Warrior-librarian's subtype

[The Exception]

What subtype do you think I come most across as in the DCNH model?

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=System_of_DCNH_Subtypes

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=Compatibility_and_Duality

[electric sheep]

lol I don't know what any of that means.

[Krig the Viking]

I voted Creative, but that's very, very preliminary. Based on the very small dataset I have about you, I would rank the likelihood of the subtypes as: Creative, Harmonizing, Normalizing, Dominant.

[The Exception]

I'm wondering at what point subtypes start to become pointless. You could always find new ways to further and further subdivide people within a given type. Eventually you could go so far as to have more theoretically possible subtypes than people on this planet. Which in that case you might as well just throw out the labels altogther.

Still I find this 4 subtype model intriguing.

[Krig the Viking]

I think the 4 subtype model is enough for most purposes. Deeper than that is only useful when you have large numbers of the same DCNH subtype.

[The Exception]

Any further thoughts on my subtype?

I'm definitely not dominant and normalizing is highly unlikely. However, I'm still having trouble deciding between C and H.


Here are Krigs DCNH LII descriptions for your reference:

LII Subtypes

Mental Ring Subtypes

Normalizing: appears stern, emotionless, robotic. Gives the impression of solidity, stability, and immovability. Attempts to make him show emotion almost always fail. His primary focus is on logically and ethically correct systems and behaviour. In any given task, he hones in on what is most important, and ignores all distractions, almost as if he is not a part of the world around him. Deconstructs abstract and theoretical problems with ease. Can be sharp and unforgiving, intentionally or otherwise. Clothing is very conservative, neat and tidy.

Creative: has a sort of reserved openness about him. Can be very absent-minded; you may occasionally find him quietly pacing about, staring off into space, mumbling to himself, a frown of concentration on his face. He is defined by his curiosity; he wants to learn how everything works, and why everything is the way it is. As far as he is concerned, learning is its own reward, and he is baffled that others do not feel the same way. He can be oblivious of social problems, sometimes even oblivious of other people entirely. He has a strong ironic wit, and may use sarcasm as a weapon. Conscious of his appearance, he tries to dress well, but if he has lost himself in his studies for a few days (as he is known to do), he may appear rumpled and wild-haired.

Vital Ring Subtypes

Dominant: more confident and outwardly-focused than the other LII subtypes. He tries to influence the world by his wisdom and intellect, in an almost Machiavellian way. The world is his chessboard, and people and things are his chess pieces, to be moved about strategically in pursuit of his goal. He does this, not because he enjoys it, but because he feels it is necessary. Goal-oriented; when he decides upon a goal, he will analyze the situation, choose the best strategy for acheiving it, and then follow through until the goal is acheived. However, he does not like to be on the front lines; he feels his skills are best used directing and advising others, and will only take action himself if it is necessary. When not in "business mode", he can be quite mirthful and good-humoured. Good at socializing, when necessary.

Harmonizing: gives the impression of softness. Not as resolute as the other LII subtypes. While he does have an internal logical and moral system, he doesn't express it very much, especially if doing so will create tension. He tries to create harmony, resolve problems, and avoids violence. He likes nothing more than a comfortable evening hanging out with a few good friends -- he is probably the most easygoing and sociable of the LIIs. He may come across as a "loveable geek".

[Krig the Viking]

I've learned quite a bit since I wrote those, and I may have to rewrite them a bit, especially the Dominant and Normalizing ones. I was typing some Dominant LIIs as Normalizers. However, I think the Creative and Harmonizing subtypes are substantially correct.

I wish I had more time and energy in a day, there's so many things like this I want to do!

[The Exception]

I'd be interested in seeing the DCNH descriptions for ESEs. Do you know any examples of C-ESEs? That's the ultimate in duality for an H-LII? Dualization on both the type and the subtype level.

[Krig the Viking]

C-ESEs: Robin Williams, "Daisy" on the T.V. show "Bones" (Sweets' girlfriend), "Sam" in the movie "Garden State". Possibly the character of "Turk" from "Scrubs", I'm less certain of that. I'm not sure if Michael Palin from Monty Python is C-ESE or H-ESE.

And yeah, D+N and C+H are the subtype duals.

[JohnDo]

The easiest way to determine your subtype is described here. This works, believe it or not...

[The Exception]

The easiest way to determine your subtype is described here. This works, believe it or not...

No it doesn't.

[chip]

I'd like to find out the the subtle differences amongst ESE too. I'm an ESL teacher and well that is really a perfect position to notice the differences in personality and I work with three other ESE teachers and they all do have distinct personality traits. Why? I have no clue. I can recognize many of the students personalities, and I have to admit, realistically, there is a comonality in their functional behaviour, and without any intentionality of their own, the socionic intertype relations are alive and at play. As a teacher, children are really great subjects if you are studying personality as Myers and Briggs once did, they're free from all the trouble and stress you become when your adult. Its said that around puberty children learn self-awareness (the fall from grace if you will, when eve picked the apple), and since they are still children, they exhibit personality without the self. They're like a bird you see outside your window seated on a branch, the bird has no sense of self and yet displays behaviour indicative of a personality, i.e. singing a love song. Its interesting to consider, they act like themselves and yet they have no sense of self, i.e. the smart kid, the smelly kid, class clown, popular, cool, uncool, liberal, conservative, good singer, bad singer, etc. What I mean is they're at an age before they start comparing themselves with each other. I have taught teenagers too, and except for healthy teenagers, many of them act subdued like their under a spell. In my non-professional opinion that could be role-function.

Perhaps I've spent too long living here in the orient but as for your subtype warrior-librarian, in order to know yourself, lose yourself. Your personality will manifest itself in your actions and interactions, not in your thoughts and questions.

[Krig the Viking]

No it doesn't.

So long as one keeps in mind that currently no-one but JohnDo accepts his theory as valid, I don't see the harm in investigating it. My suspicion is that it's not accurate, but I don't have enough evidence either way for a definitive conclusion. To be honest, since I mostly treat V.I. as a loose starting point anyway, rather than conclusive proof, I haven't expended a whole lot of energy on it. When it comes to typing, external physical features should always be secondary to internal mental processes, as far as I'm concerned. Otherwise you'll be prone to errors.

I'd like to find out the the subtle differences amongst ESE too. I'm an ESL teacher and well that is really a perfect position to notice the differences in personality and I work with three other ESE teachers and they all do have distinct personality traits.

Some very general descriptions, as I currently understand the ESE subtypes:

D-ESEs are very driven and goal-focused, and will use high levels of emotional pressure to attain their goals. Not afraid to stir up conflict if there's something in the way of their goals. The most melodramatic of the ESEs.

C-ESEs are more bubbly and creative, can be somewhat scatter-brained, and are always coming up with new ideas for fun things to do and ways to improve the group emotional atmosphere.

N-ESEs are grounded and stable, well-organized, and tend to be concerned about doing the right thing the right way.

H-ESEs are kind and gentle, tend to try to soothe conflicts and restore peace, can have issues standing up for themselves or confronting people, because they don't want to disrupt the emotional atmosphere and create disharmony.

[The Exception]

So long as one keeps in mind that currently no-one but JohnDo accepts his theory as valid, I don't see the harm in investigating it. My suspicion is that it's not accurate, but I don't have enough evidence either way for a definitive conclusion. To be honest, since I mostly treat V.I. as a loose starting point anyway, rather than conclusive proof, I haven't expended a whole lot of energy on it. When it comes to typing, external physical features should always be secondary to internal mental processes, as far as I'm concerned. Otherwise you'll be prone to errors.

I'm just very skeptical that everyone of the same face shape has the same functions accentuated. Seems like an awful broad generalization to make. Maybe there's some general tendencies, who knows.

It probably doesn't mean much but I'd classify my face shape as somewhat longish but possibly round. I want to say more mathematical but I could be wrong. And more soft than angular. Which makes Ni subtype most likely with Ti also possible. Definitely not square, like creative subtypes have.


Some very general descriptions, as I currently understand the ESE subtypes:

D-ESEs are very driven and goal-focused, and will use high levels of emotional pressure to attain their goals. Not afraid to stir up conflict if there's something in the way of their goals. The most melodramatic of the ESEs.

C-ESEs are more bubbly and creative, can be somewhat scatter-brained, and are always coming up with new ideas for fun things to do and ways to improve the group emotional atmosphere.

N-ESEs are grounded and stable, well-organized, and tend to be concerned about doing the right thing the right way.

H-ESEs are kind and gentle, tend to try to soothe conflicts and restore peace, can have issues standing up for themselves or confronting people, because they don't want to disrupt the emotional atmosphere and create disharmony.

Thanks for the descriptions. Assuming these are accurate I tend to have the best interactions with C and H ESE. (Which suggests I'm H or C subtype). D-ESEs I think would be the least favorable. I find them kind of scary and the melodramic aspect would be a turn off for me.

[Krig the Viking]

Yeah, I'm fairly certain you're either C or H, and I'm leaning toward H right now, though that's more of a hypothesis than a conclusion. There's too much data pointing either way, that needs to be explained somehow.

[Creepy-cinq]

Harmonizing: gives the impression of softness. Not as resolute as the other LII subtypes. While he does have an internal logical and moral system, he doesn't express it very much, especially if doing so will create tension. He tries to create harmony, resolve problems, and avoids violence. He likes nothing more than a comfortable evening hanging out with a few good friends -- he is probably the most easygoing and sociable of the LIIs. He may come across as a "loveable geek".

Based on the above, I'll say H. But, my guess is tentative. It's really just based on impressions from your posts and comparisons between you and other LIIs on 16types. Also, what I know about DCNH is minimal. So, take what you will.