Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: What's your method to determine subtype

  1. #1
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default What's your method to determine subtype

    When I started with trying to guess which subtype someone belongs, I noticed there is no real general method or rule which always worked.

    For example:

    a)
    You would expect the Si subtype of LSE to be more introverted and the Te subtype more extraverted... In all of the cases I see, it's the other way around... Same holds true for ESE.

    b)
    Producing subtypes would be the ones most trying to make contact with other people (sociable) and the Accepting subtypes would be the ones most busy running their own agenda... Yet if you look at the SLE, than the producing subtype is more introverted busy working, while the accepting is out there making fun for others. Same holds true for SEE.

    c) I tried to spot other patterns like hard working, more or less humor etc. But nothing seemed to hold.

    So far the only thing that worked for me was reading the subtypes descriptions from medgved.

    So if you have noticed a general rule or something else that worked for you... it would be nice to hear it.
    Last edited by Jarno; 05-28-2009 at 06:23 PM.

  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

    Quote Originally Posted by Mimosa Pudica View Post
    So far this one seems to work for me:

    Accepting subtypes live in their leading function. Producing subtypes try to change the world to fit their leading function.

    In most cases that makes the accepting subtype a "stereotype" for their type, and the producing becomes a "changemaker" trying to change the world to fit the "stereotype". Or something.... It made more sense when I said it in my head than when I see it written here. Hope you grasped what I meant....?
    Very interesting!

    I completely understand what you mean with "live in their leading function".

    (My words used to be, "they run their own agenda" or "they are egoistic"). They are indeed somehow totally occupied.

    But like you said, it's often hard to find the right words to describe what you experience.

    I will try to see if I can relate to "changemaker" too. So far I couldn't describe producing types well, so your words are helpful. Thanks :-)

  3. #3
    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 Mimosa Pudica View Post
    Ah... And the producing type typically use their creative function to make the world fit their leading. So for example, ESI-Se can be really aggressive about pushing their Fi on us all (while the ESI-Fi just live in their Fi). Same thing goes for me. I'll Fe you all until you see how good the world could be if you only got the full picture right (Ni-picture, that is).
    nice!

    I can see what you mean now.

    It's like trying to convince others so that they see the importance of your leading function.

  4. #4
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,937
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    If I'm considering beween two mirror types for a person (even only for a microsecond), I can tell that on some occasions it's on easier to choose between one of the two types than on other occasions.

    But I don't necessarily always work like that - sometimes I could for example pick up right away that someone is an ESFj with a Ej temperament but seems to be a Si subtype. I don't place much stock in the subtypes in the real world though - on the rare occasions when I identify someone as a particular subtype, I tend to think what I'm actually doing is determining what sort of mood the person is in at that current time.

  5. #5
    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 Mimosa Pudica View Post
    I bet your Ni tells you that the perfect world is full of flowers and joy and happiness. And that's what you are forcing upon us.

    The person you meet who's in his Ni, is just standing in a corner staring at you without focusing. You are smiling. Ni doesn't smile.
    exactly. The difference between how the types talk, leans a bit toward:


    Accepting types LET you listen.

    (they enjoy hearing their own words and allow you to listen along)

    Producing types WANT you to listen.

    (they need you to hear their words)

  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 Mimosa Pudica View Post
    Exactly!

    I haven't checked all types yet, I was too lazy to read through the sub-type-descriptions and compare them with this theory, but it works excellently on the people on this forum, and it's easy to spot. The accepting type is "more relaxed in their leading function" in a way. The producing is more "active" with it. Or something. It's more of a vibe thing, than something I can explain any better than this. I see it also outside of the forum.

    Btw, if this theory is correct, then I think B&D is IEI-Fe and not IEI-Ni....
    So far I totally relate with what you say.

    And while I don't doubt your theory (it is correct!), the words in which you describe your vibe may need a little bit of sharpening. e.g. our left wing minister is clearly IEI-Ni, but she's very pushy. Indeed not pushy towards others, but more pushy in achieving her goal. It's like accepting types like to show off more. yes that's it I think...

    So maybe the question is... does B&D likes to show off as much of his Ni as possible, or is he pushing others into supporting his Ni.

