DCNH and Wings--Subtypes

[Creepy-male]

Credit to the original thought to both Jonathan for the concept of "wings" and labcoat for the concept of "social contribution".

I thin, in addition to DCNH, there's a disparate kind of subtype: our secondary social role, as drive by our ID.

Any individual type will tend toward behaviours in line with either their Mirage or their Semi-dual. For example, an SLE-like SEI, vs an IEE-like SEI: an SEI who is critical of people's thoughts and their reasoning and more consistently seeks to perform their "Mediator" role through making their environment more rational and logical (like myself), or an SEI who more consistently seeks to build bridges between people and foster mutual understanding (an IEI in this case, but someone like Sigma). Obviously any individual will manifest both types of behaviours but gravitate toward one or the other more. This is because both wings are mutually interdependent in service of the types primary social role.

This exists on a different, but perhaps not irreconcilable level, to DCNH, owing on the most obvious level to the fact that one is a system of two subtypes, while one is a system of four.

DCNH is also concerned with group roles, while wings are more concerned with "niche" and one's independent approach to their social role; or other socially productive/worthwhile pursuits (for example, ILEs' wing-pursuits are probably not objectively socially productive, even if they're of interest to their introtim duals).

Semantically, I think you can have, for instance, Inventor-Lyricists and Inventor-Craftsmen, and Mediator-Conquerers and Mediator-Psychologists (less neat in the Mediators' case since Mediator-Conquerers often have a grasp of psychology due to their logical/rational/psychological approach to mediation; similarly with Inventor-Craftsmen producing beautiful works, and Inventor-Lyricists producing elegant and rigid/direct systems of thought).

[Creepy-male]

Additional thoughts:

There's somewhat of an Australian bias here. Artsy things and systems of mystical thought are often considered rather silly in Australian culture, but perhaps less so in other cultures.

Any sufficiently developed individual will manifest both wings. The idea of wing subtypes is more about one's consistent tendency to one style or the other. A Mediator-Conquerer is still a capable Psychologist, and vice-versa. It's just what you more consistently use to engage in your social role.

[Creepy-male]

One result of this--

Is there a relationship between wing and dualisation need? For example, does an ILE-Craftsman dualise better with an SEI-Conquerer, or an SEI-Psychologist: Is an ILE-SLI more in need of Si or Fe? (And thus dualises better with an SEI-Psychologist or an SEI-Conquerer.)

One potential result is that duals of a wing of the same club (eg ILE-SLI and SEI-SLE) dualise better due to better understanding of one another, without the "wing shock" of adjusting to opposing clubs (say between an ILE-IEI and an SEI-SLE).

This then gets into a definition debate about what "better" is, but perhaps regardless might be worth considering.

[tcaudilllg]

So you agree that dual-types exist. Welcome to the club.

[EyeSeeCold]

So you agree that dual-types exist. Welcome to the club.

I just realized it was the same thing.


http://www.progressivesocionics.co.c...topic.php?t=57

[Creepy-male]

I'm not sure. I believe the wings-subtypings are limited exclusively to semi-dual wing and mirage wing.

Your dual-types have more types, do they not?

Wings arise as a result of "vertical blocks".

[tcaudilllg]

However you conceive of their "arising", your "wing" theory is encapsulated by the dual-type theory. There is no internal mechanism for determining personal interest in a thing BUT the EM type and its functions. Strong EM functions want lots of exposure to their elements, weak EM functions want little exposure to theirs.

Your "wings" are either EM types, or else these "wings" do not exist.

an SEI who is critical of people's thoughts and their reasoning and more consistently seeks to perform their "Mediator" role through making their environment more rational and logical (like myself), or an SEI who more consistently seeks to build bridges between people and foster mutual understanding (an IEI in this case, but someone like Sigma).

These aren't mutually exclusive.

The weakness of your hypothesis is that you aren't anchoring it to a system with elementary components. As such, it won't be taken any more seriously than Enneagram by INTJs. And at the end of the day, only the INTJs matter because the INTJs control how smart non-INTJs feel.

