Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 41

Thread: How to decide subtypes?

  1. #1
    07490's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    there
    Posts
    3,047
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mimosa Pudica View Post
    How are subtypes decided?

    Example:
    Strrrng is E4w3 sx and IEI-Ni.
    I have the same enneatype, but selftype IEI-Fe.

    Do subtypes even exist?
    I think subtype can be change easily with your enviornment and who you are with.
    (D)IEE~FI-(C)SLE~Ni E-5w4(Sp/Sx)/7w8(So/Sp)/9w1(sp/sx)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    1)
    A girl who I want to date, asks me: well first tell me how tall you are?
    My reply: well I will answer that, if you first tell me how much you weigh!

    2)
    A girl I was dating said she was oh so great at sex etc, but she didn't do blowjobs.
    My reply: Oh I'm really romantic etc, I just will never take you out to dinner.

  2. #2
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There is no clear correlation between socionics and enneagram, and actually a uncommon way to use for deciding subtypes.

    Subtypes do probably exist, meaning there is no continuum range of a certain type but a clear devision between them. But nobody really knows how and what. The best subtype devision that I've seen is the popular one of of Medved and (i forgot the other name). The producing and accepting subtypes.

    They seem to correlate a great deal to what you see in real life.

    The quickest way to learn about subtypes is to know many people of 1 certain type. You'll start seeing similarities and differences between people of that type.

  3. #3
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mimosa Pudica View Post
    How are subtypes decided?

    Example:
    Strrrng is E4w3 sx and IEI-Ni.
    I have the same enneatype, but selftype IEI-Fe.

    Do subtypes even exist?
    I think they exist and are just as immutable as base types. Obviously I am coming from the perspective that functions are internal psychic lenses, so if you disagree with that, you won't find what I have to say of much value. But, essentially I think your subtype is really what creates the salient points of your cognition. It's not just, "I'm more Ni than Fe," or, "I'm more accepting than producing." I think it has more to do with a certain directionality in the wiring of your psyche, which determines how you primarily deal with information and your general vantage point for processing reality. The contours of our cognition -- not deep rooted like enneagram, but the pathways that information will always travel down for us.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  4. #4
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default x

    How to decide subtypes?


    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  5. #5
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Subtypes are actually the base type.

    So as a uncover more and more, I'm realizing that there are really 32 types.

    Im a Ti ENTp.

    This actually means my mode (base) function is Ti and Ne is my utility (creative) function.

    Temperament is not determined by the element dichotomies as much as how your mode and agenda relate.
    Last edited by ArchonAlarion; 03-08-2009 at 05:50 PM.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  6. #6
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah its odd I know.

    But thats what I and others have been/are coming up with.

    I could go into more detail...
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  7. #7
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    because my mode and agenda are both field elements.

    This means that during my "projects" I will not have to make a mental shift between objects and fields like J types must. So P types are mentally lazy, just gliding along on a single flow of thought. I just keep trucking on the field train rarely having to focus on objects. This leads to high, unstable project production levels as my "mood" is the prime determinant of what I get done and when. P types are "obstacle-phobic" whereas J types are "obstacle-phillic"
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  8. #8
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,827
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have a theory I'm working on about subtypes. When it's presentable I'll make a thread about it (or something like that). It has to do with sensitivity along axes.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  9. #9
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    well Im not really reinventing the elements dichotomies, but model A, yes.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  10. #10
    expired Lotus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    TIM
    Se/Ni sx/sp
    Posts
    4,494
    Mentioned
    99 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carla View Post
    Why don't you just call yourself an LII though if you think that Ti is your base?
    I guess what it comes down to is temperment—which seems to be both over-emphasized as well as under, oddly enough.

    I've seen some people end up coming to the conclusion that “temperments aren't really that significant” when they're trying to decide between two mirror types (like say, IEI vs. EIE). They'll switch their type back and forth dynamic XNFx without ever really “deciding” on their temperment. Although both dynamic, EJ is really different from IP, obviously. If someone actually understands temperments, it would be very weird for them to switch types between temperments as if they're some flimsy aspect to type.