    Your turn :-)

  7. #7
    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 Mimosa Pudica View Post
    I spotted it, now someone else make descriptions.... please? I liked yours up here, but I agree it must be sharpened. However, my idea is totally lost in some brain fog
    I just know there's something there, so I'm happy you got me. I agree the description is not good enough for others to use, but I'm Ti HA, so I've gotten my rush already by flashing my theory. Others please check facts and systemize it. Ugh. Not sure about B&D... Maybe he's just flashing it, too?
    yeah he could be 'throwing it in the air' too.

    Nice that we both have confirmation of being on the right track. I learned a lot today!

    But my brain has had enough socionics for the moment too.

  8. #8
    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

    I believe these profiles are worth to read

    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...-ovcharov.html

    The ENTp Ti profiles makes me LMAO!
    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.

  9. #9
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Which type do they remind me of?

    LSE-Si, ESE-like: cheery. Also, by MP's thing, he'd be Si as well, constantly forcing Socially Relevant Topics on us. /eyeroll.

    LIE-Ni, EIE-like: crazy spazzball, but somehow manages to remain emotionally distant 24/7. By MP's thing, though, he'd be Te (seems mostly content to just hover around in the background being Socially Connected or something).

    LII-Ti, LSI-like: can be Logic Police sometimes. By MP's thing, Logic Police LII is LII-Ne. (I could see LII-Ne, though, since he seems to constantly be rummaging around for Fe responses.)

    [Aside: I don't see the point to subtypes, really.]

  10. #10
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The most practical way is to see if they easily hang out a lot with their beneficiary and illusionary. In that case, they're more likely to be creative subtype.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  11. #11
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hm..
    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)
    Quote Originally Posted by juju
    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?
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by ArchonAlarion
    ESFj's can seem like they've had too much helium
    This thread:how to decide subtypes?

  12. #12
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    For me I'd probably assess which function came more strongly in that person, and too look at subtype descriptions and pinpoint direct effects of the subtype.

    For instance ILI-Ni, what caught my attention to "Ni subtype" was the text: "Tries to avoid straightforwardness and criticisms in their conversations." That to me says Ni dominates Te. These clues are everywhere.

  13. #13
    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
    For me I'd probably assess which function came more strongly in that person, and too look at subtype descriptions and pinpoint direct effects of the subtype.

    For instance ILI-Ni, what caught my attention to "Ni subtype" was the text: "Tries to avoid straightforwardness and criticisms in their conversations." That to me says Ni dominates Te. These clues are everywhere.
    Ah yes. Good example btw.

    The only downside is that I would probably need to analyse the person somewhat longer.

  14. #14
    i'll tear down the sky Mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    TIM
    NeFi
    Posts
    1,108
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've personally haven't found any subtype hypothesis satisfying. I think that there are the 16 types, and the experiences unique to the individual gives them color, so to speak, or blurs the type so they aren't one out of sixteen static personalities. That enough is good enough for me because I haven't seen any inconsistencies with types, or any particular patterns of strong significance. Though, I can see how tempting it is to have subtypes.

  15. #15
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by look.to.the.sky View Post
    Though, I can see how tempting it is to have subtypes.
    Oh?

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Ah yes. Good example btw.

    The only downside is that I would probably need to analyse the person somewhat longer.
    I mostly enjoy typing the people I know well, so the lengthy analysis comes naturally.

  17. #17
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sorry guys, but I have to say that my way is probably the most effective and least complicated so far. Why bothering with complex theoretical descriptions when we can observe who they hang out with?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  18. #18
    i'll tear down the sky Mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    TIM
    NeFi
    Posts
    1,108
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gulanzon View Post
    Oh?
    Assuming that you're wondering how I perceive it tempting to have subtypes, I mean in it a manner that people find 16 types constrictive, and therefore want more types, so use subtypes for wiggle room. I also see subtypes as "excuses," for when someone can't explain a part of them not exactly fitting one of the 16 archetypes.

  19. #19
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Sorry guys, but I have to say that my way is probably the most effective and least complicated so far. Why bothering with complex theoretical descriptions when we can observe who they hang out with?
    Because even relations have descriptions. It's not so much complex, as already known. I can usually intuitively type people from earlier descriptions I've read. Current relations don't seem as accurate.