EDIT: "an SEI who is critical of people's thoughts and their reasoning and more consistently seeks to perform their "Mediator" role through making their environment more rational and logical (like myself), or an SEI who more consistently seeks to build bridges between people and foster mutual understanding (an IEI in this case, but someone like Sigma). "

That sounds like intraprenuer vs arbitrator conflict res, in an SEI case.

[EyeSeeCold]

I'm not sure. I believe the wings-subtypings are limited exclusively to semi-dual wing and mirage wing.

Add superego and you have labcoat's Narrator-Taciturn cycles.

ISFp-ESTp-INTp-ENFp
ENTp-INFp-ESFp-ISTp
ESFj-ISTj-ENTj-INFj
INTj-ENFj-ISFj-ESTj

[DividedsGhost]

If you think about this in Jungian terms, then when we extrovert we use Je and Pe, where one will be more prevalent over the other, and when we introvert we use Ji and Pi, where one will also be more prevalent over the other. So we use two axises when functioning, a perceiving one and a rational one. And when we use the creative function we are using an orientation of functions (Je and Pe or Ji and Pi) that is less natural for us, but more adaptable and has more growth for the psyche then staying in our primary orientation of introvert or extrovert.

Thus for an IEI to appear as an ILE they would have to appear as a Pe>Je user, mainly Ne>Fe, and be extroverting (outside of what is natural). Conventionally the IEI would use Fe>Se when extroverting, but here the Ni/Se axis would be shelved for the Ne/Si perceiving axis and Ne would be used with the creative Fe. I might even go so far in this case and say appearing as your mirage is easier than using your creative>dual-seeking because you're using two well understood functions of the psyche versus having to use the less understood, experience related or conditioned Dual-seeking.

And to appear as the semi-dual they would have to shelve their Ti/Fe axis for Fi/Te and use Se>Te (Pe>Je).

In my opinion, it would be much easier to appear as your mirage than it would be your semi-dual because the dual-seeking function will be quite weak if your leading function is quite strong, making an extroverted Se>Te mode of operation quite difficult (in an IEI as an example), especially since it involves the PoLR. That's probably why Gulenko says that a type acting as a Semi-Dual is well developed. I would have to agree.

Edit: I also want to add that it's possible to come off as your dual as well, using their Pe and Je or Pi and Ji combination, when introverting or extroverting creatively. This is also probably a form of development. I see the following as ease of use in appearing as another type.

Base Type: Mirage > Mirror > Dual > Semi-Dual

[Jonathan]

I'm intrigued that someone is referencing my "wings based on cycles" idea from Wikiosocion. I don't see it up there (except for a dead link in "recovered pages"), so I assume it was lost when Wikisocion crashed a few years ago.

That means it's only on my hard drive, but, Creepy-male, apparently you've found it or you have an excellent memory.

@tcaudilllg: This is different from Dual Type theory; it's the idea that there are certain natural cycles that extend a type in each of two directions.

If people are really interested in it, I could post it up someplace.

[woofwoofl]

I'm intrigued that someone is referencing my "wings based on cycles" idea from Wikiosocion. I don't see it up there (except for a dead link in "recovered pages"), so I assume it was lost when Wikisocion crashed a few years ago.

That means it's only on my hard drive, but, Creepy-male, apparently you've found it or you have an excellent memory.

@tcaudilllg: This is different from Dual Type theory; it's the idea that there are certain natural cycles that extend a type in each of two directions.

If people are really interested in it, I could post it up someplace.

Go for it! the more I can jam into my head, the better!

[Jonathan]

Go for it! the more I can jam into my head, the better!

Here's what I have saved. It's not as if I'm really super serious about this theory...It's just an idea I had.

Wings based on cycles

Wings based on cycles is a hypothesis within the category of theories to explain intratype differences. The idea is that based on observations, some people seem to show type characteristics, or secondary type characteristics similar to particular types that are in a different quadra.

It appears that a certain pattern exists according to one of the two following paradigms:

1) a person, in dealing with the result of use of his creative function tends to use the corresponding function of reversed introversion/extraversion, together with the dual-seeking function.

