Results 1 to 32 of 32

Thread: DCNH and its dichotomies

  1. #1
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default DCNH and its dichotomies

    There has been some confusion about the contact/distant, terminal/initial and connecting/ignoring dichotomy in DCNH, particularly when it comes to typing people in real-life through these dichotomies solely, as people tend to associate their colloquial meanings with these (i.e., ignoring would mean something like ignoring people). If you understand these dichotomies, then you don't need to discern the type related behaviors with subtype behaviors or observe the functional enhancement to type people, as certain types have some DCNH traits suppressed in favor of their general temperament, for e.g, Childlike/Infantile EP types (i.e., ILE/IEE) with Dominant type would show various Creative traits, jumping and bouncing from their seats, sudden sharing of ideas and potential, etc. but their orientation towards the life would remain always Dominant; that is, they will share their Ne information in a way as to dominate the conversation and not for releasing the information or enjoying the "creativity" for its own sake, plus they will sense the small changes in the environment, try to connect with people in order to get to know them and systematize the goals somehow, preferably using the people as resources, sort of putting anchors around people, turning into the quintessential EJ type.

    Creatives tend to forget whatever is happening outside them when they are "on" (whether someone calls them or knocks the door), as if they could only see the things that fall in their sphere of interests and come across as pretty much oblivious to other stuff. For example, if they are talking with someone and another person around them asks something or interrupt them, then they won't respond till they finish whatever they are saying, and then notice later (even when they notice mid-sentence, they are unable to interrupt themselves... as if they have a fear of not being able to release tons of information out of their head or as if they are in a rush) unless someone force them so hard which irritates them and they may become quarrelsome and start ignoring that person intentionally (to deny the influence), whereas a Dominant would interrupt the other person, "Wait!" or show agreement/disagreement and complete whatever they are saying and then head towards the another person, or try to give the information if it can be given in short amount. Creatives have the "merging" presence with the person / people they are talking to, like they are the only deity/deities that exist in the whole world (do not confuse the Enneagram's sx merging with this) and they stop noticing any changes in the environment. I use the analogy of a shooter in shooter range with headphones to describe Creatives, where they simply focus on the targets with no concern for what is happening outside.

    Dominants are aware of the people or whatever happening around them. They need to intentionally ignore someone if they are disturbing them too much, but you can see that they are deliberately trying to not listen such people or think about them (when their actions are already affecting the people around them). If the Dominant is "on", he is going to respond to every small changes in the environment, for e.g, if a child is slipped from the seat, or a door is knocked, or someone enters a room, etc. then they would be the one to respond, if Ne Base, they might create some metaphorical connection out of it in a very flaky but deliberate manner trying to create some effect outside, the Ni Base might give sarcastic remarks with their observations of small changes in an annoying way, i.e., if they are present in a house with strangers, and someone comes at the place with food stuff in his hands, then they would suddenly give remarks on the food or why they bought the food in the first place suggesting that they are really concerned with all such stuff implying they have a keen eyes (though it shouldn't necessarily be the Base function, I have seen Creative Ni Dominants do that as well... they come across as blunt on such small changes). This is ignoring/connecting dichotomy, and the most important dichomoty imo. Answer these questions:

    (a) If you are "doing" something (whether it's a conversation or working on a project), and something happens around you, are you likely to suddenly interrupt and take measures to resolve the distraction, or you keep at your pace as long as someone isn't directly stopping you doing what you love? (A Creative wouldn't stop talking and bursting out the information. A Normalizer would keep doing his stuff)

    (b) When you enter the house, do you tend to find the place where you can perform your activities freely or you take notice of the actions of the people present there, what they are eating or talking, the energy and movement of people? (A connecting Ni ego is likely to notice people's behaviors and why they are doing what they do. A connecting Si ego is likely to notice the energy and movement of people, staying in the present as much as possible, but both of these traits can exist).

    Harmonizers must learn the ways to accommodate people, as everything is connected; that is, like Dominants, they observe the movements of people and small changes in the environment, often carefully and tactfully at times, and they come across as someone with incredibly low energy for doing / finishing things on their own, so they make themselves aware of the general ethics and good manners of the situations in order to accommodate people. They have an extremely relaxing presence, like if two people are talking to them at a time, then they would listen to both without giving importance to one person and if any of them start becoming pushy / aggressive, then it naturally turns into a calmness around them (For this reason, they are said to have an enhancementon this aspect of Si). If new changes cause the disturbance or annoyance, then they would let other energetic people resolve the issues, so they are truly observers and "connecting" for its own sake. Dominants are "connecting" because they need to be in control, which they can only do so by reacting to changes as they come, as this has the polarizing effect on people around them who then start believeing them a leader. As mutually connecting types, Dominants tend to go towards the Harmonizing way of doing things in three scenarios: (a) when they need to change their action plan (b) when they are threatened and unable to assert themselves or control people (c) when they are at peace and not doing anything or deliberately want to accommodate people, so they start to keep some distance to figure out the people / situation. They say that Harmonizers tend to go towards the Dominant way of doing things under pressure, but I haven't observed it yet, except one H-LSE suddenly ordering me aggressively through text.

    Regarding the inital/terminal dichotomy, both Harmonizers and Creatives are initial, because they think they don't have the capability to decide on a single idea and work towards it. For Creatives, they may work on every direction or whatever they think will help them actualized, for e.g., in a group where there are few Creatives, they would not just distract themselves, but also distract other people (and get succeed in distracting Creatives, while annoying the terminal types - Ns and Ds). Terminal types do regulation, meaning no matter how messy they get, they would suddenly get reminded of the goals in their mind. It's hard for terminal types to abandon their previous goals, so when new information comes, they may either reject it or integrate to their mental lists for retrieving it later.

    The contact/distant dichotomy is difficult to notice first, especially online where many socially inept people come presenting themselves in a sort of caricature. Sometimes it's possible to not have a clear DCNH type if you have mental disorders or are pretty unstable in your approach towards life. For example, if you have the anxiety/depression and spend most of your time at home due to it, but still badly want to contact with people, then you may take the "distant" approach (while still being connecting/ignoring). I have met a few people online with social anxiety who comes across as incredibly social, so you need to ask people what makes them most comfortable psychologically.

    These are the general trends that I've observed in people. So, to determine the type, you need to observe the ignoring/connecting dichotomy first (which is very easy if you understand this dichotomy), which will help you rule out N/C or H/D, as people can fluctuate between the other two dichotomies under stress, but the change in ignoring/connecting dichotomy happens with constant efforts and not in a short time.

  2. #2
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have not spent enough time with DCNH to have a grasp of it; I have given it overviews a couple of times waiting for something to jump out at me and be enough to pull me back in and nothing did. So its been in my "later" pile for awhile. When skimming the definitions it seems I always seem to fit into at least two while "possibly" being the other two as well...

    I am IEE and probably Ne subtype, 1w2, sx/so (the latter according the sum of the actual given definitions, though not the stereotypical sometimes dramatized view of it). So I wonder if that info tells you which DCNH is more probable for me??

