Results 1 to 33 of 33

Thread: DCNH subtypes and PoLR

  1. #1
    star stuff April's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chatbox
    TIM
    NG human sorcerer
    Posts
    917
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default DCNH subtypes and PoLR

    I have a question about the DCNH 8-subtype system on a topic that I'm not sure has been studied, but I'd be interested in any opinions on the topic. How would you describe a person who has the same DCNH subtype as their PoLR? Thanks!

    (If it's not too transparent, I'm interested in EII with Se subtype, so feel free to use that as an example.)

  2. #2
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,097
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Since (provisional) descriptions have only been found to the 4-subtype level, one can go off of the C-INFj description and then add a small adjustment on the scale of Ne to Se.

    So...
    (Victor Gulenko) A good eye for people; immediately sees who does or doesn’t feel drawn to them by the looks in people’s eyes / have similar views to them. They love to be in a close circle of friends and adherents, and to discuss with them the novelties of literature, skill, humanities. Frequently behave unsure of themselves; They are scattered. The aim is humanitarian activity, but they can work in the service industry. Works well both in medicine and in pedagogy. Knows how to reconcile those disputing, to smooth out sharp situations. Knows how to create a pleasant situation, how to create a comfortable home. Dresses with the taste, frequently follows fashion.
    Splitting to Se > Ne 8 subtype would make C-INFj + a little less Physically Infantile and a little less Spiritually Agressive (when compared to other INFj-C's).

    The part that confuses me is that Creative DCNH is supposed to strengthen both Se and Ne rather than exchanging one for the other, so that may conflict with this.
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  3. #3
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,466
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by April View Post
    I have a question about the DCNH 8-subtype system on a topic that I'm not sure has been studied, but I'd be interested in any opinions on the topic. How would you describe a person who has the same DCNH subtype as their PoLR? Thanks!

    (If it's not too transparent, I'm interested in EII with Se subtype, so feel free to use that as an example.)
    IMO, the person uses the PoLR like a secondary creative, which may include an unhealthy fixation on proving to other people that they're not incapable of using it. That's how I see it, and I can't say that it's hard not to be skeptical of a full-blown subtype model beyond four subtypes.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  4. #4
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ^ The above is probably related to http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...anslation.html . The article describes a subtype system with identical names as DCNH, except it focuses on emphasized functions rather than elements. PoLR subtype is called Harmonizing there.

  5. #5
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,466
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That article's claims may overlap, but this is what I was actually referring to.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  6. #6
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    That article's claims may overlap, but this is what I was actually referring to.
    I haven't read this one before, thanks for the link. It's interesting how the examples given coincide with Expat's pathetic HA descriptions... the SLE supposedly trying too hard for Fi is described a lot like pathetic Fe-HA suggests, etc. Might be different interpretations of the same phenomenon.

  7. #7
    JohnDo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    LII-IEI
    Posts
    638
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Some (qestionable) examples:

    Se-INFj: Benjamin Sisko (Deep Space Nine)
    I type him as a "commanding Humanist", INFj-ESTp but I'm not entirely sure...

    Se-INTj: John Sheridan (Babylon 5)
    I'm pretty sure that he is a "commanding Analyst", INTj-ESTp.

    Si-ENFj: Kathryn Janeway (Voyager)
    ENFj-ISTp is my best guess...

    Ni-ESFj: Richard Dawkins
    An ESFj as a natural scientist?! A "critical Enthusiast", ESFj-INTp...

    Ti-ENFp: Rick DeLong
    "analysing Initiator", ENFp-INTj (even though he doesn't support the use of subtypes )

  8. #8
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ni-ESFj: Richard Dawkins
    An ESFj as a natural scientist?! A "critical Enthusiast", ESFj-INTp...
    I still haven't figured out what gives you and expat the idiotic idea that the guy is an ESFj in the first place. Your repeating the typing is particularly annoying because it reinforces the typing into mainstream status where it absolutely shouldn't be due to it's dubiousness.

    ps. I am glad you use dual-type theory to confirm my thesis that the typing makes no sense whatsoever. ESFj-INTp? A contradiction in terms. An obvious way to obfuscate a mistyping.

  9. #9
    JohnDo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    LII-IEI
    Posts
    638
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    I still haven't figured out what gives you and expat the idiotic idea that the guy is an ESFj in the first place. Your repeating the typing is particularly annoying because it reinforces the typing into mainstream status where it absolutely shouldn't be due to it's dubiousness.
    I honestly don't believe that I have the reputation to reinforce a typing into mainstream status...

