subtypes and id functions

[hellothere]

What I'm wondering is how subtypes are reflected in the id functions.

Having read some of the old subtype threads, I gather this:

Reflection in super ego:
- creative subtypes have a weaker ("less resistant") PoLR but can better use their role functions
- vice versa for accepting subtypes

Reflection in super id:
- accepting subtypes have a weaker suggestive function, hence they are more appreciative of input from someone strong in this function
- creative subtypes have a stronger suggestive function hence do not need it as much from others

What about in the id?

To simplify things, consider an INTj. Is the Ne subtype more likely to display use of Ni, while the Ti subtype is more likely to display use of Te? Or is it the opposite, or something more complicated?

[Expat]

The simple answer is that, although the concept of subtypes is very useful to describe variations within one type - if we say that someone is an "ESFp-Fi" we get a different image from an "ESFp-Se" - it becomes increasingly speculative as you get into details such as what you are describing. Yes, most people tend to hold the view that the subtype is also reflected on the 3rd and perhaps the 4 functions. But all the others? I don't know. The very concept of subtypes may be unnecessary theoretically, despite its practical usefulness.

[hellothere]

I think that functional preferences and/or functional strengths lie on a continuum, and so subtypes are a good way of expressing what happens within Model A as you move along those continuums

[Expat]

That is one of the propositions, or implications, of smilexian socionics. The problem is that then you have, say, a Ne IJ (exactly halfway between INTj and INFj) who would then have no preference between Fe and Fi, and none between Te and Ti. Such a person might belong in lunatic asylum.

[hellothere]

That is one of the propositions, or implications, of smilexian socionics. The problem is that then you have, say, a Ne IJ (exactly halfway between INTj and INFj) who would then have no preference between Fe and Fi, and none between Te and Ti. Such a person might belong in lunatic asylum.

I don't see why this is necessarily the case, but I get the sense that this is not something that is easily argued so I won't try.

[hellothere]

Even if there is no agreement about this, I am still interested in hearing people's opinions

another question: do you think that one subtype (accepting or producing) is more likely to look like their quasi identical?

[Exodus]

I find Te concerns way more annoying than Ti-INTjs do - they better represent the Workaholic social role. Some ESxj-Si's have much more noticeable demonstrative Se. (On a side note, I find demonstrative Se very attractive.) I'm sure it works out for the other types/functions, but you get the idea.

In short, I don't think it's nearly as ambiguous as Expat says.

[Exodus]

More like INFjs.

[Exodus]

Axis? If I understand you correctly, it's supposed to be confined to a single temperament. Gulenko has a different four-subtype system where each corresponds to a temperament.

[hellothere]

pure speculation, but taking the INTj-Ne example-

perhaps there are two types within the subtype:
1) Ne/Ni is stronger than INTj-Ti
2) Ne/Si is more valued than INTj-Ti

perhaps one is more like an ENTp, while the other is more like the INFj?

[Exodus]

pure speculation, but taking the INTj-Ne example-

perhaps there are two types within the subtype:
1) Ne/Ni is stronger than INTj-Ti
2) Ne/Si is more valued than INTj-Ti

Yes, this is the best way to think about it.

perhaps one is more like an ENTp, while the other is more like the INFj?

Not really - ENTp and INTj have equally "strong" Ne and Ti. Otherwise it just doesn't make sense.

[hellothere]

Yes, this is the best way to think about it.

What differences then do you see between these two versions of the same subtype? And which one do you think you are?