    But just reading what you wrote here, Creative Subtype stands out by far the most for me. I am this way in my work and in conversation. Once I am "on", that is - because between projects and focus, and I can be very scattered. I get completely focused on what I am doing in a project or who I am talking to - and I am not even seeing other things at ALL, or I am effortlessly completely ignoring distractions after a glance because my focus on the thing at hand requires it. And I like the zen-feeling I have being completely absorbed in the thing I am absorbed in. Or focusing on the one person, for that matter. I consider a social event to have been a "good" one, and rewarding/fulfilling, only if I have had a chance for 1:1 conversations, and a few of these is great - where I am completely focusing on one person, even if lots of other people are around us at the time -- we are in a timeless bubble for the conversation. And the occasion is one I consider unrewarding and disappointing if there has been none of that. I always then feel the time has been more "real" because I have truly gotten to know someone better - a bit of who they really are. That focus and that preference when socializing is pretty much always true of me. So I'm asking: In your opinion, does that alone put me into the "Creative" group??
    ________________

    I am trying to read this article. I am as far as 2.1, and hope to get back to it later. It really looks like with the dichtonomies I am "contact, initial, ignoring - creative subtype (C);" and my SLI husband, probably: "distant, initial, connecting - harmonizing subtype (H)". Not really final on that though, as I do not feel I have a grasp of the whole yet...

    _______________
    ...oh, and according to section 2.2, this is consistent as my strengthens C and my SLI-husband's strengthens H...
    Last edited by Eliza Thomason; 06-20-2016 at 06:54 PM.
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  3. #3
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The one thing that bothers me (a lot) with dcnh, is that you seem to be able to move towards another subtype level during your life, which is not true, cause everybody VI stays the same. This doesn't connect/correlate. It does not compute goddamned.

  4. #4
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    The one thing that bothers me (a lot) with dcnh, is that you seem to be able to move towards another subtype level during your life, which is not true, cause everybody VI stays the same. This doesn't connect/correlate. It does not compute goddamned.
    Yeah I have the same problem. This DCNH thingy seem to vary constantly whenever the environment changes. A practical example: someone coming from a big city where life is very competitive and he looks like a Normalizing type - he can keep up the pace but not direct other people, he barely has time to finish his stuff, has to ignore whatever happens around him. Suddenly he moves to a small town in the countryside, he'll be considered a mover and shaker, directing everyone towards improving things, a clear dominant subtype.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  5. #5
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post

    But just reading what you wrote here, Creative Subtype stands out by far the most for me. I am this way in my work and in conversation. Once I am "on", that is - because between projects and focus, and I can be very scattered. I get completely focused on what I am doing in a project or who I am talking to - and I am not even seeing other things at ALL, or I am effortlessly completely ignoring distractions after a glance because my focus on the thing at hand requires it. And I like the zen-feeling I have being completely absorbed in the thing I am absorbed in. Or focusing on the one person, for that matter. I consider a social event to have been a "good" one, and rewarding/fulfilling, only if I have had a chance for 1:1 conversations, and a few of these is great - where I am completely focusing on one person, even if lots of other people are around us at the time -- we are in a timeless bubble for the conversation. And the occasion is one I consider unrewarding and disappointing if there has been none of that. I always then feel the time has been more "real" because I have truly gotten to know someone better - a bit of who they really are. That focus and that preference when socializing is pretty much always true of me. So I'm asking: In your opinion, does that alone put me into the "Creative" group??
    What you are describing here could be attributed to your sx-first stack; you require the 1:1 connection or the intense stimulation and merge with it. The question is: when you are having the 1:1 connection, and someone comes around you or interrupt you, do you tend to assertively stop them (as they are disturbing your connection) or you don't notice them at all or their presence doesn't affect you? A Dominant sx/so would need that intense 1:1 connection that you talked about, but in social environments, when they are merged with someone, they are going to do so in a very pushy manner, for e.g., they might directly stop other people disturbing them, or they would intentionally make flattering comments around people about that connection as if they are deliberately trying to "acquire" it. I am telling you based on personal experience, Dominants sx/so tend to be very extreme, pushy and attention seeker. I know one Creative ILI sx/so who is very flaky in social environments, but once he merge with the connection, he just keeps talking and sharing whatever information he knows, like he once found a guy at gym who proved to have an interest in "Game of Thrones" series (he was Creative too), so they both kept talking about it and why the latest season sucks, etc. and seemed to completely forget what they were doing previously (i.e., a certain exercise), and when I tried to force them, they didn't listen to me at all, perhaps they didn't even notice me or what I said to them. You sound Creative to me, especially that "I am not even seeing other things at ALL" and "we are in a timeless bubble for the conversation" part, but I won't rule out Dominant.

  6. #6
    Contra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    TIM
    ILI-Ni
    Posts
    1,405
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Yeah I have the same problem. This DCNH thingy seem to vary constantly whenever the environment changes. A practical example: someone coming from a big city where life is very competitive and he looks like a Normalizing type - he can keep up the pace but not direct other people, he barely has time to finish his stuff, has to ignore whatever happens around him. Suddenly he moves to a small town in the countryside, he'll be considered a mover and shaker, directing everyone towards improving things, a clear dominant subtype.
    This is essentially what is keeping me from settling in on a DCNH subtype. I probably use all 4 strategies in different environments, and the environment itself dictates which strategy is the most comfortable for me. I can say that I'm probably more 'myself'/less stressed out when I'm using either creative or possibly even dominant strategies, but I think i've been closer to H or N the past couple years.

  7. #7
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    The one thing that bothers me (a lot) with dcnh, is that you seem to be able to move towards another subtype level during your life, which is not true, cause everybody VI stays the same. This doesn't connect/correlate. It does not compute goddamned.
    What the VI has to do with DCNH?

  8. #8
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    What you are describing here could be attributed to your sx-first stack; you require the 1:1 connection or the intense stimulation and merge with it. The question is: when you are having the 1:1 connection, and someone comes around you or interrupt you, do you tend to assertively stop them (as they are disturbing your connection) or you don't notice them at all or their presence doesn't affect you? A Dominant sx/so would need that intense 1:1 connection that you talked about, but in social environments, when they are merged with someone, they are going to do so in a very pushy manner, for e.g., they might directly stop other people disturbing them, or they would intentionally make flattering comments around people about that connection as if they are deliberately trying to "acquire" it.
    I am definitely not pushy socially. Instead I am push-able socially. If someone is going to try to get in a 1:1 conversation I am having, I let what happens happen, even if I am disappointed. I tell myself "It was not meant to be" or that "this person must have had a more important conversational need than mine", or that "the conversation is fated to be finished later", to console myself.

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    I am telling you based on personal experience, Dominants sx/so tend to be very extreme, pushy and attention seeker.
    Interesting. But I am not a social attention seeker at all. My social way is predominantly like I explained, and that does not include attention seeking. And I go for conversations with the quiet ones most often. Because I sense in the group something really special is hidden or "left out" and I want to find out what that is. Also I let the socially dominant ones dominate, and appreciate "them being them", because they are usually "in their element" and its interesting. So I don't try to influence it in any way.

    Also I don't mind everyone's attention being on me shortly and occasionally, in a harmonious way to the occasion, but to have it on me the whole time would be tiresome. Also I want to look my best at a social occasion, but not to draw attention to myself, but really to be sue the attention I do get is not negative, as negative attention makes me feel bad. I don't want a lot of attention. I'd rather be the "gazer" than the "gazed at".