    I mean, what was it that I just read you saying? Bleh, scrolling down…
    Quote Originally Posted by Carla View Post
    Subtypes are only models and many different kinds of subtype models and interpretations of these models exist. Human behaviour was not meant to be boxed.
    See, that's the point with subtypes imo. It's kind of the opposite of boxing. It's acknowledging that a person could have leading/base/mode without being forced-fit into A) an IP temperment or B) “an ENXj with a developed creative function.” It's not splitting hairs, despite how it seems. The ideal for any typological system isn't to identify as many possible types, of course. Nor is it about having fewer, more general types. Our goal here is to identify as many relevant types—it's all about pragmatism. If you actually use Socionics to understand relationships or patterns (etc.) then you'll want to categorize the types by however many follow similar, useful patterns or whatever. Don't stick to 16 if doing so will not allow you to make valid type-related observations. Don't go past 32 if doing so means you're just dichotomizing things into insignificant differences—of which you gain no use of knowing. Does this make sense?

    He has an EP temperment. So honestly, could someone tell me why that means he must have a Pe leading/base/mode function? And for future reference, a real answer isn't: “Because (insert dead Socionist here) said so.”
    maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
    maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
    go ask the frog what the scorpion knows

  11. #11
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Gets me really pissed when people pull that card.

    AUSHRA IZ TEH GOD, BAO DOWN NAO!!!!@!@
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  12. #12
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    According to Smilingeyes, a person can be base and have stronger; there's nothing wrong with that. Instead, there is a basic difference between how accepting functions and creating functions work:

    Quote Originally Posted by Smilingeyes
    Accepting function
    This what one does without thinking. This is the function through which one focuses actions towards a single goal. This is not the same as being a focussed function by itself. This function turns the various interests of the 'result' group into the 'process' group and the 'process' group is the one that is focussed. The importance of this function is rather that it accepts a multitude of base resources, ideas and tasks. It is mobile and can be used in many situations which contrasts the creative functions that can only be used for very particular tasks. This does NOT mean that one is automatically weaker than the other as succesfull use of creative functions tends to create groundbreaking breakthroughs which are very important despite their relative rarity. The accepting functions are balanced rather than supported by the creating functions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Smilingeyes
    Creating function:
    This is what you concentrate on and are impressed by. This is a mile-stone, a worthy goal, a personal horizon and limit. Through success in the use of this function a great set of new personal possibilities arise. This function turns the focused action of the 'process' group into the multi-tasking hassle that is the 'result' group. The importance of this function is that it often reflects a person's greatest accomplishments, the result of all his efforts. It is generally concentrated for long periods on very particular tasks. The creating functions are balanced rather than supported by the accepting ones.
    For some reason having or as accepting function makes you EP, probably because that sort of information demands EP behavior and the creating function is the first thing you use to face a situation (so you act EP). Smilexian subtypes point to the stronger ego element, so I suppose a creative subtype would quickly switch to the creative function most of the time after getting the first impression through the accepting function.

    This seems more natural to me than the Model X approach, although some of the potential of Model X for explaining why Judging types act as they do intrigues me.



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  13. #13
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Allie View Post
    He has an EP temperment. So honestly, could someone tell me why that means he must have a Pe leading/base/mode function? And for future reference, a real answer isn't: “Because (insert dead Socionist here) said so.”
    To answer this more directly: EP temperament = Pe leading. Then the descriptions come along... and if you aren't either both EP temperament and PE leading or neither, then someone's botched a description, because they're synonyms.

    If you want to redefine things so that that isn't true, then obviously you can't be proven wrong; nor is that any evidence against classical Socionics.



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  14. #14
    expired Lotus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    TIM
    Se/Ni sx/sp
    Posts
    4,494
    Mentioned
    99 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brilliand View Post
    For some reason having or as accepting function makes you EP, probably because that sort of information demands EP behavior and the creating function is the first thing you use to face a situation (so you act EP).
    This is my point. Stop using “for some reason” and “probably because.” Tell my why it must be that way.