  20. #20
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm more skeptical of the usefulness of subtypes these days than I used to be.

    I think the already mentioned descriptions by Valentina Meged are very useful, also because they broaden the scope of what each type looks and feels like. In that context, it is very useful to refer to, say, a SLE logical subtype rather than sensory subtype, because this conveys a more precise idea of the person. Or to the idea that, say, a Ne-IEE is more likely to be mistyped for an ILE than for a SEE.

    I also have seen some evidence that, say, a Ni-LIE is more likely to interact well with EIEs than Te-LIEs, who on the other hand interact better with LSEs. And so on and so forth. But, I remain skeptical of the validity of subtype "theories".

    So, to answer the question of the thread, I suppose that my "method" is something like:

    - I type the individuals
    - if I think it's more likely to mistype them for their look-alikes, they are one subtype; if for their comparatives, the other subtype.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  21. #21
    Ritella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    at your feet
    Posts
    2,092
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat View Post
    - if I think it's more likely to mistype them for their look-alikes, they are one subtype; if for their comparatives, the other subtype.
    Yes. And this is implicit from Model A, anyhow.
    EII; E6(w5)

    i am flakey

  22. #22
    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

    Mimosa is right on in describing the differences between accepting and producing subtypes... Expat too... Each gets at the same premise in a different way.

    Meged's accepting and producing subtype descriptions are very good, for the most part. However, here is some additional info I've noticed:


    1. SUBTYPES of the same type often LOOK DIFFERENT and ACT DIFFERENTLY... E.g. John Lennon (a Ni-EIE) and Hugh Hefner (a Fe-EIE) are fundamentally similar, (in terms of Model A,) but present themselves differently and each gives off different albeit typical Fe vibe of each particular subtype.

    2. Subtypes DO effect intertype relations, although their effects are somewhat negligible, e.g. you and a dual of a mismatched subtype (e.g. Ni-EIE and Ti-LSI) are still duals; however, it will probably take a bit longer for you to warm up to each other. (Whereas a Ni-EIE and Se-LSI will not need any warm-up time.)

    Furthermore, like I said in another post, subtypes can make activity relations either better or worse (albeit negligibly.) All relations... Although the differences are more noticeable in close psych distance relations.

    I think it would be beneficial for ppl studying Socionics to learn how subtypes effect their quadra's intertype relations--and also learn how to recognize each subtype by way of presenting oneself... (Beyond that the knowledge is really kinda superfluous, unless you are in a serious relationship w/ someone from another quadra.)

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JuJu View Post
    1. SUBTYPES of the same type often LOOK DIFFERENT and ACT DIFFERENTLY... E.g. John Lennon (a Ni-EIE) and Hugh Hefner (a Fe-EIE) are fundamentally similar, (in terms of Model A,) but present themselves differently and each gives off different albeit typical Fe vibe of each particular subtype.
    Yeah, I generally agree (although not on Lennon's type). The subtle differences seem to be found in the eyes, cause there are other things that can influence the overall demeanor and get conflated with subtypes (i.e. an sx Fe-ENFj may look more concentrated than an so/sp Ni-ENFj, despite the latter's characteristic focused, often intense stare).

    2. Subtypes DO effect intertype relations, although their effects are somewhat negligible, e.g. you and a dual of a mismatched subtype (e.g. Ni-EIE and Ti-LSI) are still duals; however, it will probably take a bit longer for you to warm up to each other. (Whereas a Ni-EIE and Se-LSI will not need any warm-up time.)
    They really do. I know I've experienced it with duals; it's a different filter of information distillation, with p-subs feeling a bit more receptive and j-subs definitive. Although, a p-sub rational will almost have a contradictory reactivity, since there will be an underpinning control; a similar situation exists with a j-sub irrational.

    Furthermore, like I said in another post, subtypes can make activity relations either better or worse (albeit negligibly.) All relations... Although the differences are more noticeable in close psych distance relations.
    Agreed completely. I consistently react with much more ease to Se-ISTjs than Ti-ISTjs (the fact that many Ti-subs are 1s affects this as well), because it feels like I can relax around them, to a higher degree.

