Narc's subtype

[Narc]

Te-ENTj:

Gulenko: Dynamic. Pioneer. Looks for supporters, with whom they can make an idea into reality. They are very emotional and impulsive. They are a trusting person and spontaneous. If they are unsuccessful in doing something, they do not lose optimism, and try again.

Meged/Ovcharov: The logical subtype offers the impression of mobility despite being a strict and efficient person. Their expression lacks emotion and focuses directly, in a fixed manner, on the interlocutor for the sake of emphasis. They are a little timid but try to hide this; also a bit mistrustful, critical and unduly categorical. They are only distracted with great difficulty and they work diligently to complete tasks. Despite a habit of reflection they are resolute and impulsive in their words and actions. Inclined to long conversations; a desire to seem constant, cautious and serious causes them to portray stiffness in their dialogue.. Their seeming calmness can quickly be replaced by unexpected haste. In most cases their figure is thickset and their movements are angular. Try to hold themselves confidently so as if to maintain advantage. When they joke their serious expression is hardly disturbed by the indistinct smile that manifests itself solely on the corners of the their lips.


Ni-ENTj:

Gulenko: Calm and balanced. They follow an ordered way of life. They easily choose which ideas are worth taking up and which ideas are better to reject. They always find the best and most advantageous way to achieve the greatest return. They can be good scientists or experimenters. They give consideration to theory and practicality at the same time together. They try to complete things that have been started. They get along well with children and follow them with their interests. They try to dress well and pay attention to their health.

Meged/Ovcharov: The intuitive subtype is affable, kind and pleasant in dialogue. They possess a developed sense of humor that frequently makes them the soul of the company. Very mobile, restless and scattered; always hurrying to make use of time. Inspired, vigorous and optimistic. Enterprising: safely takes risks and applies new ideas. They have difficulty focusing their attention on one thing for a long time. Diplomatic and gallant with everything, especially the opposite sex, but can show familiarity towards closer acquaintances. Due to their propensity towards impudence they often change steps within their plans and when they make ethical mistakes are quick to correct them by means of jokes and various services. Behaves simply and naturally. In conversation they like concern the interlocutor, to embrace/kiss and joke. Gestures and gait, when deprived of their underlined solidity, appear quite natural.


Some notes:

I'd describe my energy as calm and balanced on a day to day basis. Balanced, calm and unflappable usually. I have moments of high emotionality but I'm phlegmatic more often than I'm not. The emotion/calm ratio is probably something like 30/70, even over the course of a single conversation.

I feel quite comfortable with all of my valued functions, so it's hard for me to say whether I lean more towards logic and sensing or ethics and intuition. I'm generally irreverent with a serious side rather than the other way around. Tinychatting forumers could probably attest to that.

[chriscorey]

I think Te-ENTj

[FDG]

Among these two you would fit the intuitive subtype more imho, just according to the little I know about you. For the record, I believe those descriptions you posted often contradict themselves, so...

(I'm not terribly fond of subtype theory anymore)

I don't know if it could be of any help, but I relate to the first paragraph of the logical description, and the second paragraph of the intuitive description.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Based on your interface with this forum, and between those two, would have to be I think. This presumes that you are inclined to not spend time making extensively long posts and so on though!

[chriscorey]

lol

I can hardly believe it.



And the cannoli brain-washed @Subteigh

[Ron Mexican]

I'm gonna vote based on the very scarce observations I have of you, so grain of salt, of course.

[Narc]

Among these two you would fit the intuitive subtype more imho, just according to the little I know about you. For the record, I believe those descriptions you posted often contradict themselves, so...

(I'm not terribly fond of subtype theory anymore)

I don't know if it could be of any help, but I relate to the first paragraph of the logical description, and the second paragraph of the intuitive description.

I should have checked for inconsistencies prior to posting, but didn't. I've relabelled them, first paragraph of each is Gulenko and second is Meged/Ovcharov. Choose your poison.

[Narc]

Based on your interface with this forum, and between those two, would have to be I think. This presumes that you are inclined to not spend time making extensively long posts and so on though!

Hah. My posts are bite-sized, typically.

[MensSuperMateriam]

It depends on what it is understood as each subtype.

According to you behavioral pattern here I would say Ni-subt. This does not necessarily imply I have observed an enhaced Ni use or focus but more like a relaxed temperament, less Ej and closer to Ip (compared with Te-subt). Something in the line of harmonizing ENTj.

This also fits with your enneagram variant, by the way.

[Narc]

It depends on what it is understood as each subtype.

According to you behavioral pattern here I would say Ni-subt. This does not necessarily imply I have observed an enhaced Ni use or focus but more like a relaxed temperament, less Ej and closer to Ip (compared with Te-subt). Something in the line of harmonizing ENTj.

This also fits with your enneagram variant, by the way.

I'd probably go with creative for the DCNH, but I'm not really super into it.

I was raised by an ILI and an ESI, there's every chance that my valued IEs have normalised across the board for the most part. I've felt very 'middle of the road' in many ways since my teens. Behaviour and temperament probably was a better starting point, to be honest.

[MensSuperMateriam]

I'd probably go with creative for the DCNH, but I'm not really super into it.

I was raised by an ILI and an ESI, there's every chance that my valued IEs have normalised across the board for the most part. I've felt very 'middle of the road' in many ways since my teens. Behaviour and temperament probably was a better starting point, to be honest.

I'm not too fond on it, but if I recall correctly, as it describes energy levels, creative does not mean "enhanced creative functions" but "enhanced Pe functions" (just in case). If both of your parents have influenced you about this aspect, you would be then something between H-LIE (due to ILI parent) and N-LIE (the ESI one). Anyway C and H are supposed to have similar energy levels, so C LIE also makes sense.

If correlation with ennegram is valid, D-LIE is archetypal E8 (8w7); N-LIE could be E1 or E6, C-ILE E7 and H-ILE any "relaxed" form. LIEs cannot be E9, so 8w9 should fit, maybe also some E7s. Not sure where to put E3 variants, probably something between C and D. Using forum examples, it could be as follows:

D-LIE: Ashton.
H-LIE: You.
C-LIE: No idea. Using ennegram, maybe FDG. Or maybe you.
N-LIE: Expat.

[davez]

Te-ENTj

[aisa]

I'm not too fond on it, but if I recall correctly, as it describes energy levels, creative does not mean "enhanced creative functions" but "enhanced Pe functions" (just in case). If both of your parents have influenced you about this aspect, you would be then something between H-LIE (due to ILI parent) and N-LIE (the ESI one). Anyway C and H are supposed to have similar energy levels, so C LIE also makes sense.

If correlation with ennegram is valid, D-LIE is archetypal E8 (8w7); N-LIE could be E1 or E6, C-ILE E7 and H-ILE any "relaxed" form. LIEs cannot be E9, so 8w9 should fit, maybe also some E7s. Not sure where to put E3 variants, probably something between C and D. Using forum examples, it could be as follows:

D-LIE: Ashton.
H-LIE: You.
C-LIE: No idea. Using ennegram, maybe FDG. Or maybe you.
N-LIE: Expat.

I kind of wish there was a description like this for all types... but the bolded part is what interests me especially - is it because of Te-leading or valued Se that there is this presumption that LIEs cannot be e9s?
(I'm asking because I read before, that (rare though they may be) some LSEs are 9w8s and they're Te-leads, so why not LIEs?)

@Narc regarding the subtype - gut feeling based partly on VI would be - LIE-Ni
(also, you look a lot like the guy I briefly dated years ago, now I know he was LIE )

[chemical]

Subtypes - the question is what do they even mean? T/F and N/S are a spectrum ultimately. So we do need some useful semi-discrete markers of what the two subtypes mean.

There are two answers I can give to this. For one, see silke's response in my thread: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tical-subtypes

The second interpretation is not the same as the first. The second is that you have a concept of the inherent rationality versus irrationality of the type. In LIE, Te-subtype could be seen as the rational subtype, in that effectively most or many rational endeavors can, despite being mainly intuitively driven, have a complementary sensory side (by contrast, an irrational endeavor may aim purely intuitive, not requiring sensation nearly much at all). You could see the Te-subtype as a subtype which essentially is so rationally focused that, while intuitive in preference, ultimately defers to reason and suppresses intuition sufficient that both sensation and intuition prove useful inputs.

The reason this isn't the same as the first is that the traditional conception of a strengthening of T/S in favor of N/F doesn't present the subtype as really occurring due to a greater rational focus, rather the S and T strengthenings might just coincide, rather than be expressly related (apart from that if you did strengthen N, you'd not strengthen S). The first (silke's response) deals with the idea of inertness, so it's simply saying the inert disposition is favored and thus those respective blocks are strengthened.

As a note, I have been considering the Ti-subtype for my type, but I interpret it more in line with the first of the two meanings I presented, but I think both can be valid. I'd kind of said as much in that thread. I tend towards identifying with the inert introvert as silke presented it, and the way she presented it was pretty similar to how I'd describe it.

Another way of looking at it which silke also gets into is ambiversion versus purer extraversion/introversion. However, I don't look at it this way, if only because strengthening in vertical subtypes happens in both the extraverted and introverted orientations. Like, in my type, both Te/Ti obtain a strengthening of potential, so the inertness isn't pointing to introversion as far as I know, although, if you're both introverted in a pronounced way and inert, it'll have the effect silke detailed in my view.

[MensSuperMateriam]

I kind of wish there was a description like this for all types... but the bolded part is what interests me especially - is it because of Te-leading or valued Se that there is this presumption that LIEs cannot be e9s?
(I'm asking because I read before, that (rare though they may be) some LSEs are 9w8s and they're Te-leads, so why not LIEs?)

Maybe I was too categorical in my affirmation, but LxE and E9 should still be an extremely uncommon combination (although maybe slighty more frequent in LSE if Si subt).

There are some ennegrams which are (or could be) widely spread through sociotypes, and there are others which are more concentrated around certain one(s). LIE and E9 do not match mainly due to temperament; Ej nature goes against E9 essence. Ej is the most proactive temperament: I want to do X, and consciously (not an impulse or whim Ep-like); whereas E9 is the least (or almost) proactive enneagram: I go with the flow.

E9 and Ip match quite well. The type which most likely belongs to it is SEI, followed by SLI (although E6 is also quite common). Ni doms can also be, but many of them settle in more instrospective enneagrams (E4 and E5, respectively). I guess some INxjs could also be, although less likely. As you can imagine, if SEI is the archetypal sociotype for E9, its conflictor hardly would fit.

Inside Ej, I guess Fe doms are more likely to be E9 than Te doms, as they can be, on average, a bit more relaxed. But still uncommon.

[Persephone]

Narc has got no subtype, he is universal.