    What type do you think Dawkins is?

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    ps. I am glad you use dual-type theory to confirm my thesis that the typing makes no sense whatsoever. ESFj-INTp? A contradiction in terms. An obvious way to obfuscate a mistyping.
    There is no contradiction there. Just let me explain it in terms of Jungian dichotomies:

    E----|....I
    N----|....S
    T----|....F
    p----|....j

    That's an ENTp-ENTp. Very extraverted, very intuitive, very logical, very rational.

    E..--|....I
    N..--|....S
    T..--|....F
    p..--|....j

    And that's an ENTp-ISFj. Slightly extraverted, slightly intuitive, slightly logical, slightly rational. Why shouldn't such a type exist?! It even works with the Reinin dichotomies: An ENTp-ISFj is very carefree, very yielding, very static and so on - because his base type and subtype share those traits...

    The more interesting part of dual-type theory is, an ENTp-ISFj has the characteristics of both an ENTp and an ISFj, not the characteristics of any other type. 9 months ago I really couldn't see that and considered the idea of two types in one person ridiculous...

  10. #10
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by April View Post
    (If it's not too transparent, I'm interested in EII with Se subtype, so feel free to use that as an example.)
    My EII mother has occasional Se outbursts. Only pointed towards us, the family. It manifests as criticizing and stereotyping of the worst kind. Basically saying "you did this and that, you are worthless", pulling the same old issues over and over again. It can be really ugly. Something primitive, something scary.
    Last edited by Trevor; 12-25-2010 at 11:27 PM.

  11. #11
    lump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,613
    Mentioned
    632 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor View Post
    My EII mother has occasional Se outbursts. Only pointed towards us, the family. It manifests as criticizing and stereotyping of the worst kind. Basically saying "you did this and that, you are worthless", pulling the same old issues over and over again. It can be really ugly. Something primitive, something scary.
    is that really an "Se outburst" or is it just being in a shitty mood? i ask because the fact that i can be bitchy sometimes or yell at people seems to be incompatible in the view of some people with what Se polr types are capable of. and this confuses me because i would think most people get pissed and yell sometimes. heh.

  12. #12
    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

    Subtypes are a joke.

  13. #13
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by laghlagh View Post
    is that really an "Se outburst" or is it just being in a shitty mood?
    Se outburst is not the same thing as shitty mood. They are not mutually exclusive, either. When it comes to my mom, they seem to be somehow linked together, and I was wondering might the fact be type related (it seems to make sense at first glance). Do you get my point? Any questions?

  14. #14
    lump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,613
    Mentioned
    632 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor View Post
    Se outburst is not the same thing as shitty mood. They are not mutually exclusive, either. When it comes to my mom, they seem to be somehow linked together, and I was wondering might the fact be type related (it seems to make sense at first glance). Do you get my point? Any questions?
    sure, i get your point. thx.

  15. #15
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What type do you think Dawkins is?
    ESTj, with a very, very strong emphasis on the fact that he is a logical type.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    April you'd might as well ask Gulenko directly. As a psychologist you can pretty much ask him whatever about anything and he has an obligation to respond, does he not?

  17. #17
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,466
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    As a psychologist you can pretty much ask him whatever about anything and he has an obligation to respond, does he not?
    What?
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  18. #18
    star stuff April's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chatbox
    TIM
    NG human sorcerer
    Posts
    917
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm not a psychologist; I just do psychology research.

  19. #19
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by April View Post
    I have a question about the DCNH 8-subtype system on a topic that I'm not sure has been studied, but I'd be interested in any opinions on the topic. How would you describe a person who has the same DCNH subtype as their PoLR? Thanks!

    (If it's not too transparent, I'm interested in EII with Se subtype, so feel free to use that as an example.)
    Based on my studies of the subject, I would describe it thus:

    An Se-C EII would be more present-focused than other EIIs, more willing to take action in the here-and-now for the sake of her relationships with people, and less willing than other EIIs to back down when confronted. While her thoughts and things she says would still be focused on the big picture and the Ne potential inherent in relationships, in practice she would be more spontaneous, aggressive, and "sharp" than other EIIs.

    Gulenko describes the difference between type and subtype as the difference between words and deeds. So I suspect that someone whose base type's Vulnerable function is his subtype's Leading function would think and say that he's not very good at that area, but in practice he would tend to use that element in his actions probably more than he realizes.
    Last edited by Krig the Viking; 12-29-2010 at 01:11 AM.
    Quaero Veritas.