    So then you are saying that sx/so manifests itself differently depending on DCNH subtype and the Dominent sx/so will be stronger, dramatic, maybe flamboyant?

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    I know one Creative ILI sx/so who is very flaky in social environments, but once he merge with the connection, he just keeps talking and sharing whatever information he knows, like he once found a guy at gym who proved to have an interest in "Game of Thrones" series (he was Creative too), so they both kept talking about it and why the latest season sucks, etc. and seemed to completely forget what they were doing previously (i.e., a certain exercise), and when I tried to force them, they didn't listen to me at all, perhaps they didn't even notice me or what I said to them.
    LOL, that's hilarious. I can see that happening with an ILI, too. You probably did not take offense, knowing he was just completely immersed in his subject. I don't ignore to that extent, but there are so many times I do that.

    An example is that throughout school years I would have had people tell me "I saw you in the hall and you didn't say anything" (and even now, "at church", or "in town") and i was always explaining that I don't always see people when I am walking - I am thinking, in another world - which is not so unusual for a Ne person, but is unusual to a Se person... and other types, probably. So, I always was explaining that to people.

    In 2nd grade I had a teacher that would approach me and tell me to get up and she would dump my desk and all its contents. To get my attention, because she had been addressing me, and I was unaware, or, once, giving a math test to the entire class and I had no idea; I sat at my desk drawing...

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    You sound Creative to me, especially that "I am not even seeing other things at ALL" and "we are in a timeless bubble for the conversation" part, but I won't rule out Dominant.
    Dominant has never been in the "probable pile" for me. As explained in your article, it being "Terminal" rules it out for me, as finishing things is not natural, instead its what I have to push myself to do, as many other intriguing ideas have presented themselves to me along the way and that can get me off track. And I do finish all the important things (eventually!) but I see part of that is the E1 trait - the job isn't done well til its actually DONE. I start or at least entertain far too many ideas to get them all done, and I certainly do NOT complete them in a "regulated way". So the "Terminal" descriptor does not fit, whereas its opposite, "Initiating" does fit, as I find it very easy to initiate and move on - I have to put real effort into stopping that tendency in order to keep at finishing the important things. I just do what I have to do - and what I feel like - to get there. .. Also as to Ignoring/Connecting, if this is a thing, as your article explains, I am definitely "Ignoring", while my husband is "Connecting". He is much more interrupt-able than me, and like me he also works on big projects that take prolonged focus (we are dong a home-reno project right now so we are living project-centered now as much as we are able) but when my focus gets turned on I just ignore all but my project. My husband instead needs my help to ignore - I need to give him space, providing it for him by taking care of things so he does not have to when he has something to complete because he will stop work for simple requests.. I have to take care of all the requests around here at that time because he will respond - even if its a small unimportant thing someone wants, and then he is frustrated by the delay in his work. If I am in the "zone", I can ignore the phone, someone talking, asking, just about anything.

    It is interesting though because as much as I am sure I am not Dominant by these defining dichotomies, my astrology sign is Cardinal, while my Dh's is Mutable, and I can see those differences at times... Of course, they have their own definitions... I don't know if you have ever compared astrology signs. (Actually, in your example, the person is displaying the way of a "fixed" sign...) Astrology and Socionics types do appear to me to have a pattern of correlation. I really like how @weirdleftovers car/driver analogy explains it in post #51 in this thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...32#post1136932
    Last edited by Eliza Thomason; 06-20-2016 at 09:10 PM.
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  9. #9
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also this terminal initial thing...I mean there are tasks that I know I am good at where I am absolutely "terminal"...others where I am more indecisive where I can be considered "initiating"...idk.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  10. #10
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    TIM
    SEER ~ 458 sx/sp
    Posts
    9,893
    Mentioned
    732 Post(s)
    Tagged
    40 Thread(s)

    Default

    After talking to @Deer Woman about this, I was able to reflect on my past. I can trace back how I fit dominant subtype all the way to my childhood. I attributed it to sx first (and some alcohol consumption, in the past), only, until she and I talked. It didn't change much when I moved from a hick town to NYC. Now I live in a town with absolutely nothing to do on weekends except bars. I think we have only one actual club and I don't go to bars/clubs anymore. They are dangerous territory for me.

    My Lilith and Mars placements are the psychopath combination. @Deer Woman I am bringing astrology into this because I also attributed my differences to other IEI to astrology. I was told by an astrologer I had a split personality chart because I had two very distinct personalities present that didn't intersect. I don't know what that means, exactly, but the essence of it made sense. FTR, in western astrology I am, Scorpio rising. Not that it means much but I still find it interesting.

    Wherever I go I become "known". It is not intentional. It is often word of mouth and people want to meet me. I am not even bragging. I feel weird saying this publicly. When I was a child I thought I might be famous one day and thought it would be cool. By my late teens I thought I might be famous one day if I didn't put a stop to it. I imagined a life without privacy and it terrified me. I never wanted to be famous because of privacy issues. I never tried to publish my work for the same reason. I am a very private person in many ways. I just wanted to live a somewhat quiet life with someone I love. No pets, no babies, no one but us. I lived that kind of life for awhile and I was pretty content with it.

    I often, unintentionally, dominate group interactions with my base function. This often gave me higher status in a group and more attention than I wanted. I don't like to be talked about, especially when I find out people said some pretty bad things about me that were not true at all but that is what happens when you are "known" and probably sx first too. Some people hated me and others loved me.

    I didn't even know that is what I was doing, at the time. I was kind of expressing myself from a bubble even though I had awareness of what others wanted and was able to respond to them quickly without losing others. For the past couple years I have taken to self monitoring more. I always feel like I am saying too much or not letting others speak as much as they would like to. It makes me self conscious when I realize I am doing this. It was Olly who really made me start to evaluate what I was doing by some comments he made while we were talking. He may also be dominant subtype as we would talk over each other but by the end of the conversation I think we both felt we said what we had to say.

    It makes some people think I am an extrovert and I am definitely not. People drain me. I don't like social interactions. I would rather stay home. I also have experience with an EIE-Ni sx/so ex who would always be in competition with me for the spotlight. It felt like he was always pushing me off the stage, so to speak. Being an extrovert he needed to feed off the group. I did not so sometimes I would just let him have the room but I could steal the spotlight back easily when I would get irritated with him. People have described us quite differently though. I have been told I have a big presence that can heal the group (in metaphysical groups) quite a few times. People said he could suck the energy right out of the room. I imagine this is how more sensitive introverts saw him. I felt it too when he would take over.

    What I got from my conversations with DW is that you are not changing into another type and your cognitive style is still intact. The way the subtypes would present would still be within the realm of your socionics type cognitive abilities. I may have this wrong but that is what I took from it. I could never lead an army and I wouldn't want to. I sucked at running a company and didn't want the responsibility. Another dominant socionics type might thrive doing those things. I do know how to delegate tasks to people using my creative function to get them to respond and not using it when I know they are not likely to respond to it.

    I do shift to harmonizing in the situations mentioned in op. I also think I am more harmonizing when I am feeling more relaxed and going with the flow instead of sharing. I relate to most of what the op says about dominant subtype. I probably wouldn't comment on food but if I did it would be some offhand comment since I am not interested in food. For better or worse Ni is my life and I bring it with me wherever I go. Not everyone will notice, respond or like it but that is pretty much what they get with me. I can do Fe too obviously. I can use all the functions as tools, when I have to. I also notice things but not respond for my own reasons. If I do it is because no one else notice. I am also oblivious to things when I completely zone out. Usually when I am alone but mostly I am aware of what is going on even if I am refusing to respond to it.

