So there's these archetypes. For example the Heroic archetype supposedly correlates to your dominant trait.

Except we know MBTT's "dominant" is actually extroverted and "extroverted" is actually accepting. That is, if the IXXX=IXXx hypothesis is correct -- saying e.g. that INTJ is really INTj, hence is really TiNe instead of NiTe. But that's using our definition of Ti and Ne...

Let me try and put this straight.

INTJ has the ego traits T and N.
MBTT calls them Te2 and Ni1.
Socionics calls them Ti1 and Ne2.
To convert, all we had to do was substitute; e2/i1, i1/e2.
So when the claim is made that Ni1 = Heroic
we translate that Ne2 = Heroic.

So for example, Ne1 and Ne2 (using socionics definitions) are both Heroic, whereas Ti1 and Ti2 are Parental.
Simply put, Heroic archetypes arise when dealing with bodies whereas Parental archetypes deal with fields.

This is pretty weird, but if correct it would explain why MBTT (allegedly) produces these archetypes in such a manner, as well as why socionists haven't come up with a similar scheme of archetype-trait associations. It just isn't as conducive to the way we map the traits.

Of course this is all strictly hypothetical