What methods besides reading descriptions are there?
What methods besides reading descriptions are there?
(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
Well, I suppose you'd need to read descriptions eventually. I mean, how else would you know what they even are and how they are different from each other? At the very least I'd think you would have to read the description of the information elements or what DCNH even is.
Subtypes are ways of distinguishing people of the same type who nonetheless act differently to one another.
DCNH deals with J/P, I/E, and as a consequence Static/Dynamic. You could get a good fix on someone's DCNH subtype by determining which temperament they look more like relative to other representatives of that type.
The context is "methods besides descriptions". It seems the more likely conclusion is that I have read the descriptions already rather than me not wanting to take the time to do so. At the least, why assume either one?
Specifics yo. You're bouncing around the issue.
(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
What sort of specifics do you want?
Presumably you're talking about how to find your subtype/energy type/persona type/whatever?
The best way, in my opinion, is to find as many people as you can that you're sure are the same type as you. Then start looking for differences. Are you more outwardly-oriented than most others of your type? You probably have an Extraverted subtype. Are you more absent-minded and oblivious to the physical world than others of your type? You're probably an Intuitive subtype. And so on.
The one caveat is that this method only works if you're very sure of your own base type and the base types of the people you're comparing yourself to.
Quaero Veritas.
Yeah, comparing yourself to identicals of yours would be the way to go. I've lost interest in the process over the years, though. Without applying some form of rigor to the exercise there is just to little to base a decision on.
For now, I recommend people to type less precisely than 16 types, not more.
Practical ways of confirmation. I don't give subtypes much credit right now because I don't see the practical differences.
Yes.
Okay, I have been using this method. The problem is that I can't separate accentuation from natural tendency. Nowhere is this accounted for.The best way, in my opinion, is to find as many people as you can that you're sure are the same type as you. Then start looking for differences. Are you more outwardly-oriented than most others of your type? You probably have an Extraverted subtype. Are you more absent-minded and oblivious to the physical world than others of your type? You're probably an Intuitive subtype. And so on.
The one caveat is that this method only works if you're very sure of your own base type and the base types of the people you're comparing yourself to.
I have identified Creative accentuation, and I do find myself to be more active(mentally, at least). I'm just not sure if that would entail ILI-Te.
This sounds reasonable, even though I'm pretty stuck on 16 types.
(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