2) a person, in seeking input into the base function area, tends to use the corresponding function of reversed introversion/extraversion, together with the activation function.

Accordingly, in the first case, one might talk of an "ILI with an LSI wing" or, in the second case, of an "ILI with an IEE wing," for example [note - for symmetry maybe EII would make more sense than IEE here]. The term "wing" is borrowed from Enneagram theory, but no connection with Enneagrams is intended in any way, other than the concept that a type may display tendencies related to other types that are somehow "adjacent" in some ways.

Immediately, it is also apparent that these two possibilites are somewhat similar to the concept of creating and accepting subtypes. However, it not presumed that these are exactly the same.

Nor is it presumed that this phenomenon is mutually exclusive of other patterns giving rise to secondary type characteristics or explaining intratype differences. For that matter, it is not known that the concept of "wings" is a stable trait, although it is believed to have stability similar to that of type.

[edit] Explanation by way of example

The idea that a person may have "wings" following this pattern is based on the concept of natural cycles of IM Elements. We'll use ILI to demonstrate this phenomenon. The ILI's creative function is . That means that the ILI produces logical thought in a dynamic setting. This is often associated with "empirical" investigations. But however the techniques and tendencies of may differ from , the end result is a body of thought that may be cumulatively thought of as a "system." Thus, through the accumulation of , the mind perceives the results as having the information aspect. Emphasis on this result may produce the use of in a particular context to maximize the return on the production of by . A further logical step in this process is to try to implement the plans and systems characterized by through , given that the latter is a quadra value and represents part of a cycle of production: Imagination => Plan => implementation.

Hence, one may have a person who is ILI with an LSI "wing." It is expected that unlike a true LSI, such a person would not have such a clear physical presence or display characteristics of a rational type, and would rather display Ip temperament, but altered with a certain extra sense of "resolve" through the LSI secondary characteristics. Nevertheless, such a person will seem to value and more than the prototypical ILI type, and thus be considered to have some Beta characteristics.

Conversely, a natural source of imagination is . If one considers external possibilities but doesn't realize them outwardly, they become "internalized" and streamlined, thus becoming . An ILI who focuses more on the source of imagination and creation will thus tend to use more than the typical ILI. Given that is a quadra value, this may have a Delta character, and correspond to the following cycle of production:

Ideas about what people want => imagination => Critical thinking to make things work

[edit] Challenges to the classical theory

The idea of "wings" presents a challenge to the classical theory because it suggests a more complex relationship to quadra values. It also suggests new ways in which people may be mistyped. For example, what appears like an IEI because of obvious use of intuition combined with could in fact be an EII with an ESE wing.

If these "wings" are valid, they may explain why some people seem to have close connections with people outside a given quadra to a greater extent than would explained by the classical intertype relationships. However, many of the assumptions of classical Socionics would be complicated because the person would have characteristics of multiple :quadras:.

[edit] Potential criticisms of the theory

As with any other theory of intratype differences, this theory of "wings" is prone to charges of ignoring simpler modeling of types. For example, if a person displays what appear to be the characterics of two different types in different ways, it could always be argued that one of those types is the "real" one, and that the other is due to the misunderstanding of the observer. The "ILI with LSI wing" may in fact be an LSI whom one has mistyped for being "too intuitive and laid back for an LSI." The "ILI with an IEE wing" could be an EII whom one has mistyped for being "too thinking-oriented and theoretical" for a leading type.

The key issue is, of course, whether the apparence of secondary type characteristics is due to the lack of understanding or proper perception on the part of the observer, or is actually a true observable fact. It is possible that through greater study and documentation of such presumed phenomena, one may arrive at convincing proof of the existence of these phenomena.

[edit] Possible applications of the theory

One possible application of this way of looking at things is to view benefactor/benefiary (and possibly illusionary and quasi-dual) relations as possibly having a particular purpose in terms of providing inspiration or implementation. The beneficiary (or illusionary) stimulates the base function through its I/E inverse, and may help one to recharge one's creative energies. The benefactor (or quasi-dual) is associated with implementation of one's creative function.