    It also depends on the group. In a group of Deltas I am more likely to drift into my own world unless they do something to engage me.. I am still taking in what they say and I might interject a comment and they are sort of shocked that I was even following the conversation because I was literally looking off into nothing. In a beta group I feel more in my element, if I know them. If I do not know the people I do observe and wait until I know who is who and what is happening. I don't like to dive right into a new group. I don't even like groups. I would rather have a small group of my friends, at my house, if I am going to socialize at all. When my friends and family visit, it usually ends up with them sitting around asking me to interpret their dreams or something related.

    I will probably delete this post since it feels too personal to be in a public section of the forum. I don't want to come off as arrogant even though arrogance is my dragon. I have posted about our personal "dragons" before. Similar to shadow but different.
    Last edited by Aylen; 09-13-2017 at 12:24 AM. Reason: scorpio correction. I spaced.

    "When I ought to be thinking of heaven he will nail me to earth"

     







  11. #11
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,520
    Mentioned
    233 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Aylen, I am glad I read it before you deleted it because it was interesting! And your chart stuff sounds quite plausible from what I know. My Dh is a Sagittarius...
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  12. #12
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    So then you are saying that sx/so manifests itself differently depending on DCNH subtype and the Dominent sx/so will be stronger, dramatic, maybe flamboyant?
    I was referring to how sx/so would manifest differently in their connection seeking in Dominants and Creatives. I guess every type could be "stronger, dramatic, maybe flamboyant" as you put it. My Dominant SEE sx/so cousin recently came to a relative's house (where all the relatives and his few friends were present including me) with a very unique hair style, and then everyone started looking him and talked about him after he left. From the moment he entered the room and till he left the room, he attempted to create some effect on the outside, like he showed a photo of a person on his mobile who was shot recently, and he added the personal emotional touch, "This guy spent YEARS with me!" and he was extremely deliberate in this manner and how people are perceiving him. He always struck me as 7w8 core with strong 4w3 image-fix.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    LOL, that's hilarious. I can see that happening with an ILI, too. You probably did not take offense, knowing he was just completely immersed in his subject. I don't ignore to that extent, but there are so many times I do that.
    I DID take the offense when that ILI dude didn't listen to me, as I was trying to play some badass role at the gym who just orders people (that Se seeking), and he treated me like a shit, made me feel like I am not being validated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    An example is that throughout school years I would have had people tell me "I saw you in the hall and you didn't say anything" (and even now, "at church", or "in town") and i was always explaining that I don't always see people when I am walking - I am thinking, in another world - which is not so unusual for a Ne person, but is unusual to a Se person... and other types, probably. So, I always was explaining that to people.

    In 2nd grade I had a teacher that would approach me and tell me to get up and she would dump my desk and all its contents. To get my attention, because she had been addressing me, and I was unaware, or, once, giving a math test to the entire class and I had no idea; I sat at my desk drawing...
    These events actually seemed like the manifestations of poor sensations rather than actual ignoring DCNH dichotomy. "Ignoring" doesn't mean not being able to understand or remember the physical features of the objects or the presence of certain people, it just means you are not aware of the changes that are happening around you the way Dominants and Harmonizers are... let's say a Te Dominant noticing the physical properties of objects or correcting someone when they are not following the most efficient route, etc., that would require the keen eye on objects as ever-changing entities, a Si Harmonizing would notice how someone is growing in shape, whether its becoming strong or weak and can easily point out why something doesn't fit correctly, etc., that would require the attention to present moment and whatever happening, sort of attention to the dynamics. You get the point. Also, these are dichotomies, you could be "connecting" for your interests (let's say you need to observe the movements of a special person), but when you are "on" and bursting out the information, then I am willing to bet you wouldn't even notice when someone has left the room.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    Dominant has never been in the "probable pile" for me. As explained in your article, it being "Terminal" rules it out for me, as finishing things is not natural, instead its what I have to push myself to do, as many other intriguing ideas have presented themselves to me along the way and that can get me off track. And I do finish all the important things (eventually!) but I see part of that is the E1 trait - the job isn't done well til its actually DONE. I start or at least entertain far too many ideas to get them all done, and I certainly do NOT complete them in a "regulated way". So the "Terminal" descriptor does not fit, whereas its opposite, "Initiating" does fit, as I find it very easy to initiate and move on - I have to put real effort into stopping that tendency in order to keep at finishing the important things. I just do what I have to do - and what I feel like - to get there. .. Also as to Ignoring/Connecting, if this is a thing, as your article explains, I am definitely "Ignoring", while my husband is "Connecting". He is much more interrupt-able than me, and like me he also works on big projects that take prolonged focus (we are dong a home-reno project right now so we are living project-centered now as much as we are able) but when my focus gets turned on I just ignore all but my project. My husband instead needs my help to ignore - I need to give him space, providing it for him by taking care of things so he does not have to when he has something to complete because he will stop work for simple requests.. I have to take care of all the requests around here at that time because he will respond - even if its a small unimportant thing someone wants, and then he is frustrated by the delay in his work. If I am in the "zone", I can ignore the phone, someone talking, asking, just about anything.
    Creative E1 seems an interesting combination. My ESI brother is ignoring Normalizer. He spends the whole day on the computer with his headphones, and even when he is not wearing headphones, he seems unable to notice when the bell rings or someone calling him, like he is completely merged into whatever he is doing, whereas when I am merged, and my mom calls me, then I say, "Wait!" and if she calls me again, then I am like (in a raised voice) "Wait just 5 minutes!" or sometimes I stop doing the work and try to reduce the distractions. I work best when there is no distraction, otherwise I feel frustrated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    It is interesting though because as much as I am sure I am not Dominant by these defining dichotomies, my astrology sign is Cardinal, while my Dh's is Mutable, and I can see those differences at times... Of course, they have their own definitions... I don't know if you have ever compared astrology signs. (Actually, in your example, the person is displaying the way of a "fixed" sign...) Astrology and Socionics types do appear to me to have a pattern of correlation. I really like how @weirdleftovers car/driver analogy explains it in post #51 in this thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...32#post1136932
    I am not into astrology much, but I am a Scorpio (if that helps) and also relate to Scorpio archetypical descriptions quite strongly.

  13. #13
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Aylen Hey. I enjoyed your post. You come out of yourself pretty well, in a way I find it hard to imagine Harmonizing and Creative; you have that kind of seriousness and thoroughness as if you do stuff through planning rather than "going with the flow" and randomly doing stuff and forget about the progress, and you expressed yourself in a highly punctuated manner as if you are putting efforts to pour energy outwardly, kind of focused emotions (@strrrng noticed the similar in me when he suggested Dominant for me). I would personally put you either D or N, but terminal for sure. Can you give me real-life examples on how you dominate the conversations through your Base (or ego) function(s)? Do people feel the "strong" presence and even get muted / annoyed when you are dominating the conversations? When you are communicating, and something happens around you, do you tend to interrupt and respond to it (and feel yourself in-charge of the environment)?

    Also, tell me your work style, when you were writing the post, did you feel that the time is running out and you just need to push yourself as forcefully as possible, making you quite tensed and restless (that you can feel in your body), or you remained kind of internally self-controlled and externally immobilized in your energy spending, like you just read my post, dissected its parts and casually made the response? When you were writing the post, and for some reasons you felt that you are not going to finish the post, did you start pushing yourself more and more, ignoring the body sensations completely till you get exactly what you wanted? When you are working on something, how the other people perceive your movement / energy? Do you appear kind of rushed, tensed and pushy, or very self-controlled in your energy manifestation?

    Regarding the comments on food, I didn't say Ni ego has an interest in food, but they might comment on why someone bought the food or what the owner of food is thinking. It was just an example of Ni ego reacting to the small changes in the environment, it could be anything, not just food, like if someone comes across as deceiving, then they may comment on it bluntly, unless there is a tactical reason not to do so.

  14. #14
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Yeah I have the same problem. This DCNH thingy seem to vary constantly whenever the environment changes. A practical example: someone coming from a big city where life is very competitive and he looks like a Normalizing type - he can keep up the pace but not direct other people, he barely has time to finish his stuff, has to ignore whatever happens around him. Suddenly he moves to a small town in the countryside, he'll be considered a mover and shaker, directing everyone towards improving things, a clear dominant subtype.
    Dichotomies can change (and so the type), but that requires a VERY intense focus and may take months and years if the already decided type seems strong. A Normalizing wouldn't become a Dominant in different situations, but simply forced to act like it, but will swing back to his default mode of approaching the life; that is, he wouldn't be relying on external factors to accomplish his goals the way connecting types are. My IEI father is a strong Normalizing at every situation, but he is a senior manager in the tiles factory, where he is probably forced to act like a Dominant (but not necessarily change into a Dominant type, as Normalizing can play that role too), but that doesn't mean his DCNH varies all the time.

  15. #15
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    MACS0647-JD
    TIM
    SEER ~ 458 sx/sp
    Posts
    9,893
    Mentioned
    732 Post(s)
    Tagged
    40 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    @Aylen Hey. I enjoyed your post. You come out of yourself pretty well, in a way I find it hard to imagine Harmonizing and Creative; you have that kind of seriousness and thoroughness as if you do stuff through planning rather than "going with the flow" and randomly doing stuff and forget about the progress, and you expressed yourself in a highly punctuated manner as if you are putting efforts to pour energy outwardly, kind of focused emotions (@strrrng noticed the similar in me when he suggested Dominant for me). I would personally put you either D or N, but terminal for sure. Can you give me real-life examples on how you dominate the conversations through your Base (or ego) function(s)? Do people feel the "strong" presence and even get muted / annoyed when you are dominating the conversations? When you are communicating, and something happens around you, do you tend to interrupt and respond to it (and feel yourself in-charge of the environment)?

    As I understand it DCNH is, primarily, based on group interactions and how you express yourself in different groups? That is how I have been looking at it and why I thought I might be harmonizing by some descriptions. I read a couple different interpretations that people linked me and at the time I could see both dominant and harmonizing tendencies in myself. I could also see a bit of myself in the other two but normalizing was the one I least related to. I am not that organized in my thoughts or behavior and have never been. I have my own system of thoughts that I don't need to organize as much. My brain is pretty good at finding the right "file" when needed. If I am stressed already it gets pretty chaotic in here. I can be very ambitious when I want something and I can also get tunnel vision when it comes to what I want.

    I want to mention that I am primarily talking about me in some very specific, special interest groups. Unfamiliar groups take a little more time to sort out and decide if I can even relate enough to bother. If you put me in a room full of sports fans I am probably going to disappear pretty quick with the first person who hates sports and seems ok to talk to, about things that interest me. This is usually mutual and they also get something out of it. If not I would rather listen to music and maybe some small talk with whoever walks in the room. I am not going to put myself in the center of that kind of sports fanatic action.

    If it is a light hearted atmosphere of playing and joking I can get into that. The teasing and jokes are fun and that is when my creative function gets the most exercise. If it is horrible but I have to stay for some reason, it's like an obligation to whoever invited me. I just sort of bear it until I can escape. I don't really like going into unfamiliar territory so much these days, unarmed. I am pretty balanced between planning and spontaneity, I think. I want to know what I am talking about. I can be a bit calculating when I have to be. It is not malicious though. I feel like I am on the border of giving out some "trade secrets" here. I do like to keep some mystery in my interactions but for the sake of psychology, and understanding, I will continue.

    Oh and I don't even drink now so it is most likely I will not accept invitations to anything I do not feel comfortable with. I don't have the energy for it and I no longer want to push myself to do things I really don't want to do.

    Yes, people have commented on my "presence" quite a bit. People listen to me with great interest or amusement, often both. I can tell when they think I am some flake or even schizo. If they roll their eyes, when they think I am not looking, I will ask them about it. I didn't always. I used to be afraid to with some people or I just didn't care enough to acknowledge it. Now I will absolutely tell them, "say it if you think it because I hate to be talked about behind my back later". I will often tell them what they are thinking before they even get a chance to say it and make a joke of it after. Like, "now that we all agree I am schizo, let's get on with.. where was I?" I feel oppressed when someone is listening and thinking these things and it is not out in the open. They are still projecting that energy even if they think they are keeping it in. It throws me off until it is resolved.

    I used to care, that they thought I was delusional but now, not so much. As a child I was quite a storyteller according to family and family friends. I would make everyone sit in the living room so I could tell them stories of my past adventures that were way above my age level of experience. How I ended up on earth and what I was meant to do in this lifetime, since it was my last. I also started hosting seances in my home when my mom was out. I scared quite a few children and upset their parents to.

    I felt I was here for a purpose and it was to share a message with whoever would listen.I kind of still think I am but not in the same way I did then. It is not my job to change the world only to observe it and share my experience, if applicable. It is my choice to influence it in some way that makes things a little bit better, for whoever enters my atmosphere. I tend to get absorbed in my interests and the "person" who is my interest (in a given timeframe), and forget about others, including family. I am paying more attention when I do this.

    I also wrote and directed plays, as a child, and made the younger kids in my family perform them. I was a bit of a little dictator and still can be in the right situation. Then some really "bad" stuff happened and I went a different direction for many years. I got depression on and off for years. I used substances to turn it all off. I just wanted to silence that "voice", get rid of the images/colors in my head, tame my inner emotional states, that made me different. I tried to be more "normal" and I wanted to party and be like other teens my age. I spent a good part of my teens and early 20s in a stupor. I had huge gaps of "blank" years in my childhood all the way up to a few years ago. I just disappeared and let other aspects of my personality have control. At the same time I was an observer but it was somewhere "outside" my physical body. I was watching all this but sometimes from the perspective of being "far away" and it was all very symbolic and energetic. This might be the hardest thing to explain to people and why I have been typed a core E9 by some here. I shared a lot of this when I first joined the forum and then I stopped because it was leading to wrong conclusions, about me, on the part of others. I had all those memories but they were repressed. I have them now. I just had to wait for the right time to remember. I am still "remembering". There was a lot of early trauma and shock and it had nothing to do with being a 9.If anything it pushed me deeper into a 4 hellish nightmare. Just want to put that out there while I am at it. I feel I am back in control now. I have synthesized and integrated broken parts of me. It is an ongoing process. I am still integrating but I am now in control.

    In a group setting they will let me talk to the point I have nothing left to say or I am just inwardly begging for someone to change the subject, when I get tired. At that point I will look to the most dominant personality in the room for help and they happily step in and take the pressure of me when it gets to that point. The ex I mentioned above said I was mesmerizing to listen to and sometimes he didn't even want to interupt me. Granted he was biased and completely lovesick at the time. I was not aware that was how some people saw me. I am very sure I annoyed some people very much but in the metaphysical circles I used to be in most were probably too polite to say it directly to me. I did hear through the grapevine though and there was conflict. Quite a bit, at one point, and I instigated some of it by not shrinking away (like the thought I would) and confronting it directly. I like closure on an issue, one way or another. I feel empty without it. If it is established someone hates me, in a group, I can deal with that but tbh not many people have actually said they hated me and some who said they did, often change their minds after talking to me one on one. Misunderstandings, jealousy and expectations are the root of most of this, or so it seems. I am also guilty of these things.

    I tend to speak my "imagery" and free associations. It is whatever imagery is floating in my head real time. I am doing it now. I am pretty dynamic in interactions but I usually have an idea where I am going and do not lose focus on my intent or goal. I do not get distracted by Ne meanderings but I can follow them when I have to. It is not my prefered style and can knock me off course, sts, until I refocus. I can speak in metaphors, symbolically and there can be an easy flow to it but only once I have clarity myself. It is sort of a double edged sword since I am not always in the state of mind or mood to be asked questions or speak on subjects, yet some people have come to expect it from me. Sometimes I find it hard to pay full attention to someone else speaking because as they speak I might get this sort of tunnel vision in regards to something they are saying and I have to speak it outloud. I get an impulse to share whatever thought comes to mind and I will ask my own questions which often lead to me sharing a lot of my own information in the process. My brain seems to always be subconsciously searching it's filing system and I have enough experience to have a pretty big databank. When I was a teen it took me way longer to respond than it does now. I used to get more frustrated then because I didn't have much to speak on other than my own interests and a lot of adults just sort of dismissed me. My stepdad (ILI) did not. He would answer my questions and also give me tips on how to speak to others without sounded like a, "babbling idiot". His words. I think if I were to give him a DCNH subtype it would have been definitely normalizing. He fit it better than any of the others.

    People ask me a lot of questions in groups. I also end up in an, unwanted, leadership role in certain groups because people tend to think I always will just "know" what I am talking about, but I don't, and I lack confidence when I am in unfamiliar territory. I think it shows in frustration or completely withdrawing my energy. I just pull it all into myself and build a wall. A lot of this is related to my enneagram tritype and if I get into that I will be writing all day. Now when this happens I depend on my previous experiences to sort of guide me in the interactions so it can lead to sharing experiences of the past and how they apply to the present and will continue to manifest in the future. I got a bit of a reputation of being psychic in some groups I used to belong to and that put some pressure on me to perform, and always be on, I guess. I think I was somewhat convinced that I was psychic as well so when things did not come to me immediately I would get a frustrated at myself. "Why don't I fucking know this???!" If asked question by people that I thought were just looking for answers that I didn't have and weren't even willing to give me some feedback. They thought I had the solution to their problem but I didn't have enough information to know where to start. So frustrating when people are not aware how Ni works. Heck half the time I don't even know so how can I blame them. I blamed myself for not knowing the right answer. Some people were a bit pushy too and didn't understand I had to be in a certain flow to speak on some things. That is when I would shift to my creative function or sometimes role and use it rather heavily or just hide from them until the answers came to me. Sometimes the answer was there all along, "I just don't know". I am not a machine that cranks out some magical woo woo. I need time to process to. Sleeping and dreaming is my solution when I am burnt out.

    Also, tell me your work style, when you were writing the post, did you feel that the time is running out and you just need to push yourself as forcefully as possible, making you quite tensed and restless (that you can feel in your body), or you remained kind of internally self-controlled and externally immobilized in your energy spending, like you just read my post, dissected its parts and casually made the response? When you were writing the post, and for some reasons you felt that you are not going to finish the post, did you start pushing yourself more and more, ignoring the body sensations completely till you get exactly what you wanted? When you are working on something, how the other people perceive your movement / energy? Do you appear kind of rushed, tensed and pushy, or very self-controlled in your energy manifestation?
    Just in relation to me writing, I was in the flow writing that post. Also this one. Some people make me feel pressured to respond quickly and get things done but they are, in the moment people. I know why they do that now. People I call my friends, or potential friends, usually do not, once they get to know me. But, I didn't feel any pressure to respond to the op or to answer your response. I am pretty relaxed at the moment listening to some chakras music and just typing thoughts as they come.

    I do feel pressure to write my dreams or my thoughts down quickly sometimes. It is because I might lose it and I am not sure if it will ever come back to me in the same perfect form. I have had writers block for some time and when I would sit to write, my mind went blank and I did feel internal pressure to finish what I started a long time ago. I decided I am in a different phase right now so I have to let it go. It will return some day, then I will continue where I left off. Talking to my friends helps me keep my mind off it. I have a couple in particular who I talk to often on this forum. Sometimes just simple concrete stuff like focusing on getting myself physically healing helps. I have been sick for months (I just didn't talk about it much until I started feeling better) but I am getting much better every day.

    As far as general work style, I am not sure how to put that into words. A lot of this is very situational. I am giving you a general idea of how I operate in this whole post. I am pretty quick to notice energetic changes but my Se works at a very subconscious level. If I am responding quickly it is not because I had a conscious awareness of the changes as much as I felt the energy shift. I hope at least half of this post makes sense.

    Regarding the comments on food, I didn't say Ni ego has an interest in food, but they might comment on why someone bought the food or what the owner of food is thinking. It was just an example of Ni ego reacting to the small changes in the environment, it could be anything, not just food, like if someone comes across as deceiving, then they may comment on it bluntly, unless there is a tactical reason not to do so.
    I knew what you meant. I think I said that more for others than I did for you, lest they start typing us all as sensors. I can imagine people retyping me as they read this.

    Thanks for responding to my post. I get a bit torn between sharing information and protecting my privates parts (my inner world).

    If you asked me all this another day, I might have responded in a very different way by sharing completely different situations. I had read your response before I went to sleep and when I woke up I felt I knew how to respond. Last night I was too cranky and tired. I don't think most people get a good read on me from my posts and that is why I was impressed by @Deer Woman. Even she didn't get a fuller picture until she actually talked to me one on one. She is very easy to talk to. I get a bit lost in time with her because a couple of hours can pass so quickly. That is being in the flow for me.

    Oh and I do tell people, "wait", "give me a half hour" or answer them as quickly as I can, if I can do it without losing my train of thought, if it is something minor, all the time. I think it is best to inform someone when you can rather than completely ignoring them like they aren't even there. I HATE to be ignored myself. I will either pout about it, until I know what to do, or make myself heard immediately. Depending on who is ignoring me and why. I can cut people off for minor offenses sometimes without remorse but other people I do not want to cut off. I just have to sort out my own chaotic, jumbled up feelings and then I can let them back in. Believe it or not, I find it hard to share deep personal feelings even in relationships. I can do intimacy but I hold a part of myself back because I fear driving people away once they see all of me. If I am invested in someone I sort of express myself in measured doses to them. Testing how far I should go. I could write a novel on this if I keep going. lol

    I have shared a lot of this stuff already in various posts, maybe giving a slightly different take on it depending on context but it is sort of surreal to see it all written out in one post. I guess I really did come close to writing you a short book. I hope this is cohesive enough that most people can read it without...

    "When I ought to be thinking of heaven he will nail me to earth"

     







  16. #16
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    Dichotomies can change (and so the type), but that requires a VERY intense focus and may take months and years if the already decided type seems strong. A Normalizing wouldn't become a Dominant in different situations, but simply forced to act like it, but will swing back to his default mode of approaching the life; that is, he wouldn't be relying on external factors to accomplish his goals the way connecting types are. My IEI father is a strong Normalizing at every situation, but he is a senior manager in the tiles factory, where he is probably forced to act like a Dominant (but not necessarily change into a Dominant type, as Normalizing can play that role too), but that doesn't mean his DCNH varies all the time.
    Well the way you describe it I think it varies, your father is dominant in the tiles factory and normalizing in other environments. So you are basically arguing in favor of my point?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  17. #17
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Well the way you describe it I think it varies, your father is dominant in the tiles factory and normalizing in other environments. So you are basically arguing in favor of my point?
    No. I didn't say he is "Dominant" in DCNH sense when he is playing the manager role, sure he needed to develop certain traits to survive there (which simply added the flavor to his Normalizing type), but his overall temperament and approach to the life remains the same.

  18. #18
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    What the VI has to do with DCNH?
    Well VI is someone's face make up is coupled with his type right?

    e.g. You can recognize an ESFP's subtype by looking at their face.

    but if their subtype changes, than also their face should change. which it doesn't. so dcnh's theory of changing subtype can't be true. Maybe a stationary dcnh is, but idk.

  19. #19
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,129
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    contact/distant, terminal/initial and connecting/ignoring

    The way to break these dichotomies down is fuzzy to me. Whats the type/element/function breakdown here?
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If itís a disease, itís nobodyís fault. Yay empiricism.

  20. #20
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    Well VI is someone's face make up is coupled with his type right?

    e.g. You can recognize an ESFP's subtype by looking at their face.

    but if their subtype changes, than also their face should change. which it doesn't. so dcnh's theory of changing subtype can't be true. Maybe a stationary dcnh is, but idk.
    You are conflating 2 subtype theory with DCNH subtype system.

  21. #21
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pookie View Post
    The way to break these dichotomies down is fuzzy to me.
    What is it that you don't understand in these dichotomies?

  22. #22
    Pookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    TIM
    IEI-Ni 6w5-9-2 So/Sx
    Posts
    2,129
    Mentioned
    89 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    What is it that you don't understand in these dichotomies?
    I understand them, I should've asked more directly. What do those dichotomies correspond to? Example - Aristocratic is NF/ST. Result is irrational+aristocratic or rational+democratic, etc...

    I like to have the breakdowns laid out in front of me, as I can infer the distinctions before I delve into the topic.
    I would say that ethically you are still supposed to act as if you have unilateral responsibility; but simultaneously you have to be able to see the other as a fully autonomous, free, aware person.

    Medicalizing social problems has the additional benefit of rendering society not responsible for those social ills. If itís a disease, itís nobodyís fault. Yay empiricism.

  23. #23
    Nymeria's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    ILI 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    347
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ...but his overall temperament and approach to the life remains the same.
    Re. FDG and seriousguy

    Sorry for butting in, but I really see this exchange often every now and then. Like one standpoint describing, what a person/or a fxn/or whatever is and the other standpoint more coming from what a person/or a fxn is doing and how this can change with circumstances. It somehow always strikes me as/ I always associate it with static thinking vs. dynamic thinking. I also often see it coming up in static feeling vs. dynamic feeling, too.
    Last edited by Nymeria; 06-22-2016 at 10:41 AM.

  24. #24
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pookie View Post
    I understand them, I should've asked more directly. What do those dichotomies correspond to? Example - Aristocratic is NF/ST. Result is irrational+aristocratic or rational+democratic, etc...

    I like to have the breakdowns laid out in front of me, as I can infer the distinctions before I delve into the topic.
    I am not sure what exactly you are asking. A Dominant is contact/terminal/connecting, Normalizing is distant/terminal/ignoring, Harmonizing is distant/initial/connecting, and a Creative is contact/initial/ignoring. I can see a particular dichotomy changing for a while, but when a type plays its role, then these dichotomies work in synchronization, e.g., a Dominant type wanting to be in control of his world would take notice of people around him, or anything that could affect his goals (connecting), and he would do so in a thorough manner (terminal) making sure he is following his goals, plus he would assertively (contact) tell people what to do or stop them from doing something or somehow influence them to mold them according to his goals, or adopt under certain circumstances (as he rely on external circumstances).

  25. #25
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nymeria View Post

    Sorry for butting in, but I really see this exchange often every now and then. Like one standpoint describing, what a person/or a fxn/or whatever is and the other standpoint more coming from what a person/or a fxn is doing and how this can change with circumstances. It somehow always strikes me as/ I always associate it with static thinking vs. dynamic thinking. I also often see it coming up in static feeling vs. dynamic feeling, too.
    How static thinking vs. dynamic thinking?

  26. #26
    Nymeria's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    ILI 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    347
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    How static thinking vs. dynamic thinking?
    A person has a ‚core‘ subtype. The dichotomies try to explain, what that type is about, because of these 3 dichotomies one type is set apart from the others. The descriptions try to lay out these different ‚core‘ subtypes. Even if someone shows a different behaviour in a situation, it‘s just him e.g. adapting to the environment, but his ‚core‘ stays the same and he reverts back to it (or sth. along the lines) – static.

    vs.

    You have 3 dichotomies. But they are not as definite as they are made out to be. More like gradients/scale that can move up or down. When someone is in a situation, that makes him more contact, initiating etc. (you move up in the distant/contact, initiating/terminal scale - you know what I mean is, you show more behaviour, that is attributed to ‚contact‘ ‚initiating‘ dichotomy), then the outcome is an dominant subtype.

    So you can have the same person moving down the scale in another environment, and the outcome could be an normalizing subtype. I went with scales blah bah blah, beacuse I couldn’t think of sth. different to explain it rn. It‘s not like you are one and then you cannot be the other, but more like depending on the circumstances and how you end up on let’s say the gradient, it can change – dynamic.

    Bc in life you cannot use one thing for everything, like a one size fits all approach. That’s the thing, when you want to discern your type. I mean what you do? Yeah you look at your behaviour, thinking about ok does this ‚distant‘ dichotomy for example fit me and then you move into this direction, where it can go with ‚well depends on the situation‘, environment, other factors, that can influence how the dichotomies play out and you come up with different conclusions.

    Now if the system comes from a very static POV (one size fits all approach), then that would just not be possible. You just have a ‚core‘ subtype. Which would lead us to the question re. DCNH - how does DCNH really fleshes out one dichotomy/one type against the other then? I mean when it starts with the assumption, that people just have one – let’s say ‚core‘ subtype. That would also be looking at it from an let’s say objective standpoint., like what's the measurement?

    Bc I think the other standpoint is, that you can look at this and think ‚boah what’s the fucking problem‘. I read, I decide. Done. I will just grab sth. that makes sense to me. Like yeah I can act like this and this, but this one just speaks' the most to me. You know what you picked, makes subjectively the most sense to you (regarding yourself) which is, I think, what everybody will end up with most of the time reg. settling for stuff.
    Last edited by Nymeria; 06-24-2016 at 08:55 PM.

  27. #27
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    You are conflating 2 subtype theory with DCNH subtype system.
    Yes, and that's normal and that's why so many people have troubles with DCNH, it's extremely difficult to recognize a stable "DCNH" behavioral pattern in everyday life for a sufficient amount of time.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  28. #28
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Nymeria When we change the environment, we don't change our subtype suddenly, only adopts certain behaviors that are required to work in the places (which might manifest different dichotomies outwardly for a while), but eventually move to our core type where we feel the most comfort. Think of DCNH as the temperament enhancement; a Harmonizing SEI/IEI/SLI/ILI type (with all the problems of IP temperament) that is forced to remain active, respond quickly in a given situation might start manifesting the Dominant traits (and thus the enhanced EJ temperament which will reflect with the Dominant dichotomies as well), but eventually he will feel comfortable in his IP Harmonizing mode when he leaves the situation, unless of course, he has dramatically changed his way of life (and there is no going back to previous situations), then there is a possibility that he might start transitioning to a Dominant type. A Creative subtype is perfectly capable of noticing any changes in the environment, but he tends to have interest in what he likes for himself, so when he is merged with someone then he talks with no concern of the environment, thus when he is "on" he is VERY ignoring, such type in an organization playing the leadership role would be forced to react suddenly to people's requests, become more persistent, etc., thus showing the Dominant traits.

    This is hypothetical, of course, as I have not seen someone changing their type (as that would require intensive efforts, something that can't happen with everyone), but Victor has said (and the Socionics Britannica School that I have talked with) that change in subtype can happen (probably due to emotional stress, mental disorders or accentuation of certain functions). I have seen Normalizing transitioning to Harmonizing (and Creative) or Creative to Dominant partially, but not the fully converted subtype yet.

    It's debatable how we "got" our subtype in the first place (and that whether it is inborn), but I can just speculate that when we have been through various situations in our life, then we start feeling more comfortable in the role which led to more pleasure and less pain, and then it is conditioned. For this reason, people who are very unstable and have imbalance in their energy manifestation due to accentuation on a certain function can have trouble deciding the role or niche in society, but for healthy people, there should be clear type.

  29. #29
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Yes, and that's normal and that's why so many people have troubles with DCNH, it's extremely difficult to recognize a stable "DCNH" behavioral pattern in everyday life for a sufficient amount of time.
    That happens due to poor grasp on DCNH, as it's really the most ambiguous subtype system, and it gets worse when people try to fit it with Model A when they hear about certain functions getting enhanced. For this reason exactly, I talked about dichotomies, so they can at least able to see how dichotomies are playing out in other people, so that later they can assess what they do in real-life.

  30. #30
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    That happens due to poor grasp on DCNH, as it's really the most ambiguous subtype system
    Where do you base this distinction on? How can you classify a subtype system into ambigious or not? Actually DCNH has 3 defining dichotomies, should be enough to classify people easily. The real problem is that those dichotomies seem to change quickly, whereas Socionics dichotomies seem fairly stable.

    , and it gets worse when people try to fit it with Model A when they hear about certain functions getting enhanced. For this reason exactly, I talked about dichotomies, so they can at least able to see how dichotomies are playing out in other people, so that later they can assess what they do in real-life.
    I still don't think that's the gist of the problem, personally I just can't use DCNH successfully because people just adjust too much their behavior in different environemnts from the POV of DCNH dichotomies, and that's something they don't really do with Socionics dichotomies, or if they do, they only do it very slowly.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  31. #31
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seriousguy View Post
    A Creative subtype is perfectly capable of noticing any changes in the environment, but he tends to have interest in what he likes for himself, so when he is merged with someone then he talks with no concern of the environment, thus when he is "on" he is VERY ignoring, such type in an organization playing the leadership role would be forced to react suddenly to people's requests, become more persistent, etc., thus showing the Dominant traits.
    Perhaps, but indeed an introvert type will still display all the typical "qualities" of an introvert type when having a leadership role in an organization i.e. generally being somewhat more cautious, avoiding excessive energy consumption, realizing his own thinking rather than letting the environment take over, and so on and so forth. Similarly for thinking, feeling, sensing, intuition, etc.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  32. #32
    seriousguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Where do you base this distinction on? How can you classify a subtype system into ambigious or not? Actually DCNH has 3 defining dichotomies, should be enough to classify people easily. The real problem is that those dichotomies seem to change quickly, whereas Socionics dichotomies seem fairly stable.
    I have seen the trends in people here who wonder about the DCNH and ask questions like "How is it possible for a Dominant subtype to improve Fe along with Te, as one needs to turn off the one to make the another on?", as they poorly understand the functional enhancement theory that DCNH theory points out when talking about the outward behaviors of subtypes, and so they conflate it with the functions accentuated theory that has the basis in the Model A (wherein, an accentuation or heavy focus on one Ji function leads to poor ability on another Ji function, e.g., when we use the Role, then the Base is turned "off"), which makes it ambiguous and seem to go beyond the Model A boundary. For example, I don't think that the functions themselves are enhanced, but a certain aspect of it is enhanced, e.g., a Dominant type would have an assertiveness and persistence in their goals regardless of their actual dimenstionality of Se, so people would wrongfully assume that the Se is enhanced on its own, which is not true (and you can confirm it through Socionics Britannica School Facebook page), as they simply meant to say that they have assertiveness (which people normally correlates with the usage of Se), so even an Se PoLR with Dominant subtype would appear more assertive than other subtypes (similarly they would appear more zealous/passionate -- Fe and willing to be active and work -- Te). For this reason, I don't rely on functions enhancement or observe it in real-life to type people to see if someone has a certain function that seems stronger than let's say from his strong ego/id block, as people can use whatever function they want for whatever reasons they have.

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    I still don't think that's the gist of the problem, personally I just can't use DCNH successfully because people just adjust too much their behavior in different environemnts from the POV of DCNH dichotomies, and that's something they don't really do with Socionics dichotomies, or if they do, they only do it very slowly.
    DCNH dichotomies change, because it needs to change to perform some role (as you said earlier that people varies all the time), and not just a single dichotomy, but all the three dichotomies in a way that makes it comfortable to play the role (e.g., Imagine a Dominant subtype with distant/terminal/connecting, how does that sounds? Such type would need to become contact or generally outwardly focused to actually play the Dominant role and be assertive, otherwise he is fucked up). It doesn't make sense to conflate them with Renin dichotomies for instance, which are based more on the values of a type and does not change (or at least many of them are pretty much stable, like aristocratic/democratic dichomoty, and the remaining 4 Jungian dichotomies may change depending on the subtype).

    Do you have trouble seeing the dichotomies in other people or you can't decide which dichotomies you use?

Posting Permissions

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