Variance in how functions are designated

Anything related to the theory of socionics.

Variance in how functions are designated

Postby hewber » Wed Nov 09, 2016 4:15 am

Listing descriptions of the Functions, I read on the Site of designations of Functions oddly different from how others portray them. For example, Socionics says the SuperEgo Block has in it Se, then Ti (the latter meaning Inferior or Fourth), as opposed to Te and Si respectively. Can anyone explain this, or is it written wrong?
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:17 am

Re: Variance in how functions are designated

Postby malyshka » Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:19 pm

Socionics types list 2 valued functions, followed by 2 un-valued ones that oppose the first two, followed by 2 valued function, and another 2 un-valued ones that oppose the second set. This is different from MBTI which lists 4 valued functions and doesn't talk much about the the other four.

Socionics list of functions for any type is like this:
Ego block - 2 valued functions
Super-ego block - 2 un-valued subdued functions
Super-id block - 2 valued needed functions
Id block - 2 un-valued mostly ignored function

MBTI functional listing is as follows:
4 valued functions

So of course for any type the order of listing of the functions is going to be different for MBTI and Socionics.
But which functions are valued does not change. This is important to notice.
Socionics ENFp type values Ne, Fi, Te, and Si, which is same as the valued functions listed for MBTI's ENFP.
It's just that the order in which they are listed is different. This comes from Socionics Model A where Superego block functions are considered to be conscious and in close relation to the Ego block functions.
If you want to read more about model A, there is a lot of good information on it here:
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2016 8:13 pm

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest