ILE-Ne ~ Sakinorva Databank

The Sakinorva Databank

ILE-Ne

Socionics

in Philosophy, Psychology, and Social Sciences

ILE-Ne ~ Sakinorva Databank

ILE-Ne

Socionics

Philosophy, Psychology, and Social Sciences

e

i

n

s

f

t

p

j

function

ennea

variant

socio

psyche

ENTP 2

7w6 2

sx/so 1

sx/sp 1

LFEV 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1

h

e

x

a

c

o

total votes 11

3

2

2

2

2

1

Click to toggle markup guide.

bold	bold
italic	italic
hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"	[hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"](https://sakinorva.net/library/contextualizing_functions)
	(i){https://i.imgur.com/g0oL9CB.png}

You may not modify this entry's picture.

	Woll Smoth 2025/07/16 (Wed) 22:10:12 #10145
	IDRlabs themselves have stated that not only do they not use Socionics at all saying "We don’t use Socionics at all on this site and so whatever they postulate will have no bearing on the type assessments found here", but they also say that their conceptions of the functions differs greatly from Socioncis as well saying to a commenter who used a definition of Socio Te, "you throw this notion from Socionics out there, which I read as almost the complete inverse of Jung’s idea of the Te type." So yes, IDR is VERY different from Socionics. Not only are the conceptions of the functions different but they also seek to measure different things. Regarding your confusion, I wouldn't worry about it. No typology model is going to be fully true, in other words most typology models/theories are very flawed (whether we are talking about MBTI, Socionics, Enneagram, etc.). Think of it as seeing someone's "best fit" type, many people are not going to perfectly fit into a type in some models but they usually have a "best fit" one if you get what I mean.

Editing post #10145 by Woll Smoth IDRlabs themselves have stated that not only do they not use Socionics at all saying "We don’t use Socionics at all on this site and so whatever they postulate will have no bearing on the type assessments found here", but they also say that their conceptions of the functions differs greatly from Socioncis as well saying to a commenter who used a definition of Socio Te, "you throw this notion from Socionics out there, which I read as almost the complete inverse of Jung’s idea of the Te type." So yes, IDR is VERY different from Socionics. Not only are the conceptions of the functions different but they also seek to measure different things. Regarding your confusion, I wouldn't worry about it. No typology model is going to be fully true, in other words most typology models/theories are very flawed (whether we are talking about MBTI, Socionics, Enneagram, etc.). Think of it as seeing someone's "best fit" type, many people are not going to perfectly fit into a type in some models but they usually have a "best fit" one if you get what I mean.
Replying to post #10145 by Woll Smoth

date	username	vote
21/09/08 09:21	camelmilk	ENTP
20/06/23 18:51	Thyssen	ENTP
20/05/26 16:13	tch	ENTP

date	username	vote
20/06/23 18:51	Thyssen	ENTP
20/05/26 16:13	tch	ENTP

date	username	vote
21/09/08 09:21	camelmilk	7w6
20/06/23 18:51	Thyssen	7w6

date	username	vote
21/09/08 09:21	camelmilk	sx/sp
20/06/23 18:51	Thyssen	sx/so

date	username	vote
21/09/08 09:21	camelmilk	784
20/06/23 18:51	Thyssen	749

date	username	vote
20/06/23 18:51	Thyssen	LFEV