Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: four subtypes

  1. #1
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default four subtypes

    Are there descriptions of these anywhere?
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  2. #2
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The other two being Super-Id functions? I didn't know that theory had actually been developed past conceptualization.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    USA.
    TIM
    INTj
    Posts
    4,497
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    detail had a thread

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=12416

    wasn't aware this is was something that was circulated (the idea)

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    The other two being Super-Id functions? I didn't know that theory had actually been developed past conceptualization.
    ostensibly she meant four subtypes a la something like LSE Te-Te, LSE Te-Si, LSE Si-Te, LSE Si-Si (this is terrible notation but you get the idea).


    i seem to remember rick suggesting that these kinds of extended subtype systems exist among the crazy russian Ti-ists, whereas the estimative subtype is a gulenko creation.

  5. #5
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    ostensibly she meant four subtypes a la something like LSE Te-Te, LSE Te-Si, LSE Si-Te, LSE Si-Si (this is terrible notation but you get the idea).
    That's a horrible concept. What is the point?
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  6. #6
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Gilly had it right.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  7. #7
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    As in which Super-Id function you use more? So if you're an LSE Te-Se, it means Te is more evident in you externally (and maybe internally) than Si, and Se is more evident than Ti?

    It's still a shit idea.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  8. #8
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No, I mean like...

    ENTj subtypes:

    Te: *insert description here*
    Ni: *insert description here*
    Fe: *insert description here* (Perhaps this subtype is too concerned with other people's feelings or is overly boisterous, etc.)
    Si: *insert description here* (Perhaps this subtype tries to take care of people too much, gets too focused on his/her health, has problems with addictions, etc.)
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  9. #9
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [QUOTE=Joy;282905]No, I mean like...

    ENTj subtypes:

    Te: *insert description here*
    Ni: *insert description here*
    Fe: *insert description here* (Perhaps this subtype is too concerned with other people's feelings or is overly boisterous, etc.)
    Si: *insert description here* (Perhaps this subtype tries to take care of people too much, gets too focused on his/her health, has problems with addictions, etc.)[/QUOTE

    What would be the point of this? You may as well just scrap sociotypes altogether.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  10. #10
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nah. Types are still types. Values are still values. Someone can be too focused on an unvalued function though.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  11. #11
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    To be clear, I'm not saying that there are four subtypes.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Joy, you confuse perception with action so much that I've decided to stop reading you. It's not worth my time, because you DO NOT understand socionics.

    Nor do I suspect I could help you understand without the authority of a degree that you require of someone for your trust.

  13. #13
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    No, I mean like...

    ENTj subtypes:

    Te: *insert description here*
    Ni: *insert description here*
    Fe: *insert description here* (Perhaps this subtype is too concerned with other people's feelings or is overly boisterous, etc.)
    Si: *insert description here* (Perhaps this subtype tries to take care of people too much, gets too focused on his/her health, has problems with addictions, etc.)
    Actualy those are Super-Ego; not sure that's ever been suggested before. I do remember past discussons of types like Ti-IEI, Si-ILE, etc., but I'm fairly sure it was just speculation.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  14. #14
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    As in which Super-Id function you use more? So if you're an LSE Te-Se, it means Te is more evident in you externally (and maybe internally) than Si, and Se is more evident than Ti?

    It's still a shit idea.
    That's the Id block.

    You guys both need to go back to the basics You should probably know this stuff by now (Joy perhaps moreso than Ezra).
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  15. #15
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,630
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There are infinite subtypes, given that there are infinite points on a curve.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  16. #16
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Joy, you confuse perception with action so much that I've decided to stop reading you. It's not worth my time, because you DO NOT understand socionics.

    Nor do I suspect I could help you understand without the authority of a degree that you require of someone for your trust.
    Tony, you confuse psychotic dellusion with reality so much that I've decided to continue not reading you. It's not worth my norepinepherine, because you DO NOT understand life.

    Nor do I suspect I could help you understand without the inanity and unquestioning subservience of a degree that you would require of someone for your consideration.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  17. #17
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    That's the Id block.

    You guys both need to go back to the basics You should probably know this stuff by now (Joy perhaps moreso than Ezra).
    Yes, I do "know this stuff". I'm asking if there has been a four subtype theory, and if there have, whether or not descriptions were written. The two subtype theory isn't even truly "traditional" socionics. I don't see the harm in speculating that one could be more focused on one of their other two conscious functions (I don't see how someone could be most focused on an unconscious function though, so the other suggestion here doesn't make sense to me).
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  18. #18
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    Tony, you confuse psychotic dellusion with reality so much that I've decided to continue not reading you. It's not worth my norepinepherine, because you DO NOT understand life.


    Seriously though, tcaudilllg, it does not take a degree for me to trust someone, nor does a degree mean that I will trust someone. (Hmmmm I forgot that I'm an ENTj - ISTp in your theory. I can see where you're coming from with your post I think.)
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  19. #19
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    Yes, I do "know this stuff".
    Then why did you reference the Super-Ego as the Super-Id?

    I'm asking if there has been a four subtype theory, and if there have, whether or not descriptions were written. The two subtype theory isn't even truly "traditional" socionics. I don't see the harm in speculating that one could be more focused on one of their other two conscious functions (I don't see how someone could be most focused on an unconscious function though, so the other suggestion here doesn't make sense to me).
    I don't think there have been any proposals worth investigating, no. But we could give one a go.

    I think focus on Super-Ego functions would be just as easily denoted by the two normal Ego subtypes, and express the same tendencies in functional strengths and preferences. With super-id subtypes, you get functional strength/preference combinations that kinda go against the normal makeup of model A and normal subtype theory, which is the only real reason they would be worth investigating. For example, a Ti-IEI would be stronger in logic, hence weaker in ethics; normally we call this Ni-IEI, but this one has a higher preference for the Ti/Fe spectrum than the Ni/Se one.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  20. #20
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    Then why did you reference the Super-Ego as the Super-Id?
    Hmmmm it appears I was mistaken when I said that you were correct. My fault for skimming too quickly.

    I don't think there have been any proposals worth investigating, no. But we could give one a go.

    I think focus on Super-Ego functions would be just as easily denoted by the two normal Ego subtypes, and express the same tendencies in functional strengths and preferences. With super-id subtypes, you get functional strength/preference combinations that kinda go against the normal makeup of model A and normal subtype theory, which is the only real reason they would be worth investigating. For example, a Ti-IEI would be stronger in logic, hence weaker in ethics; normally we call this Ni-IEI, but this one has a higher preference for the Ti/Fe spectrum than the Ni/Se one.
    Yeah, I considered that.

    The idea sort of revolves around the concept that a person's subtype is just their focus and it can change over time. I believe there are some who think that subtypes are inborn, so this theory would make less sense to them.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  21. #21
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy View Post
    Nah. Types are still types. Values are still values. Someone can be too focused on an unvalued function though.
    So what's to say they don't actually value it? What's to say you're confusing their 5th or 6th function for a PoLR or third function?
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  22. #22
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,169
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    That's the Id block.
    I realised that a while after I'd posted it.

    (Joy perhaps moreso than Ezra).
    "Perhaps"? She joined two years before me! That's a few months after Expat. Of course she should know this by now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilly View Post
    Then why did you reference the Super-Ego as the Super-Id?
    THAT's what confused me. Because she said that, it made me fuck up. I thought she was referring to the Super-Id. So it wasn't my fault, it was hers.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  23. #23
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I never actually typed that... lol. Just skimmed the thread and read Gilly's post the wrong way.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

Posting Permissions

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