Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 100

Thread: Subtypes in Duality Relations

  1. #1
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default Subtypes in Duality Relations

    I changed my mind. Subtypes are a very important aspect to socionics.

    For example as an IEI-Ni, I'm definitely most attracted to SLE-Se rather than SLE-Ti.

    Also, there is just too many differences between the subtypes to ignore them. I thought this difference was subtle and in a way, it is. But it's kinda like having 3 different major buffs in world of warcraft - which can be a huge deal you know. It makes quite a big difference between identical types, I'd say between 15-20% (rough estimate).

    I'm the more withdrawn 'lost' type of IEI, the type that's more stoic and less of a people person, Fe subtypes are just different. They're more cheery, bubbly and enthused. Also IEI-Fes can be extroverts in the MBTI sense. I don't think IEI-Nis can be extroverts.

  2. #2
    Haikus Sirena's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    GAH, US
    TIM
    Mumpsimus
    Posts
    2,549
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmmm, every time I read the differences between the subtypes described, I think I have to be Ni sub.

    *random comment*

  3. #3
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,060
    Mentioned
    223 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think an example of an IEI-Fe extrovert is that one guy from the old willy wonka movie, didn't he play willy wonka?

    Gene Wilder! Yes, that's it.

  4. #4
    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 BulletsAndDoves View Post
    I changed my mind. Subtypes are a very important aspect to socionics.

    For example as an IEI-Ni, I'm definitely most attracted to SLE-Se rather than SLE-Ti.
    Exactly. Good observing!

  5. #5
    Éminence grise mikemex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Third Planet
    TIM
    IEE-Ne
    Posts
    1,631
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm IEE-Ne and find SLI-Si far more attractive than SLI-Te.
    [] | NP | 3[6w5]8 so/sp | Type thread | My typing of forum members | Johari (Strengths) | Nohari (Weaknesses)

    You know what? You're an individual, and that makes people nervous. And it's gonna keep making people nervous for the rest of your life.
    - Ole Golly from Harriet, the spy.

  6. #6
    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 mikemex View Post
    I'm IEE-Ne and find SLI-Si far more attractive than SLI-Te.
    Nice. Oke let's settle it then. Same subtypes are better then differing subtypes.

  7. #7
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Subtypes in Duality Relations

    I thought I read this from a few areas, that in socionics, the most compatable dual relation (when subtype is given) is when one type is of leading subtype and their dual is of creative subtype, visa versa. I don't see how this idea is explained, but I've gotten it from a few sources and various vibes. What is the answer?

  8. #8
    07490's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    there
    Posts
    3,047
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    polikujm, where is the sources?
    (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.

  9. #9
    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

    anyway, duality is not everything
    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.

  10. #10
    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 Carla View Post
    Semi-duality is everything! Mwahahahahahaha
    Carla I've saved enough money for you NOT to do any research for the NEXT ten years! forget the boring math and dance with me in the Bahamas.
    (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.

  11. #11
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Carla View Post
    Semi-duality is everything!
    nope.

    if duality is not everything --> conflicting is not nothing --> conflicting is something


    Mwahahahahahaha
    jajajajajajaja
    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.

  12. #12
    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

    *End of anti-carla operations*

    Let's get back to the thread:
    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.

  13. #13
    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 Carla View Post
    lolz Let's do it!
    Show me your hands, we are not going to stop, just try not to look back.

    (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.

  14. #14
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    anyway, duality is not everything
    anyway, since you can't come up with a more catchy theory . . .



    Quote Originally Posted by 07490 View Post
    polikujm, where is the sources?
    I don't recall.

  15. #15
    not a bumblebee octo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    TIM
    IEI 4-6-9 apparently
    Posts
    2,744
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Allie View Post
    I have not read that anywhere. Usually I read that it's perceiving subtype with perceiving subtype and judging subtype with judging subtype. I find this to make more sense both in theory and from personal observations.
    I agree with Allie, that makes perfect sense. If both members of the dual pair are "leading" or "creative" subtype, the relationship should be better. For example, an IEI-Ni has more Ni, and therefore would need more Se from external sources, which is better supplied by an SLE-Se than an SLE-Ti. And so on.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agee The Great View Post
    Nobody here...besides me, seems to know what SLE is except for maybe Maritsa.

  16. #16
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Simple enough I guess.