    A model is only as valid as it represents reality. Perhaps an EP with Ji accepting/leading/base/mode/(synonyms etc.) isn't theoretically conventional. However, it honestly makes the most sense to me when interacting with various types of EPs. To categorize two EPs as Pe-leading simply because, “theory says so,” is a tad ignorant when I've had experience with types that prove contrary to that. Quite simply, the reality is a priority above theory. Reality says that someone has a Ji base with an EP temperment—not a model, not a theory, not any dead, Russian Socionist. Go with what you see. If there is any truth in the patterns you observe, the “model” will form itself.
    maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
    maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
    go ask the frog what the scorpion knows

  15. #15
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,635
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There are many ways to "decide" which subtype is the most likely. My personal favorite is, look at the two adjacent clubs, and see which one fits you best; if it's neither, then you're an inbetween subtype. Other ways are related to either trying to notice which adjacent quadra you get along best with, or slight modification in intertype relations (i.e. a Fe-INFp will basically have a conflicting relationship with a Te-ENTj where a Ni-INFp will have a more standard supervisee situation; the problem with this criteria is that it's self-referential, in the sense that to start there must be an arbitrarly "right" assigned subtype for a given person)

    Of course, temperament is to be considered as fixed, it will only be rather confusing to think of an EP-Ji as an IJish EP; if you really want to, it would be just better to create a category for all the EP-Ji were to clog all the characteristic behaviors

    Reality says that someone has a Ji base with an EP temperment—not a model, not a theory, not any dead, Russian Socionist. Go with what you see. If there is any truth in the patterns you observe, the “model” will form itself.
    That's not easy to characterize in a system such as socionics for a simple reason, if an IJ Pe is to be considered as EPish, then an EP Ji IJish, you start losing the frame of reference for temperaments
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  16. #16
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    no, i understood you. Functions != elements, I know this.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  17. #17
    expired Lotus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    TIM
    Se/Ni sx/sp
    Posts
    4,494
    Mentioned
    99 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    That's not easy to characterize in a system such as socionics for a simple reason, if an IJ Pe is to be considered as EPish, then an EP Ji IJish, you start losing the frame of reference for temperaments
    That isn't quite what I meant. I agree with the frame of reference thing. I don't think an IJ-Pe should be considered EP-ish, nor should an EP-Ji be considered IJ-ish.
    IJ-Pe : IJ : : EP-Ji : EP
    Always. By leading (or base/mode/etc.) function, I meant it more in an “accepting” way? Like um, a primary lens used to process information? Which, imo, doesn't always correlate with people's behavior. The way someone “sees” or interprets information (i.e., a mode, a base, whatever) doesn't manifest through behavior. It's merely how they take things in. I think a person's temperment is a fixed thing.

    As an ESI-Se, my “mode” is Se, and imo that doesn't mean I must behave in an EP way—because I'm definitely IJ. Blah. I hate explaining stuff like this through writing.
    maybe a saint is just a dead prick with a good publicist
    maybe tommorow's statues are insecure without their foes
    go ask the frog what the scorpion knows

  18. #18
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Allie
    He has an EP temperment. So honestly, could someone tell me why that means he must have a Pe leading/base/mode function? And for future reference, a real answer isn't: “Because (insert dead Socionist here) said so.”
    lol, yeah.

    The erroneous conflation in this mess stems from an inaccurate understanding of both functions and temperament. Contrary to what many groundbreaking articles will tell you, "P" functions aren't inextricably linked to a "P" temperament; saying so dumbs down the more subtle, essential components of each of those things.

    Temperament deals with psychic energy levels, thresholds, and a certain control or adaptability one exhibits in their thoughts and actions. My observations lead me to believe that temperament is a much more deep-rooted psychic phenomenon that encompasses things socionics has yet to cover. Regardless, what is important to note, is that it is a precedent, a psychic foundation -- not a corollary of some functional ordering in a model.

    Now, as for functions, "P" functions are really just more reactive to information, whereas "J" functions are more refining of it. An Se base/mode person does not necessarily have to act in a stereotypical ESxp way, nor does Ti base/mode necessitate rigid IJ behavior. There are subtle differences between p- and j-subs' cognitions, but nothing that determines temperament. Again, this stems back to psychic directionality and ordering; the difference between a Ti-ESTp and Ti-ISTj, is that the former has a strong Ni focus and the latter has a strong Fe focus. As archon mentioned, a fluid focus on either objects or fields makes a lot more sense for the irrational temperament; and a switch from objects to fields works better for the more deliberate rational temperament. So, it's not about one piece of the puzzle which necessitates everything else; it's about the interdynamics of each piece, which vary subtly for similar types.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  19. #19
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @archonalarion: is your 32 subtype system also based on observations? just curious.