  20. #20
    xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,466
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Based on my studies of the subject, I would describe it thus:

    An Se-C EII would be more present-focused than other EIIs, more willing to take action in the here-and-now for the sake of her relationships with people, and less willing than other EIIs to back down when confronted. While her thoughts and things she says would still be focused on the big picture and the Ne potential inherent in relationships, in practice she would be more spontaneous, aggressive, and "sharp" than other EIIs.

    Gulenko describes the difference between type and subtype as the difference between words and deeds. So I suspect that someone whose base type's Vulnerable function is his subtype's Leading function would think and say that he's not very good at that area, but in practice he would tend to use that element in his actions probably more than he realizes.
    That's an interesting take and quite different from mine. I shall have to consider it.
    You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.

  21. #21
    star stuff April's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chatbox
    TIM
    NG human sorcerer
    Posts
    917
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I love that interpretation, Krig. Thank you.

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Based on my studies of the subject, I would describe it thus:

    An Se-C EII would be more present-focused than other EIIs, more willing to take action in the here-and-now for the sake of her relationships with people, and less willing than other EIIs to back down when confronted. While her thoughts and things she says would still be focused on the big picture and the Ne potential inherent in relationships, in practice she would be more spontaneous, aggressive, and "sharp" than other EIIs.

    Gulenko describes the difference between type and subtype as the difference between words and deeds. So I suspect that someone whose base type's Vulnerable function is his subtype's Leading function would think and say that he's not very good at that area, but in practice he would tend to use that element in his actions probably more than he realizes.
    Will someone who thinks they have decent Ti call Krig out on the degree to which the whole 8 subtype thing just DOES NOT FOLLOW?

  23. #23
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Will someone who thinks they have decent Ti call Krig out on the degree to which the whole 8 subtype thing just DOES NOT FOLLOW?
    I'm just describing Gulenko's theory so far as I understand it, in which the base type can be divided into 2, 4, 8, or 16 subtypes, which he also calls "persona types" or "energy types". I have no interest in your variation of his theory, in which "subtype" and "energy type" are inexplicably distinct concepts, and subtypes are limited to four for some reason. Nothing in Gulenko's works supports that idea, nor in my opinion does the observable evidence.
    Quaero Veritas.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    I'm just describing Gulenko's theory so far as I understand it, in which the base type can be divided into 2, 4, 8, or 16 subtypes, which he also calls "persona types" or "energy types". I have no interest in your variation of his theory, in which "subtype" and "energy type" are inexplicably distinct concepts, and subtypes are limited to four for some reason. Nothing in Gulenko's works supports that idea, nor in my opinion does the observable evidence.
    What kind of creating LII just takes another LII's theory spoon fed, without actually critiquing its consistency? Don't you think that's kind of reckless?

    Listen people respect you I guess because you take the time to translate those articles? That's not a criterion for academic respect IMO.

    You've not seen observable evidence because it's not there. Something in your observation system is fucked up.

  25. #25
    Marie84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,359
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Based on my studies of the subject, I would describe it thus:

    An Se-C EII would be more present-focused than other EIIs, more willing to take action in the here-and-now for the sake of her relationships with people, and less willing than other EIIs to back down when confronted. While her thoughts and things she says would still be focused on the big picture and the Ne potential inherent in relationships, in practice she would be more spontaneous, aggressive, and "sharp" than other EIIs.

    Gulenko describes the difference between type and subtype as the difference between words and deeds. So I suspect that someone whose base type's Vulnerable function is his subtype's Leading function would think and say that he's not very good at that area, but in practice he would tend to use that element in his actions probably more than he realizes.
    *apologies to April for hijacking her thread*

    Krig,
    do you know how the Dominant subtype would work in EII? And how Normalizing works in LSE?
    I've been thinking about possibly being D recently, so I'm curious.
    Thanks in advance
    EII INFj
    Forum status: retired

  26. #26
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,631
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marie84 View Post
    *apologies to April for hijacking her thread*

    Krig,
    do you know how the Dominant subtype would work in EII? And how Normalizing works in LSE?
    I've been thinking about possibly being D recently, so I'm curious.
    Thanks in advance
    No doubt you're D. You're bitchy as hell.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  27. #27
    Marie84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,359
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    No doubt you're D. You're bitchy as hell.
    guilty as charged
    EII INFj
    Forum status: retired

  28. #28
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    What kind of creating LII just takes another LII's theory spoon fed, without actually critiquing its consistency? Don't you think that's kind of reckless?

    Listen people respect you I guess because you take the time to translate those articles? That's not a criterion for academic respect IMO.

    You've not seen observable evidence because it's not there. Something in your observation system is fucked up.
    I have carefully studied Gulenko's work and thus far have found it consistent with my observations of how people actually work. I'm not yet convinced of all aspects of it -- for example, why does he contrast "energy type" with "information type", when clearly the energy type is still dealing with forms of information? However, in general his theory has significant explanatory power, and thus far seems consistent with the evidence. Consequently, I treat it as an accurate working theory until proven otherwise.

    I have also carefully studied your variation of the theory, and found it mostly incomprehensible, filled with intuitive leaps with very few logical explanations. I think it likely that you're an IEI who has mistyped himself as LII, and that that mistyping is at the root of your entire theory. From what I've seen, it's fairly common for Beta NFs to arrive at a conclusion intuitively, and then be unable to accurately evaluate its truth or falsehood due to weak Logic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marie84 View Post
    *apologies to April for hijacking her thread*

    Krig,
    do you know how the Dominant subtype would work in EII? And how Normalizing works in LSE?
    I've been thinking about possibly being D recently, so I'm curious.
    Thanks in advance
    Hijacking? You're actually bringing it back on topic. Tcaud and I are the hijackers.

    Please take these descriptions with a grain of salt, as I'm basically thinking them up on the fly.

    A D-EII would be more goal-oriented than other EIIs, likely in the service of some humanitarian cause. While she would talk about people and relationships like other EIIs, she would be much more driven to make things happen, and have substantially higher energy levels than other EIIs.

    Personally, I think it's more likely you're a C-EII, mainly due to your long-term interest in a theory like socionics, which although it has significant explanatory power, has limited practical application. Whereas a D-EII would be driven to achieve some goal, a C-EII would be more focused on exploring things. An Ne-C-EII in particular would be more focused on exploring new ideas than other EIIs, finding new ways of understanding and relating to people. More contemplative than a D-EII, but still energetic when pursuing a new idea.

    As for N-LSE -- an N-LSE would be the sort of person who believes the best way to achieve efficiency is through order. Consequently, they would be the sort of person who keeps everything in their possession or otherwise under their control meticulously organized and neat and ready to be used. I think Liam Neeson's character in "Taken" would be a good example of this subtype. Calm, more reserved than other LSEs, very efficient.
    Quaero Veritas.

  29. #29
    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 Krig the Viking View Post
    Personally, I think it's more likely you're a C-EII, mainly due to your long-term interest in a theory like socionics, which although it has significant explanatory power, has limited practical application. Whereas a D-EII would be driven to achieve some goal, a C-EII would be more focused on exploring things. An Ne-C-EII in particular would be more focused on exploring new ideas than other EIIs, finding new ways of understanding and relating to people. More contemplative than a D-EII, but still energetic when pursuing a new idea.
    Hmm, I don't think because she has been on the forum for a while that she is more likely a Creative type. I found creative subtype to be pretty playful minded through, and goofy at times, especially to the people they know they can be like that with. I think marie84 is somewhere in the N/D, good thing she's considered she is a D because I am confused between the two as well, she is less likely to back off on a post than most people do here, which I guess is a good thing.
    Last edited by 07490; 12-30-2010 at 10:38 AM.
    (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.

  30. #30
    lump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,613
    Mentioned
    632 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    ooh ooh krig do H-EII please? also do you have an opinion as to whether H is correct for me? thanks!

  31. #31
    "Information without energy is useless" Nowisthetime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    near Russia
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    1,025
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marie84 View Post
    Krig,
    do you know how the Dominant subtype would work in EII?
    A former girlfriend of mine is EII. I'm pretty sure D subtype. Because of the way she is and also because I think we had subtype duality. I have experience of other EIIs too, so I think I'm able to compare.

    Although sensitive and soft in private she could sometimes be very dominating in a group. At parties she could take charge of the conversation. Leading seemed to come naturally for her. I had an impression that her energy on a face level was very directed and intensive. She is a teacher and researcher, she is also into political activism.

  32. #32
    Marie84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,359
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Hijacking? You're actually bringing it back on topic. Tcaud and I are the hijackers.

    Please take these descriptions with a grain of salt, as I'm basically thinking them up on the fly.

    A D-EII would be more goal-oriented than other EIIs, likely in the service of some humanitarian cause. While she would talk about people and relationships like other EIIs, she would be much more driven to make things happen, and have substantially higher energy levels than other EIIs.

    Personally, I think it's more likely you're a C-EII, mainly due to your long-term interest in a theory like socionics, which although it has significant explanatory power, has limited practical application. Whereas a D-EII would be driven to achieve some goal, a C-EII would be more focused on exploring things. An Ne-C-EII in particular would be more focused on exploring new ideas than other EIIs, finding new ways of understanding and relating to people. More contemplative than a D-EII, but still energetic when pursuing a new idea.
    Honestly, I don't relate to much in the C (and H) description. I think the main factor that drives me in my continued learning of the theory is that I want to use it for practical application; it's about understanding myself, others and how to maneuver myself in the world. In that sense, I'm grateful to C's who make these discoveries, but it's outside of my comfort zone to do that myself

    The part about goals=D is one of the main reasons I never considered D before, because I don't have anything in mind that would drive me towards achieving atm, and it rather frustrates me since I feel that I have a lot of passion but no outlet for it; if I did have something I wanted, I think I'd be relentless towards obtaining it.

    The things I relate to in D

    *ending up being the leader even without wanting to be. Even though I'm rather shy I often ended-up being the more direct one in groups, even at school, I usually was the one who lead group projects, especially if the others were too passive to get the ball rolling (Picture people around a table looking at one another, waiting for someone to make the first move; if nobody initiates I generally step forward).
    *I think I'm very blunt for an ethical type.
    *I have a lot of anxious energy, even to the point that I often find it difficult to go to sleep even when I'm exhausted. In overwhelming situations I feel a depletion in energy (Introversion in general I think), but as soon as I get into my zone I can go on for elongated periods at a time
    *I can get quite impassioned when speaking of things that affect me deeply
    *I relate to this; "Dominant Dostoevsky [EII] is sort of "an iron fist in a velvet glove": after a demonstration of softness and ethics emerges an equally demonstrative condemnation and desire to "educate".

    I guess I thought N before since I can be very particular about things, but I don't really have the patience to be meticulous about things to such an extent.
    I think of Minde as being a likely EII-N, someone who puts a lot of effort into learning about the mechanics of photography and imagery, very detail orientated. I greatly admire people who can put forth the diligence to do this sort of stuff, but I can't be bothered with it.

    As for N-LSE -- an N-LSE would be the sort of person who believes the best way to achieve efficiency is through order. Consequently, they would be the sort of person who keeps everything in their possession or otherwise under their control meticulously organized and neat and ready to be used. I think Liam Neeson's character in "Taken" would be a good example of this subtype. Calm, more reserved than other LSEs, very efficient.
    I don't think I've seen "Taken" but what you described is pretty much how I'd picture my ideal type of LSE; calm, reserved, polite/proper, well prepared, etc.

    Thank you for your help, Krig, I sincerely appreciate it

    Quote Originally Posted by 07490 View Post
    I found creative subtype to be pretty playful minded through, and goofy at times, especially to the people they know they can be like that with.
    That's what I was thinking. I think I'm too serious and blunt for what a C subtype looks like

    I think marie84 is somewhere in the N/D, good thing she's considered she is a D because I am confused between the two as well, she is less likely to back off on a post than most people do here, which I guess is a good thing.
    That's also been a factor in rethinking this

    Quote Originally Posted by Nowisthetime View Post
    A former girlfriend of mine is EII. I'm pretty sure D subtype. Because of the way she is and also because I think we had subtype duality. I have experience of other EIIs too, so I think I'm able to compare.

    Although sensitive and soft in private she could sometimes be very dominating in a group. At parties she could take charge of the conversation. Leading seemed to come naturally for her. I had an impression that her energy on a face level was very directed and intensive. She is a teacher and researcher, she is also into political activism.
    I think if I weren't shy I'd be a lot like this around people in general, but as it is I only really act this way around people I'm comfortable with/know. Although this may change in the future, idk
    EII INFj
    Forum status: retired

  33. #33
    Bananas are good. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The Rift
    TIM
    C-EIE, 7-4-8 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,632
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by April View Post
    I have a question about the DCNH 8-subtype system on a topic that I'm not sure has been studied, but I'd be interested in any opinions on the topic. How would you describe a person who has the same DCNH subtype as their PoLR? Thanks!
    Well it depends on the type and the function in question, but the 8-subtype system functions are actually not the same as classical IE element functions, so the two are not necessarily in conflict. For example, an IEI's Te-PoLR manifests in a strong dislike of being shown evidence they're wrong, which has nothing to do with Te-subtype; which manifests in a cold, controlling nature. IEI-Te is actually a very common type, as are LSI-Ne and ESI-Ne (visionary/idealistic xSIs).
    What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.

    Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).

    For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.

    -Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov

Posting Permissions

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