  17. #17
    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 polikujm View Post
    anyway, since you can't come up with a more catchy theory . . .





    I don't recall.
    Oh ok, because that if there is, it contradicts a lot of what it is not suppose to be when we talk about subtypes.
    (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.

  18. #18
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Allie View Post
    I have not read that anywhere. Usually I read that it's perceiving subtype with perceiving subtype and judging subtype with judging subtype. I find this to make more sense both in theory and from personal observations.
    +1

    This is what I've come to think as well, based on what I've read and seen irl.

  19. #19
    sigma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    641
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    if duality is not everything --> conflicting is not nothing --> conflicting is something
    I agree. Theoretically speaking, some misguided IEI might become curious about how would he interact with a LSE girl and might end up smoking marijuana and having rather nice sex. Theoretically!
    "What is love?"
    "The total absence of fear," said the Master.
    "What is it we fear?"
    "Love," said the Master.

    I chose Love

  20. #20
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I be keepin all my subtypes in one basket, if you know what I fuckin mean

  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 polikujm View Post
    I thought I read this from a few areas, that in socionics, the most compatable dual relation (when subtype is given) is when one type is of leading subtype and their dual is of creative subtype, visa versa. I don't see how this idea is explained, but I've gotten it from a few sources and various vibes. What is the answer?
    it's certainly not true.

    We've had a thread on it, last month or so.

    All the subscribers said they had clearly the best compatibility/magnetism between corresponding subtypes.

    Which has been my experience also.

  22. #22
    Creepy-Cyclops

    Default

    In the past i've deliberated a little over which ones the best. In practice has shown me that judging function sub type goes better with judging function sub type, and perceiving subs go better together.

    The theory behind it makes most sense to me as well.

  23. #23
    EffyCold thePirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    TIM
    ??
    Posts
    1,897
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re-Examining Subtype Duality

    In this dualization article:

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=34095

    it states:

    "Douala should "get used" to each other, learn recognize the signals given by different functions. Until that happens, there are inconsistencies and misunderstandings. dualization relations are most favorable for the types with different subtypes: if one is stronger rational function, then the other must be irrational subtype - more developed an irrational function (Sancho Panza and Don Quixote, Niels Bohr and Bohr, Margaret - "tight" and "slim" types: logical "Don Quixote" and touch "Dumas"). "

    "It is the fact that the human psyche developed unevenly, forcing search Douala. After dualization mental balance is restored, disappears se "bias" which may give rise to conflicts, tensions between people. We must note one important fact. If the subtypes do not match (two rational or two irrational), then partners. seem more simple. Hence - the loss of interest in each other. In addition, value-cultural orientation, if they are different, can impede dualization. It plays the role of the law of psychology: innate qualities of individuals must be additional, and acquired education - similar. Gap adverse subtypes can leave their enemies, especially if it's political leaders (eg, ethical subtype of "Hamlet" - Trotsky and logical subtype of "Gorky" - Joseph Stalin, the political rivalry that escalated into severe hostility in Unlike the intuitive "Hamlet" - Molotov, Stalin, who took the program and unconditionally followed it all his life). I must say that man, finding the duality feels psychic protection, comfort and safety, which greatly facilitates his life. The fact that the problems are for most excruciating Pego, are the source of his mistakes, doubts and anxieties, it is best resolved its dual. Douala quickly soothe each other.
    "

    any thoughts on this?
    Last edited by thePirate; 01-14-2011 at 09:42 PM. Reason: more of description
    <Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is and not

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    SLE/LSE sx/sp
    Posts
    2,489
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    From the duals I know with subtypes, I agree that rational-irrational pairing works better.

  25. #25
    Creepy-female

    Default

    "until that happens, there are inconsistencies and misunderstandings. dualization relations are most favorable for the types with different subtypes: if one is stronger rational function, then the other must be irrational subtype - more developed an irrational function"
    = Duality relations with Jx/Px subtypes is more beneficial than Jx/Jx or Px/Px?

    "We must note one important fact. If the subtypes do not match (two rational or two irrational),
    = (Jx/Jx or Px/Px I'm assuming)

    then partners. seem more simple. Hence - the loss of interest in each other."
    Isn't this a negative value judgment?