  20. #20
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well I would really only feel comfortable calling it "my" system when its deviated enough from those who brought it to my attention in the first place (steve, ashton, and nick)

    And yes, I was almost elated when it was explained to me because it clarified and made sense of irl observations.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  21. #21
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ArchonAlarion View Post
    Well I would really only feel comfortable calling it "my" system when its deviated enough from those who brought it to my attention in the first place (steve, ashton, and nick)

    And yes, I was almost elated when it was explained to me because it clarified and made sense of irl observations.
    oke good. I would guess it's not easy to validate the 32 subtype theory in real life.

    Hope to read more about it sometime.

  22. #22
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've been seeing the influx of "Model X" as a sort of growing viral infestation. It's trying to re-write the collective thought, or rather change the collective language that we all more or less refer to. It's trying to overturn the old system in favor of a "new" one. And because it doesn't seem to be very coherently defined it can even say it isn't doing this while it is doing it.

  23. #23
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    hmmm...

    Perhaps you don't understand how new things come about.

    Allow me to explain:

    You observe how something works.

    You find its faults.

    You create different theories.

    You develop them over time, seeing how well they describe reality.

    You continue this process until a complete theory materializes.


    Unfortunately my sudden, all at once, epiphany, button isn't currently functioning so I am unable to give you a complete theory as quick as you may want it.



    And its because the old system is shitty.

    And we know this due to our lack of science grants from the federal government.

    When socionics hits the news as the next big science THEN we will have a non-shitty model.

    Have a nice day.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  24. #24
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    They have not said how or why.

    "It's trying to overturn the old system in favor of a "new" one."

    That came across as a bit reactionary. And Im quite sure that there are people here that would be quite content to stagnate.

    So I think I'll go on trying to improve things and I'll post my ideas and what I've considered here.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  25. #25
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have and I said that I am not subscribing to any model at the moment. Model x is just closest.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  26. #26
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    From my understanding of things...

    There's an Accepting subtype and a Creating subtype. (I'm in the habit of using Accepting and Base interchangably and Creating interchangeably with Creative Realization function)

    From what I understand, Accepting means reactivity and simple thoughts. Primitive thinking.
    Creating means complexity and deep deliberation.

    I don't think there are fixed subtypes. In fact, a person is probably a certain subtype in relation to the environment s/he is currently in.

    If the person knows little about the environment, s/he will be forced to fall back on simple, reactive, primitive thoughts. This is what I understand to be behavior related to an Accepting subtype.

    If the person knows much about the environment, s/he can use the full arsenal of his/her tools including complex and highly effective ones. S/he may even transfer such tools and knowledge to others.

    I'd describe the two concisely as:
    Accepting subtype behavior: student-like behavior (safe; modest)
    Creating subtype behavior: teacher-like or professional behavior (risky; pretentious)

  27. #27
    JuJu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Springfield, Massachusetts, USA
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    2,704
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ArchonAlarion View Post
    I have and I said that I am not subscribing to any model at the moment. Model x is just closest.
    You know it doesn't exist, right? That it's all hokum and hoo-ha?

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    I'd describe the two concisely as:
    Accepting subtype behavior: student-like behavior (safe; modest)
    Creating subtype behavior: teacher-like or professional behavior (risky; pretentious)
    Let's say for a moment that subtypes are fixed. (I believe they are, as it's been my observation.) Given this, what are your thoughts on how duality works? I.e. XXXx's creating subtype is XXXx _____ subtypes' dual?

  28. #28
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    P types are "obstacle-phobic" whereas J types are "obstacle-phillic"
    This remark was interesting... I've been trying to link obstacle-minded thought and oppurtunity exploiting thought to terms in socionics for the last few weeks, but what I came up with is that it's linked to Process/Result. J types are Process when behaving like STs, whereas P types are Result when behaving like STs, so I would estimate that your conclusion applies to activities related to the ST types: very concrete, practical activities, rather than mental ones.

