http://www.socionics.com/articles/mbti.htm

Things to consider about MBTI® theory (Part 1)
对MBTI理论的思考（第一部分）
18 February 2007
by Sergei Ganin

You have probably noticed that the types on this website have slightly different acronym: three capital letters followed by a small “j” or “p” instead of the traditional four capital letter acronym. This is because there is a slight incompatibility between the MBTI® and Socionics/Jungian type due to the inconsistency in MBTI theory. This incompatibility sometimes (note sometimes) appears between Introvert types. As for Extrovert types – MBTI theory, Socionics and Jung seem fully compatible.

你可能已留意到，在这个网站上采取的类型缩写稍有不同：三个大写字母后紧跟一个小写的“j/p”，而非传统的四个大写字母缩写。这是由于MBTI理论的内部矛盾，致使在MBTI理论与Socionics/荣格类型之间存在着轻度的不一致。这种不一致有时（注意：有时）出现在内倾类型中。至于外倾类型，MBTI理论，Socionics与荣格似乎完全一致。

The reason for this is that when Myers was designing MBTI, she took Jungian typology as the basis for her project. According to Jung, people can be Extroverts (E) or Introverts (I), Thinking (T) or Feeling (F), Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N). So Jungian types ended up looking like this:

出现这种情况的原因是当迈尔斯在设计MBTI时，她将荣格的心理类型学作为其项目的基础。根据荣格的说法，人们可能是外倾（E）或内倾（I），思考（T）或情感（F），感觉（S）或直觉（N）。所以荣格心理类型学最终看来就是这样——

Extraverted Thinking type　外倾思考型
Introverted Thinking type　内倾思考型
Extraverted Feeling type　外倾情感型
Introverted Feeling type　内倾情感型
Extraverted Sensing type　外倾感觉型
Introverted Sensing type　内倾感觉型
Extraverted Intuitive type　外倾直觉型
Introverted Intuitive type　内倾直觉型

Jung also indicated that along with the main function, type could have a secondary function as well, which is different in nature to the primary function. In other words, the type with a main preference for T or F could also have a secondary preference for N or S and types with a main preference for N or S could also have a secondary preference for T or F. The two variations of the same core type would be different from each other, for instance, F type with preference for S would be different from F type with preference for N, and so on.

荣格还指出，伴随主要功能，每个类型还可能有个次要偏好功能，这与主导功能在本质上不同。换句话说，主要偏好T/F的人可能同时会伴有有N/S作为次要偏好，而主要偏好N/S的人同样也会在T/F上有次要偏好。同样类型核心的两种变化导致它们之间有所不同，例如，F型中更偏好S者与更偏好N者表现不同，以此类推。

Myers was particularly interested in the mental processes that were dynamically opposite like E vs. I, S vs. N, T vs. F., because this would allow to formulate a bipolar question – if you prefer one thing then you do not prefer its opposite, theoretically.

迈尔斯与对于那些动态相反的心理过程，例如E/I、S/N、T/F，有着特别的兴趣，因为这使得设定迫选表格成为可能——理论上讲，如果你喜欢某事，那么你就不会喜欢它的对立面。

Myers was faced with the challenge of how to identify which mental process would be the main and which one would be the secondary. For example if a person would show a preference for N and T, then would this be N that is the main preference and T that is the secondary, or vice versa?

而她所面临的挑战则是确定哪种心理过程是主要的，哪种是次要的。例如，如果一个人同时展示了对NT的偏好，那么是先N后T呢，还是相反？ （阅读全文……）

http://www.socionics.com/articles/howto.htm

How to convert MBTI® type to Socionics type
如何将MBTI类型转换为Socionics类型
14 April 2007
by Sergei Ganin

Anyone who had closely read all the articles about Socionics and MBTI® theory compatibility issues has already got a fair idea that there is no straightforward conversion between the two systems. This obviously creates quite a lot of confusion, especially when it comes to the introvert types. The most common question people ask is: “Is MBTI INTJ the same as SocionicsINTp or Socionics INTj?” Some people have created the myth that if you change the last letter of the MBTI introvert type acronym to the opposite then you get a Socionics equivalent, i.e. MBTI INTJ = Socionics INTp. As I said, it is a myth and even though such conversion may work in some cases, it does not work in all cases. So here I’ll try to show how to make such conversion possible without getting into too much trouble.