    I'm not following the logic/language here. I thought it said Jx/Px is more beneficial, but then it says if you have Jx/Px you get a loss of interest, so I'm assuming they don't go together, unless you're in a universe where the subtypes do not match (beneficial) but they're..less interesting (non beneficial)? Ugh!

  26. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    SLE/LSE sx/sp
    Posts
    2,489
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Dolphin, I agree it's confusing. As I understand it, duals can pass each other by, if they're a better fit sub type then this is even easier, as it's or they are too 'simple' seeming at first. Don't know about you but people seem more attracted to those where there's some sort of challenge at first, which can make it initially exciting.

  27. #27
    Creepy-female

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Words View Post
    Dolphin, I agree it's confusing. As I understand it, duals can pass each other by, if they're a better fit sub type then this is even easier, as it's or they are too 'simple' seeming at first. Don't know about you but people seem more attracted to those where there's some sort of challenge at first, which can make it initially exciting.
    Okay that makes sense. So what this is saying is Jx/Px > Jx/Jx or Px/Px via actual compatibility but Jx/Jx or Px/Px > Jx/Px via beginning interest level?

  28. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    SLE/LSE sx/sp
    Posts
    2,489
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes

    Except people being people JxPx might still be ... lucky enough to be initially interested in each other due to some damn fine sex-u-all chemistry

    But all things being equal in the world of paper theory...

  29. #29
    lump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,629
    Mentioned
    635 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    wow i thought the second paragraph was saying Jx/Jx or Px/Px "do not match" and thus seem simple to eachother. thats kind of ambiguously worded imo.

  30. #30
    EffyCold thePirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    TIM
    ??
    Posts
    1,897
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    if I understand this correctly "matching subtypes" in this article means =

    Se-ESTp & Fe-INFp
    Ti-ESTp & Ni-INFp

    non-matching are these:

    Ni-INFp & Se-ESTp
    Fe-INFp & Ti-ESTp

    non matching subtypes lead to a loss of interest as each seems more simple to the other. the article refers to matching subtypes as one irrational and one rational sub, its different from what we have traditionally come to believe are matching subtypes(which is both rational or irrational, literally matching in that sense); different meaning for the same term.
    <Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is and not

  31. #31
    2 EVIL I golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Several stories high
    TIM
    EIE prob 6
    Posts
    2,969
    Mentioned
    106 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thePirate View Post
    if I understand this correctly "matching subtypes" in this article means =

    Se-ESTp & Fe-INFp
    Ti-ESTp & Ni-INFp

    non-matching are these:

    Ni-INFp & Se-ESTp
    Fe-INFp & Ti-ESTp

    non matching subtypes lead to a loss of interest as each seems more simple to the other. the article refers to matching subtypes as one irrational and one rational sub, its different from what we have traditionally come to believe are matching subtypes(which is both rational or irrational, literally matching in that sense); different meaning for the same term.
    Pirate, I concur with your reading, and I noticed this, too. The article is saying--imo--that cross-subtypes are a better fit. Not what I've been led to believe 'round here.

    I neither agree nor disagree with the idea at this point but am curious about the reasoning behind matching up subtypes, either way (rational/rational, irrational/rational).

    If I consider the INFp/ESTp dual pairing per this article, just thinking ... Se-ESTp & Fe-INFp ...


    Nonmatching, as you stated:

    Ni-INFp & Se-ESTp
    Fe-INFp & Ti-ESTp

    Matching:

    Se-ESTp & Fe-INFp
    Ti-ESTp & Ni-INFp

    So what would be the difference in blending Ni/Se or Fe/Ti, versus Se/Fe and Ti/Ni?

    What I see with "my dual" so far (we could be Ni/Ti subtype pairing if the School of Ashton is correct) is that my Fe feeds his Se and vice versa. That's obvious to me, so it could stand to reason that Ni and Ti also feed each other readily.

    I also see, within my own cognition, that Ni blends with Ti easily, and then it's harder for me to move from the intuiting and thinking realm into feeling, that I even struggle a bit to bridge from a sort of inner-imaging-and-analysis process to a "what do I feel about it" process, which comes second for me. (This is something I articulated about myself in the chatbox through conversation.)

    So maybe the rationale here would be that the introverted functions easily blend and support each other, as do the extraverted functions?

  32. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    SLE/LSE sx/sp
    Posts
    2,489
    Mentioned
    76 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah that's it actually with the same sub type thing.