    IMO an ENTp is typically a person who solves a mental problem with a "eureka" realization. The focus is on an obstacle, but more on the happy feeling of overcoming such problems than on the restrictions of these problems themselves. It's not in any way a concrete obstacle like is the case with the Judgers' Process ST behavior, though.

  29. #29
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    really its obviously a mistake to even mention "model x" I'm realizing.

    And I'm not adhering to it anyways so I dont care whats been said about it.

    And as of now Im thinking Ij sub Ep goes with Ej sub Ip, Ep sub Ep goes with Ip sub Ip, Ep sub Ij goes with Ej sub Ej, and Ij sub Ij goes with Ip sub Ej.

    As of nowwwwwwwwwwwwwww
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  30. #30
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    you say that and i agree, but others will deny its existence. Ashton freakin says it doesn't exist.

    Really I dont care. Im just trying to improve shit and Im not gonna stop posting new ideas here because they dont adhere to model A.

    You guys are hitting my 6 fixation and Im getting all righteously rebellious, so Im done whatever.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  31. #31
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    From my understanding of things...

    There's an Accepting subtype and a Creating subtype. (I'm in the habit of using Accepting and Base interchangably and Creating interchangeably with Creative Realization function)

    From what I understand, Accepting means reactivity and simple thoughts. Primitive thinking.
    Creating means complexity and deep deliberation.

    I don't think there are fixed subtypes. In fact, a person is probably a certain subtype in relation to the environment s/he is currently in.

    If the person knows little about the environment, s/he will be forced to fall back on simple, reactive, primitive thoughts. This is what I understand to be behavior related to an Accepting subtype.

    If the person knows much about the environment, s/he can use the full arsenal of his/her tools including complex and highly effective ones. S/he may even transfer such tools and knowledge to others.

    I'd describe the two concisely as:
    Accepting subtype behavior: student-like behavior (safe; modest)
    Creating subtype behavior: teacher-like or professional behavior (risky; pretentious)
    This was quite enlightening.

  32. #32
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Given this, what are your thoughts on how duality works? I.e. XXXx's creating subtype is XXXx _____ subtypes' dual?
    I'll answer the question if you consider that the following is "labcoatian socionics".

    Trick question. Everybody wants to be with a Creating subtype person because an Accepting subtype person is quite litterally a loser. Someone who doesn't know anything. So regardless of what subtype a person is, the Creating version of the dual is ideal for them.

    IMO if an Accepting subtype person meets their Creating dual they learn stuff at an incredible rate. It doesn't take long until they become Creating subtypes themselves...

    Of course, the only thing worse than a normal Accepting subtype person is a failing Creating subtype person. I mentioned that Creating activity is risky and this is how. If a person claims to be knowledgeable but turns out not to be, s/he makes a tremendously hard fall. This kind of reduction from the illusion of being a clever, knowledgeable person to a loser who doesn't know jack is what is commonly refered to as... drumroll... the PoLR hit.

    You can even find this stuff out in yourself. Find yourself in a PoLR hit situation. Prior to the hit, you thought you were Creating but had too optimistic views of your abilities. After it, you are reduced to what you really were: a loser who can't help but behave in a way that doesn't draw attention. (not saying anyone here is a loser; using loser in a relative way; everybody finds him/herself playing the loser's role every once in a while)

    In defense of Accepting subtype behavior, this kind of behavior is something everyone can get along with, even your conflictor. It's very diplomatic. Not usually very spectacular, though. Accepting function behavior is definitely a valuable skill in everyday life. It just isn't something anyone ever wants to be confined to. Probably most people including myself are Accepting subtypes for most of their lives. But there is an environment in just about each of our lives in which we are consistently Creating subtypes.

    So less politically correct:
    Accepting subtype: diplomatic, unspectacular "loser"
    Creating subtype: attention drawing, risktaking novelty

  33. #33
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    I'll answer the question if you consider that the following is "labcoatian socionics".

    Trick question. Everybody wants to be with a Creating subtype person because an Accepting subtype person is quite litterally a loser. Someone who doesn't know anything. So regardless of what subtype a person is, the Creating version of the dual is ideal for them.

    IMO if an Accepting subtype person meets their Creating dual they learn stuff at an incredible rate. It doesn't take long until they become Creating subtypes themselves...

