What do you think of this model? Is it necessary to go beyond two subtypes for a given type? Are there people you know for whom a D, C, N, or H subtype is clearly visible?
NOTE: The second article reverses the notation for D and H subtypes. D should be connecting and terminating and H should be connecting and initiating.
What I'm not clear about is if the DCNH is intended to be an extension of the more commonly known 2 subtype system (accepting/producing) or if this is some entirely different system of subtypes, not related to the other one.
From the top article:
Strengthening the linear-energetic functions , whatever position this pair occupies within the framework of the sociomodel, forms dominant subtype (D).
Strengthening of the pliable-deployment functions , leads to the appearance of creative subtype (C).
Strengthening of the even-stable functions , gives normalizing subtype (N).
Strengthening the receptive-adaptive functions , - harmonizing subtype (H).
If creative subtype strengthens and normalizing subtype strengthens , then shouldn't LII-Ne correlate best with creative subtype and LII-Ti correlate best with normalizing subtype in the four subtype model? What about the dominant and harmonizing subtypes? I hypothesize that LII's with the dominant subtype are more like LII-Ti and harmonizing LII's are more like LII-Ne since in the first, thinking is strengthened and intuition strengthened in the second.