任何曾仔细阅读过Socionics与MBTI理论兼容性文章的人都会清楚地知道，无法在这两个系统间进行直接转换。很明显，这会造成许多混乱，尤其是在面对内向型时。人们最常问到的问题是：“MBTI中的INTJ与Socionics里的INTp/INTj是同一回事吗？”有些人则陷入迷思，以为将MBTI中内向类型的最后一个字母转换为它的反义字母，即可得到对应的Socionics类型，如：INTJ（在MBTI体系中的）=INTp（在Socionics中的）。依我说，这就是个误区，即使在有些情况下这样的转换得以成立，但并不意味着在所有的情况下它都成立。是以在此，我将试图阐明如何真正实现两种体系间的转换，而不至于惹出太多的麻烦。

The Thinking and Feeling pair of functions is bound together in the same way the Sensing and Intuition pair is. The two functions in a pair always go up against each or fight for the domination if you like. If one of the functions in a pair appears to be Dominant function then the other function in the same pair is Inferior and is well suppressed by the Dominant function, and the domination of the Dominant function is obvious. However, if one of the functions in a pair is Auxiliary, then the other would be Tertiary, which represents the Hidden Agenda. The Auxiliary and Tertiary combination of functions provokes a war between these functions, because there is no clear dominator. On one hand the Auxiliary function is much stronger than Tertiary, however the Tertiary function is the Hidden Agenda and is extremely important. So what happens in reality is that a person find it difficult to separate these two functions in order to give them clear preference, the functions always appear to be mixed up together to a certain degree.

思考与情感这一对功能捆绑在一起，同样的，感觉与直觉也是如此。这两对功能总是彼此对立，争夺主导权。如果一对功能中的一个成了主导功能，那么与它对立的功能即会沦为劣势功能（第四功能），主导功能的统治地位凸显。然而，如果一对功能中较强的一个是辅助功能，那么与它对立的那个则是沦为第三功能，表现为幕后进程（http://www.socionics.com/articles/hiddena.htm）。辅助功能与第三功能这对组合之间时有争战，分不出明显的胜负。一方面，辅助功能强于第三功能，然而，第三功能的幕后进程也同样相当强大。所以，事实上一个人无法真正将这对组合撇清，在它们中指出明确的偏好，在某种程度上，它们总是混在一块儿。

So, if a person’s Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), then such person find it hard to keep these two in peace and may find it difficult to decide whether they are F or T. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), and should be quite easy to separate. Because the Dominant function is Perceiving in this case, the person would be Socionics Perceiving type (XXXp). So if MBTI INTJ person is more uncertain about being T or F than S or N i.e. IN(T/F)J or INxJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTp.

因此，如果一个人的辅助功能与第三功能是情感与思考（或思考与情感），他会发现很难让这两者和平相处，很难确定它们究竟哪个更强点儿。在这种情况下，作为主导功能与劣势功能的感觉与直觉（或直觉与感觉），则很容易区分。因为在这种情况下，主导功能是感知，而这个人将是Socionics中的P型（XXXp）。所以，如果一个MBTI中的INTJ对于他究竟属于T/F中的哪种，比之N/S这一维度上的结果更不确定，意即不知道究竟是IN（T/F）J或INxJ，那么他/她就相当于Socionics中的INTp。

If a person’s Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), then such person may find it difficult to keep these two in friendship and may find it hard to decide whether they are S or N. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), and should be quite easy to divide. Because in this case the Dominant function is Judging, the person would be Socionics Judging type (XXXj). So if MBTI INTJ person is more unsure about being S or N than T or F i.e. I(S/N)TJ or IxTJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTj.

如果一个人的功能与第三功能是感觉与直觉（或直觉与感觉），那么他会发现让这两者保持友好，确定究竟哪个更强点儿也颇为困难。在这种情况下，作为主导功能与劣势功能的情感与思考（或思考与情感），则极易分别。因为在这种情况下，主导功能为判断，此人为Socionics中的J型人（XXXj）。所以，如果一个MBTI中的人对于他究竟更偏向于S/N，比之T/F这一维度上的结果更不确定，意即不明确究竟是I（S/N）TJ或IxTJ，那么他/她就相当于Socionics中的INTj。

So here it is all of the above simplified:

所以，上面所说的一切都简单了——

Unsure about being T or F -> you are Socionics XXXp
Unsure about being S or N -> you are Socionics XXXj

不确定你到底是T/F——你是Socionics中的XXXp
不确定你到底是S/N——你是Socionics中的XXXj

Alternatively if you would like a solid table of conversion between the two systems, you can use the table below:

或者你还是想要两种体系间根据功能维度转换得来的表格，那么就用下面这张好了——

Extroverts
外倾型
MBTI类型 Socionics类型
ENFJ ENFj
ENTJ ENTj
ENFP ENFp
ENTP ENTp
ESFJ ESFj
ESTJ ESTj
ESFP ESFp
ESTP ESTp

Introverts
内倾型
MBTI类型 Socionics类型
INFJ INFx
INTJ INTx
INFP INFx
INTP INTx
ISFJ ISFx
ISTJ ISTx
ISFP ISFx
ISTP ISTx