    Of course, the only thing worse than a normal Accepting subtype person is a failing Creating subtype person. I mentioned that Creating activity is risky and this is how. If a person claims to be knowledgeable but turns out not to be, s/he makes a tremendously hard fall. This kind of reduction from the illusion of being a clever, knowledgeable person to a loser who doesn't know jack is what is commonly refered to as... drumroll... the PoLR hit.

    You can even find this stuff out in yourself. Find yourself in a PoLR hit situation. Prior to the hit, you thought you were Creating but had too optimistic views of your abilities. After it, you are reduced to what you really were: a loser who can't help but behave in a way that doesn't draw attention. (not saying anyone here is a loser; using loser in a relative way; everybody finds him/herself playing the loser's role every once in a while)

    In defense of Accepting subtype behavior, this kind of behavior is something everyone can get along with, even your conflictor. It's very diplomatic. Not usually very spectacular, though. Accepting function behavior is definitely a valuable skill in everyday life. It just isn't something anyone ever wants to be confined to. Probably most people including myself are Accepting subtypes for most of their lives. But there is an environment in just about each of our lives in which we are consistently Creating subtypes.

    So less politically correct:
    Accepting subtype: diplomatic, unspectacular "loser"
    Creating subtype: attention drawing, risktaking novelty
    This was quite enlightening.

  34. #34
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tuturututu View Post
    This was quite enlightening.
    helium is quite enlightening
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  35. #35
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ESFj's can seem like they've had too much helium
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  36. #36
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Tell me about it

  37. #37
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ill do you one better.

    I shall show you.



    shes like 18 or some shit too.
    OPERATION POOPLAIR

    Now conscripting, for more information come here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...48#post1003048

  38. #38
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    P types are "obstacle-phobic" whereas J types are "obstacle-phillic"
    J types see everything as a small obstacle. P types see big obstacles and non-obstacles. This is reasoned from (my distortion of) Model X as follows:

    J types have complementary elements as the elements they use naturally. I'll use me for example - I'm Ne over Si. So my cycle is:
    Ne-Fe-Si-Ti-Ne-Fe-Si-Ti-Ne-Fe-Si-Ti

    On the other hand, Archon is a P type, so his naturally-used elements are monoverted. Specifically, he's Ti over Si.
    Ne-Fe-Si-Ti-Ne-Fe-Si-Ti

    The non-bold elements are obstacles between the bold elements. I have a constant one-element barrier (a small obstacle) between every pair of elements; Archon has alternating zero-element and two-elements barriers between his element pairs.

    P types may be afraid of obstacles, or eager to smash through them; the difference is that P types will perceive the obstacles as very different from the non-obstacles, while J types will treat everything pretty much the same.

    (Why must the elements cycle in that manner? Because IJ (for elements) is the partitioning of IP into EP, whereas EJ is the agglomeration of EP into IP. The cycle varies by quadra, but is always EP->EJ->IP->IJ->EP.)



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  39. #39
    Currently God Brilliand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Nevada
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    4,246
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ArchonAlarion View Post
    Ill do you one better.

    I shall show you.

    shes like 18 or some shit too.
    The trouble with that is it doesn't take our input.

    Maybe that's less of a problem for you, though.



    LII-Ne

    "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
    - Blair Houghton

    Johari

  40. #40
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ArchonAlarion View Post
    Really I dont care. Im just trying to improve shit and Im not gonna stop posting new ideas here because they dont adhere to model A.

    You guys are hitting my 6 fixation and Im getting all righteously rebellious, so Im done whatever.
    Archon, I don't mean that I think you shouldn't try to improve things or come up with new ideas. I'll try to put my overall complaint (which isn't just with you but with the entire world) into more words.

    I believe that models only approximate reality and while there can be a benefit to improving a model so it approximates it better I don't see "Model X" as improving Model A but rather as a separate model entirely that although it overlaps with Model A to some degree it is not systematizing "reality" in the same way. (e.g. a 32 type system where the subtype is the base is not the same thing as a 16 type system where subtype is not so significant.)

    So since they are in fact different systems I don't see why it is productive to constantly try to override one with the other as if they're both the same kind of "Socionics." And I think that's why I was being "reactionary" because I feel like this comes up all the time now where entire threads become bogged down in constant disputes over what isn't even the same system.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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