  24. #24
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't have a method. I like to use subtypes in a loose way really... I've said this before, but probably haven't ever said all of my thoughts on it... and I'm not going to yet again. I think that my basic thinking about them is that given any type, it can be splintered off in a lot of different subcategories, and sooooo I see it as totally arbitrary. The only reason I see types themselves as less arbitrary is because I'm doing it in my "for the sake of argument" as that's how I'm placing it to consider them in the first place... So I guess I see subtypes as something that can be very useful going one way, but not so useful going the other. For instance you could see someone as IEE-Fi, and that being a more accurate fit than simply IEE (for the time being at least, who knows how they'll change later); but if you try to go the other way and demarcate *every* IEE into one subtype or the other, I don't see it as something that would really work very well I guess. However, given that I started with the premise of seeing the types as less arbitrary, there's probably a way to re-arrange all of it... This is why the lack of empirical-ness of Socionics is sort of annoying, because I have to assume *something* to even start thinking about it. I think if I interacted with more people, intertype relations would switch to being the touchstone. Bla. Anyway.

    Last edited by inumbra; 06-03-2009 at 03:41 PM.

  25. #25
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Usually I try to find people of the given type and then try group them into subtypes where I see alot of common trends in terms of behaviors, vibe, VI etc. I dont have a method with respect to the accepting/producing thing, I just try to gauge a few examples of a given subtype and then try and fit more people into that group. At first it can be easy to make mistakes too; I cant beleive I once held Joe Dalessandro to be Se ISTj when hes obviously Ti ISTj. Right now the only two types Ive got divided into subtype would be ENFj and ISTj, the others im still working on.

  26. #26
    Darn Socks Director Abbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southwest USA
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    6,724
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I go by something Brilliand told me. A 1 subtype will have a weaker 5, and a 2 subtype will have a weaker 6.

    ESTj
    1w2 sp/so 1-2-6
    Brilliand's Younger Sister
    Squishy's Older Sister

    Johari Nohari

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritella View Post
    Over here, we'll put up with (almost) all of your crap. You just have to use the secret phrase: "I don't value it. It's related to <insert random element here>, which is not in my quadra."
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    Abbie is so boring and rigid it's awesome instead of boring and rigid. She seems so practical and down-to-the-ground.

  27. #27
    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 Director Abbie View Post
    I go by something Brilliand told me. A 1 subtype will have a weaker 5, and a 2 subtype will have a weaker 6.
    I use this too, but expand it to:

    A 1 subtype will have stronger 1,4,6,7 (left column) and weaker 2,3,5,8 (right column); 2 subtypes are the opposite.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agee The Great View Post
    Nobody here...besides me, seems to know what SLE is except for maybe Maritsa.

  28. #28
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Subtypes scare me. It's like a weird symbolic misformed face, like if someone were to be replaced with a stunt double, the face would look different. Just creepy in my opinion.

    I guess I've just been overanalyzing subtypes of my type

  29. #29
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by octopuslove View Post
    I use this too, but expand it to:

    A 1 subtype will have stronger 1,4,6,7 (left column) and weaker 2,3,5,8 (right column); 2 subtypes are the opposite.
    Exactly my thoughts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat View Post
    I'm more skeptical of the usefulness of subtypes these days than I used to be.

    I think the already mentioned descriptions by Valentina Meged are very useful, also because they broaden the scope of what each type looks and feels like. In that context, it is very useful to refer to, say, a SLE logical subtype rather than sensory subtype, because this conveys a more precise idea of the person. Or to the idea that, say, a Ne-IEE is more likely to be mistyped for an ILE than for a SEE.

    I also have seen some evidence that, say, a Ni-LIE is more likely to interact well with EIEs than Te-LIEs, who on the other hand interact better with LSEs. And so on and so forth. But, I remain skeptical of the validity of subtype "theories".

    So, to answer the question of the thread, I suppose that my "method" is something like:

    - I type the individuals
    - if I think it's more likely to mistype them for their look-alikes, they are one subtype; if for their comparatives, the other subtype.
    Misconceptions such as "you don't remind me of anyone of this type." Where perhaps the person quoting has 3 friends of this type, who are all the other subtype of the person they are talking to, thus misrepresentation. Subtypes are more for clarification purposes. They aren't just "another dichotomy" and they aren't out to make the process more complex.

Posting Permissions

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