    Re general belief on forum, take it with a pinch of salt if you ask me, some people love to theorise more than try for experience.

  33. #33
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    How can you make claims for Subtype dualization when subtypes themselves are not even precise and consistent?
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  34. #34
    when you see the booty Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    everywhere at once
    Posts
    8,451
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Too hasty of a judgment. Sounds like whoever wrote this was trying to be too "X=Y" when the evidence to make such a claim simply isn't there. At least the evidence doesn't seem to be there from my perspective.

  35. #35
    End of the road
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    167
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aixelsyd View Post
    Anecdotal:

    Dunno what I think, but if I am right to presume I am SEE-Se, I definitely find I get on more easily with the Te subtype of ILI. I find the Ni subtype to be far more interesting, at least from a distance, but relations with the Te sub comes quickly and naturally. Ni subtype tends to confuse me since most seem be highly expressionless when not engaged (and I notice they tend to wait to be engaged) and even when I think they want to be engaged, their complete lack of outward signal makes it very, very hard to engage them (at least for me even if I very much would like to) and most people leave them alone, feeling unsettled in their presence, feeling that they want to be left alone (whether it is true or not). And so I usually leave them alone though I have taken a few risks in trying to get to know them even though it felt weird as hell from my end, though usually they don't bite and so never got a 'who the fuck are you' reaction I had expected.

    Te subtype is more vocal and responsive and more inclined to engage without waiting for someone to engage them, making it easier to respond to things they say and do and usually we come to realize we are very comfortable with each other and enjoy our rapport and so relations develop very quickly. The fact they are more obviously open and friendly in disposition helps, though they can suddenly snark at me, too, which can be off-putting and have had my feelings kind of hurt by that a number of times.

    I also find misunderstandings happen more often with the Ni subtype, at least in past experiences, but that might have had more to do with my thoughtless nature in those times and saying thoughtless things in a thoughtless way. I also can never tell if they like me as a person or not and prefer to stay away than be nice and risk being pushed away (type of people where you initially never feel you know where you stand with them, prolly because of Fe PoLR). Those who are friends who are prolly Ni subtype are also those who I have less to say to, though enjoy being near them, nonetheless.

    Point:
    It's possible opposite subtypes make for ease of relations, but deep down, I feel the matching subtypes (same rationality subtype) have the potential to be more rewarding in the long run, but I could be totally wrong. I definitely find the matching subtype to be the most attractive, fwiw.
    So if you were to choose, would you pick to "live your life" with a Ni sub or Te Sub ?

  36. #36
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    same subtypes works better than different subtypes.
    I'm 100% sure about this.

  37. #37
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Cross subtypes being better doesn't really make sense since without subtype theory the J types and the P types match. Very counter intuitive.
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  38. #38

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,834
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Isn't there quite a lot of debate whether subtypes even exist?

    Let me make sure I have this right...

    So before, the word on the street was that both rational subtypes were "YAY perfect match."

    So Fi ENFp and Te ISTp = yay perfect.
    Or Ne ENFp with Si ISTp = yay perfect.

    And now it's saying one subtype should be rational and the other, irrational.

    So, Fi ENFp with Si ISTp = yay perfect.
    Or Ne ENFp with Te ISTp = yay perfect.

    That's interesting because I'm pretty sure my hubby is an Si ISTp (I'm Fi ENFp). It used to bother me that we weren't "perfectly" matched with the subtypes. But I guess now we are.

    I mean, he uses a lot of Te also, but if it's a choice between "lie in my comfy bed in fuzzy pjs and watch TV" and "use Te and think about business" he would always choose the former. Always.

    Our horoscopes also recently changed to become better matched. So I guess if you wait long enough, the theory will change to fit your relationship. Lol
    Hi! I'm an ENFP. :-)

  39. #39
    boom boom boom blackburry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    TIM
    ESI-Se 6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,269
    Mentioned
    142 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I feel like my subtype changes with my mood.

    Or it's changing as I get older, because honestly Idk which one I am.


    I do see how matching subtypes could make for a smoother relationship.
    However....nonmatching still offers a lot of growth...it just make take longer to become "dualized" and in sync?

  40. #40
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackburry View Post
    I feel like my subtype changes with my mood.

    Or it's changing as I get older, because honestly Idk which one I am.
    I agree with this. I accentuate or depending on my environment.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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