# Thread: Subtype and Erotic Attitudes within Alpha

1. ## Subtype and Erotic Attitudes within Alpha

These updated graphs illustrate the theory that (1) type and subtype determine erotic attitude; (2)subtype is a continuous spectrum (rather than discrete); and (3) one's subtype preference will determine the relative expression of each of the two erotic attitudes within the type's respective subloop. For example, an INTj with a strong Ti subtype (relative to his/her Ne subtype) would expressive a substantial amount of aggressor attitude; however, no matter how strong the Ti subtype is, the INTj will always be predominantly infantile (although the INTj could theoretically be almost half infantile/half aggressor if Ti was incredibly strong). On the other hand, an INTj with a very strong Ne (relative to his/her Ti) would epitomize infantile attitude (because Ne is the core determinant of infantile expression), and in this case, the aggressor attitude would be almost nonexistent. The basic premise is that types exhibit a mixture of two erotic attitudes (infantile and aggressor, or caregiver and victim) based on their subtype.

I had trouble creating one fully descriptive circle (hence the diagonal line, which represents the problem I ran into illustrating the theory with only one circle), so instead I divided the one circle into two smaller circles, each containing an introverted and extroverted subloop. Comments?

2. Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that there was any transition between INFj and INFp (or the other delta and beta types that end up adjacent to each other on the circle). The graph was meant to solely represents the alpha types, and the other delta/beta types on the graph are the fringe types that just represent the types that share one of alpha's subtypes. The diagonal line through the circle was supposed to show separation between the delta/beta types and to also show that there was no direct transition between the delta and beta types in the circle. The other quadras would each have their own version of the graph with their respective subtypes (e.g., gamma would have a circle with Fi, Te, Se, and Ni instead of the subtypes used here; beta would have Ti, Se, Fe, Ni; etc.).

3. Where's Gamma?

4. Exactly: the complete absence of any common subtypes between alpha and gamma meant that gamma didn't make it on this graph. And you're right, I should have made the connections more explicit on the graph. For example, an ESFj-Fe would identify more with ENFj, and an ESFj-Si would identify more with an ESTj; I probably should have drawn arrows connecting these associations.

5. nice diagram. I like it

6. Good stuff.

7. Originally Posted by ifmd95
in theory, as soon as an INTj is aggressor that INTj is an ISTj. in reality, there is probably enough randomness and noise that we might still call an aggressor INTj if enough of their other behaviors are more INTj than ISTj.
Definitely. This means that when person X, usually typed as INTj, acts like an aggressor, he's being an ISTj.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•