1. ## Subtypes

I know that there are two possible subtypes, but when people are balanced between the two subtypes and can't choose one, does that mean that they don't have a subtype?

Or is it that a person must fall into one of the subtype categories?

And how does a person determine which subtype they fall in?

2. Well, like I was trying explain before..about biases and such. When we were talking about functions as a whole on another forum, we (not you guys, another group) were chatting on which ones we could not live without. I remember thinking and typing to them: I would not want to be without N. This was wayyyyyyyyyy before I even knew what a subtype was. So, so far, I think it is a bias of a preference but Im open to anything else plausible. And...if true... why is it a bias of a preference? It makes me wonder if the bias is formed in order to cope with past existence... or perhaps it has biological components... or a combination of the two. Or maybe something entirely different :x

3. ## Re: Subtypes

Originally Posted by Hugo
I know that there are two possible subtypes, but when people are balanced between the two subtypes and can't choose one, does that mean that they don't have a subtype?

Or is it that a person must fall into one of the subtype categories?

And how does a person determine which subtype they fall in?
Isnt this what a split subtype is?

4. I wonder if a subtype is simply an emphasised function... in which case couldn't there be any amount of them between 2 and 8?

5. ## Re: Subtypes

Originally Posted by Zeia
Isnt this what a split subtype is?
I'm not even sure if such a thing exists. It was my understanding (or misunderstanding) that there was such a thing as split subtypes.

6. ## Re: Subtypes

Originally Posted by Hugo
Originally Posted by Zeia
Isnt this what a split subtype is?
I'm not even sure if such a thing exists. It was my understanding (or misunderstanding) that there was such a thing as split subtypes.
One of your topics includes the following quote from socionics.com

From socionics.com

Quote:
Although there are two main functions, a dominant function and an auxiliary, a person can sometimes prefer one function better then the other. So sometimes it is the dominant over the auxiliary, sometimes it is the auxiliary over the dominant. If an ENFp prefers Intuition over Feeling then they are Intuitive subtype, if an ESTj prefers Sensing over Thinking, they are Sensing subtype. Sometimes this preference is quite balanced, so it is not possible to tell which subtype a person is. So the most recognisable types are normally the ones with the preference for the dominant function. For the second part of the question: A good publication requires some time. Yes, there are plans for a publication in English, however it might not happen for quite a while.
End quote.

I think that when the two are balanced then you have the Archetypal type. But subtypes explain the differences in that type. Thus you have two groups, 1. subtype and 2. subtype. Taking this further an archetype would not have a subtype correct? It would be an equal balanced one considering that it is the perfect example of that group.[/b]

7. ## Re: Subtypes

Originally Posted by Zeia
I think that when the two are balanced then you have the Archetypal type. But subtypes explain the differences in that type. Thus you have two groups, 1. subtype and 2. subtype. Taking this further an archetype would not have a subtype correct? It would be an equal balanced one considering that it is the perfect example of that group.[/b]
Thanks. But then I'm thinking that if someone is balanced between two subtypes then don't they actually belong to the subtype connected with their dominant function?

8. ## Re: Subtypes

[quote="Hugo"]
Originally Posted by Zeia
I think that when the two are balanced then you have the Archetypal type. But subtypes explain the differences in that type. Thus you have two groups, 1. subtype and 2. subtype. Taking this further an archetype would not have a subtype correct? It would be an equal balanced one considering that it is the perfect example of that group.[/b]
Thanks. But then I'm thinking that if someone is balanced between two subtypes then don't they actually belong to the subtype connected with their dominant function?[/quote

If it was balanced it would mean that neither was more dominant, basically you may have dominant Ti but use Ne more so it balances it out, you use them both the same amount of time.

9. ## Re: Subtypes

Originally Posted by Zeia
If it was balanced it would mean that neither was more dominant, basically you may have dominant Ti but use Ne more so it balances it out, you use them both the same amount of time.
But if you look at the quote from socionics.com, an INTj's dominant function is always no matter which function the INTj prefers as a subtype.

If you don't prefer one function over the other then doesn't that automatically mean that your dominant function is also your subtype? So for example, if you are INTj and have no subtype preference, then you automatically have a logical subtype because your dominant function is ?

10. I thought about that and it confused me. I really have no idea how to answer that except that if I prefer Ne over Ti that makes me an Extrovert... And I couldnt see me as that... Logically that would mean your preferred subtype is your dominant type... So I really dont know.

11. Would it depend on how you occupied yourself? If you spent more time doing things which required over would that make you INTj intuitive subtype?

12. Originally Posted by ishysquishy
Would it depend on how you occupied yourself? If you spent more time doing things which required over would that make you INTj intuitive subtype?
I think that's the theory.

13. I thought subtypes were to do with preference, not necessity.

14. Originally Posted by Hugo
I thought subtypes were to do with preference, not necessity.
I agree, while its possible for someone to do something that revolves around a certain function, that still dosnt apply to them being astute to choose one over another...

15. Originally Posted by Hugo
I thought subtypes were to do with preference, not necessity.
Why seperate the two? Which is a bit what Im saying-- using a preference for a necessity that varies from past to current which creates a bias for the dominant or secondary preference.

The funny thing for me is that I continually test low for E and J. In finer light I test nearly equally in Fe, Ni, Ne, and Fi. Fe and Ni are slighlty stronger than the last two yet nearly equal to each other. I'm barely passing as an ENFj. Now my mother is an INFx (I dont have the patience to test her again lol, takes too long for the computer-unfriendly) so I wonder how much of that I pick up. It's not exactly like one is testing for innate only. There are theories for picking up nurture, too, and they are very plausible. So, when we type under this system, how accurate is it from the day we were a wee bit zygote? And how much are we picking up from nurture? ...and how accurate are the results each week?--because we do fluctuate. I can tell you that I feel 50% different than I did right before Christmas. Then there is the issue of bias towards a survival necessity. Why would I use Fe if it simply "was not working out" in a specific time frame? I mean, I could make an arguement for why Ni is working out for me in this time frame of my life and why Fe might have been more useful when I was younger.

16. That's where socionics gets meesy.

17. Yeah, for sure =( Probably the down-fall of a duality system used for a specific time frame and taken as total truth but eh. A friend of mine had an idea for scoring these theories (Im guessing from some biological method, since he is a botany graduate) but I was too blitzed to exactly remember... I'll ask again lol. btw Hugo, I thought of you when I was looking at some psych catalog for some school. Have you ever thought of taking upper grad classes for psychometrics? Or maybe you have already? I dunno but I thought of you when I saw it.

18. Really?

I'm (seriously) touched.

Yeah, for sure =( Probably the down-fall of a duality system used for a specific time frame and taken as total truth but eh.
I think socionists created a solution by saying that an I(N)Tj is more dual to E(S)Fj than to ES(F)j.

20. So Fe/Si /subtype Si is more dual to Ti/Ne /subtype Ne? That seems doable by the theory.

21. Yes

#### Posting Permissions

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