Accepting/Producing Subtypes

[hoodrat]

So assuming that accepting/producing subtypes is a real phenomenon, an accepting subtype (leading function subtype) would get along better with their semi-dual?

[diljs]

Not sure which of these you're asking, but

Better with their semi dual than with their dual?

No.

Better with their semi dual than a producing subtype would be?

Yes, that would make sense. Accepting subtype would place less value on the creative function (semi dual's POLR).

[hoodrat]

Not sure which of these you're asking, but

Better with their semi dual than with their dual?

No.

Better with their semi dual than a producing subtype would be?

Yes, that would make sense. Accepting subtype would place less value on the creative function (semi dual's POLR).

yeah, the second one, lol

[strrrng]

The idea of accepting/producing has little to do with subtypes imo. If an ENTp is a Ti subtype, Ti is his leading function. Obviously not under aushra's definitions, but in essence, in his mental awareness, Ti is his dominant function.

[FDG]

The idea of accepting/producing has little to do with subtypes imo. If an ENTp is a Ti subtype, Ti is his leading function. Obviously not under aushra's definitions, but in essence, in his mental awareness, Ti is his dominant function.

Creative Ti of course, not accepting Ti

[Trevor]

So assuming that accepting/producing subtypes is a real phenomenon, an accepting subtype (leading function subtype) would get along better with their semi-dual?

yes.

[strrrng]

Creative Ti of course, not accepting Ti

No

[FDG]

No

Then it's bullshit.

[strrrng]

Then it's bullshit.

No, it isn't. Come out of the insular model A paradigm and actually watch functions in action.

[Expat]

No, it isn't. Come out of the insular model A paradigm and actually watch functions in action.

*shrugs* Come out of the insular "my own subjective experiences and understanding of functions trump everything" and try to actually understand model A in action. Hey, this is fun. Your turn now.

[hoodrat]

I don't think I'm really going to consider subtypes in my understanding of socionics. You say that having the producing subtype means you lead with your creative? So basically your type isn't your type.... your mirror is your type....

I think it's kind of a load. I agree with what rick said on his site about subtypes.... yeah, types have differences within themselves, but it's more than 2, it's like 40... lol

Also, I've noticed the more I interact with my dual, the more they start to get back to this "old school" version of ILI i have memorized in the back of my mind.....

This leads me to think that maybe the differences between the same type is just from lack of dualization and placing unnatural/uncomforatable emphasis on different functions due to external societal pressure?.....

[strrrng]

*shrugs* Come out of the insular "my own subjective experiences and understanding of functions trump everything" and try to actually understand model A in action. Hey, this is fun. Your turn now.

I have incorporated multiple models into my experience, examining each of them, and expanding upon them. Also, I have neglected all models at times, attempting to isolate certain variables in functions/types/etc. That's hardly insular.

[FDG]

No, it isn't. Come out of the insular model A paradigm and actually watch functions in action.

It's hardly possible that an ENTP is an accepting-Ti dominant type. That's an INTJ or ISTJ. Is that hard to understand? Do you need a drill on your fucking brain? By the way, I am always criticized because I do not use Model A. So inform yourself before spewing BS.

[Gilly]

I have incorporated multiple models into my experience, examining each of them, and expanding upon them. Also, I have neglected all models at times, attempting to isolate certain variables in functions/types/etc. That's hardly insular.

You've proven your insularity in various other ways. I'm quite honestly surprised, with as little personal investment as he probably has in your opinions, that Expat actually bothers responding to you.

[strrrng]

It's hardly possible that an ENTP is an accepting-Ti dominant type. That's an INTJ or ISTJ. Is that hard to understand? Do you need a drill on your fucking brain? By the way, I am always criticized because I do not use Model A. So inform yourself before spewing BS.

The problem is that you're classifying the functions as accepting and producing. And what model do you use, lol?

You've proven your insularity in various other ways. I'm quite honestly surprised, with as little personal investment as he probably has in your opinions, that Expat actually bothers responding to you.

I'm quite surprised you do as well.

[Gilly]

I'm quite surprised you do as well.

No you're not

[strrrng]

No you're not

I guess not lol...I kind of do expect you to respond to me. Why is this?

[Gilly]

Do I really have to explain it to you?

[strrrng]

Do I really have to explain it to you?

Oh, so you're insinuating some patronizing, role-model shit. Gotcha

[Gilly]

That's part of it

[Gilly]

aahahaha, maybe I am a 3...*headdesk*

[strrrng]

aahahaha, maybe I am a 3...*headdesk*

Or a 6. You know they like to take the parent role fairly often.

[Gilly]

Really? I thought that was kind of contrary to the nature of a 6...

[strrrng]

Really? I thought that was kind of contrary to the nature of a 6...

No, it relates to the reactive harmonic styles. 4's want to be rescued, 8's want to be the rescuer, and 6's want to be both.

[Gilly]

How does that work?

[strrrng]

How does that work?

The reactive harmonic style types have issues with trust and emotional abandonment. So, they fixate on the rescue/parent shit, to different degrees. The 4's, feeling defective, are waiting for someone to take care of them; the 6's, feeling insecure, want to temper this with a combination of support from others and being a support for others; the 8's, avoiding their weak side, want to be the one to help, or "parent", others. That's it in a nutshell.

[Gilly]

Interesting.

[strrrng]

Interesting.

And I still think reactive harmonic works best for you.

[Gilly]

Interesting.

[strrrng]

Interesting.

And I still think reactive harmonic works best for you.

[Gilly]

Interesting.

[strrrng]

Interesting.

I think 6 could work for you.

[hoodrat]

thanks for derailing my thread homies

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Expat]

You've proven your insularity in various other ways. I'm quite honestly surprised, with as little personal investment as he probably has in your opinions, that Expat actually bothers responding to you.

It's not so much about responding to him as such -- this forum has being going, recently, through a phase of mostly banality + a development of an atmosphere that some people have felt like complaining about - besides the old issues that never go away but nobody cares much about - like Phaedrus, tcaudilllg etc (Phaedrus seems to have essentially condemned himself to irrelevancy by just stating the same things in an increasingly crude 'you are an idiot' tone - actually from the little I catch of what he writes he has become a sort of cartoon of himself, I guess not even Jonathan would still bother to defend him now). Anyway, one of the few issues 'lying underneath' that could still generate some relevant discussion, especially as it was still emerging now and then, was the old 'Ni + model X' issue, which is why I brought it to the front with my 'On Ni' thread. Essentially an attempt to get some relevant discussion going. It has succeeded, up to a point, except that it's reaching a dead-end. But on the other hand, it has indirectly encouraged some other discussions and relevant threads, such as Diana's.

(by the way, Gilly, one of the most interesting and least banal things, recently, has been your blog).