Socionics and MBTI Differences
Explaining the Differences between MBTI and Socionics is generally cumbersome and monotonous as I must do this every time someone mentions a term like "PoLR", "quadra", or "duality" in an argument despite the topic of discussion is someone's mbti or cognitive function type. There are various methods to disprove this and they shall be organized below. I must add, one may disagree with my socionics typings or my own analysis of how the theories are structured, but it would become impossible to disagree with the fundamental differences between the 'functions' of both MBTI and Socionics or the archetypes for the theories (one should see radical differences between ENFJ and EIE, for instance). Beyond the semantics of whether or not the ideas of 'fact' or 'truth' exist in this world, I declare MBTI and Socionics to be different theories where one can be a different type in either system, and thus indisputably true.
Table of Contents
Basic Definitions of Elements
The fundamental definitions of the elements are very different, as shown by this insightful spreadsheet that I obtained from another site. As you can see, there are massive differences between systems, with only some noticeable similarities between the two.
Also see:
Elements Descriptions on Wikisocion
MBTI Functions Definitions on the Myer & Briggs Foundation Site
Various Other MBTI Descriptions
The differences between the descriptions should be rather obvious and something one does not need to take much effort in elucidating.
The Names of the Archetypes
The names of the archetypes in socionics have distinct names that should easily differentiate between the two systems. For instance, take a look at EIE (ENFj), which is named "Hamlet" by the socionists who made the descriptions. This should be strange for the uninformed, as Hamlet is generally typed as INFP or INTJ in mbti. Another example is for LII (INTj), by which it is often referred to as "Robespierre". However, it would be rather odd that Maximilien Robespierre, an obvious INTJ in mbti, would be typed as Ti base in socionics. Napoleon Bonaparte, an obvious ENTJ in mbti, is the archetype name for SLE (ESTp) and SEE (ESFp) (interchangeably). Julius Caesar, another obvious mbti ENTJ, is often the archetype name for SEE. Other examples exist for the archetype nicknames, but the figures are more obscure and not as obvious as these. But perhaps, just maybe, the systems were designed differently.
Purpose of Each Theory
The purposes for both theories are different, and the means by which they type people are often also, separated. For instance, mbti generally analyzes the human personality and behavior as it is. However, socionics observes things like a person's political & philosophical ideologies, motivations, inclinations, and role in society on top of their personality and behavior. You generally know as an (un)spoken rule that you cannot type someone a particular type just because they are a liberal or conservative, meanwhile it is the exact opposite for socionics. They cannot be the same system if they judge and measure different things.
Structure of Theorem
The structures of the two systems are immensely different. Below, you can see concepts and ideas that exist solely in mbti, solely in socionics, and some fundamental but broad similarities.
Resources:
This is everything that has not been hyperlinked in the appropriate section.
Where I borrowed the spreadsheet:
The Names of the Archetypes: