

 

[viche]

I told you a lot of people who's crossed over successfully acknowledges the ambiguity of the descriptions. You would know this if you ever visited the16types, which you still haven't done. Why do you feel that you don't need the perspectives of others? Isn't closing yourself to the opinions of others fostering ignorance(no disrespect)?

I put this poll up precisely to gather "perspective of others"

Let other people read and make up their own mind without pushing your views onto them.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

By all means, I will let them, I already know what we are capable of. We don't accept things for truth before we mentally process them.

But if there exists ambiguity in these writings and you know it, what will a poll result matter? What good will it do to know that 100 INTPs identify with ILI or LII, you decide, if the descriptions are not adequately distinguished and free from grey areas that invite doubt? As long as there is less than 100% clarity we cannot accept these articles by themselves as the final decision on which is the more accurate choice for INTP.

We can agree to disagree or we can work on agreeing to the same thing. I'd prefer the latter, if you will.

 

[Melllvar]

The second and fourth choices are identical. I suspect you meant to have INTJ listed in the fourth choice.

 

[viche]

ah yeah I was in a hurry when i made this poll - i'll create a new one as it seems I cannot edit the options now

 

[Cegorach]

Fixed.

I'll just get rid of the other thread now since it's unnecessary.
Edit: Last letters in brackets fixed as well.

 

[viche]

Fixed.

I'll just get rid of the other thread now since it's unnecessary.

thanks! could you also please fix the last letters for four letter codes in brackets? that's another thing that i wanted to edit in new poll as in hurry i mixed them up also

I am MBTI INTP and socionics ILI (INTj) should be changed to (INTp)
I am MBTI INTP and socionics LII (INTp) should be changed to (INTj)
I am MBTI INTJ and socionics ILI (INTj) should be changed to (INTp)
I am MBTI INTJ and socionics LII (INTp) should be changed to (INTj)

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Did someone reorder the links?

 

[Acrogamnon]

For what it's worth, I come from socionics background, and am very certain of being a LII. Figuring out my MBTI type was a bit trickier, but after a couple years of exposure, it looks like INTP, not INTJ. That said, if I had read the linked ILI description without prior knowledge of socionics, I would have found it mostly fitting for me.

By the way, there may be a cultural difference in type descriptions. Socionics has been largely developed in USSR and post-soviet countries, where success and advancement in virtually all fields traditionally heavily relied on connections, coercion and other Fi/Se stuff, while actually knowing what to do is more an afterthought. Thus some socionics descriptions will downplay the practical competency and abilities of NT types, particularly Ti/Ne ones, compared to MBTI.

 

[viche]

By the way, there may be a cultural difference in type descriptions. Socionics has been largely developed in USSR and post-soviet countries, where success and advancement in virtually all fields traditionally heavily relied on connections, coercion and other Fi/Se stuff, while actually knowing what to do is more an afterthought. Thus some socionics descriptions will downplay the practical competency and abilities of NT types, particularly Ti/Ne ones, compared to MBTI.

It's not just NT types but all intuitive types. Socionics does this because it incorporates type intertype relations into the theory (something lacking in MBTI). Within this theory the intuitive types are paired with sensing types. Thus descriptions of all intuitive types go over how they suck as sensing and how important it is for them to recruit aid of their dual partners.