Subtypes in Duality Relations

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I changed my mind. Subtypes are a very important aspect to socionics.

For example as an IEI-Ni, I'm definitely most attracted to SLE-Se rather than SLE-Ti.

Also, there is just too many differences between the subtypes to ignore them. I thought this difference was subtle and in a way, it is. But it's kinda like having 3 different major buffs in world of warcraft - which can be a huge deal you know. It makes quite a big difference between identical types, I'd say between 15-20% (rough estimate).

I'm the more withdrawn 'lost' type of IEI, the type that's more stoic and less of a people person, Fe subtypes are just different. They're more cheery, bubbly and enthused. Also IEI-Fes can be extroverts in the MBTI sense. I don't think IEI-Nis can be extroverts.

[Sirena]

Hmmm, every time I read the differences between the subtypes described, I think I have to be Ni sub.

*random comment*

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I think an example of an IEI-Fe extrovert is that one guy from the old willy wonka movie, didn't he play willy wonka?

Gene Wilder! Yes, that's it.

[Jarno]

I changed my mind. Subtypes are a very important aspect to socionics.

For example as an IEI-Ni, I'm definitely most attracted to SLE-Se rather than SLE-Ti.

Exactly. Good observing!

[mikemex]

I'm IEE-Ne and find SLI-Si far more attractive than SLI-Te.

[Jarno]

I'm IEE-Ne and find SLI-Si far more attractive than SLI-Te.

Nice. Oke let's settle it then. Same subtypes are better then differing subtypes.

[717495]

I thought I read this from a few areas, that in socionics, the most compatable dual relation (when subtype is given) is when one type is of leading subtype and their dual is of creative subtype, visa versa. I don't see how this idea is explained, but I've gotten it from a few sources and various vibes. What is the answer?

[07490]

polikujm, where is the sources?

[1981slater]

anyway, duality is not everything

[07490]

Semi-duality is everything! Mwahahahahahaha

Carla I've saved enough money for you NOT to do any research for the NEXT ten years! forget the boring math and dance with me in the Bahamas.

[1981slater]

Semi-duality is everything!

nope.

if duality is not everything --> conflicting is not nothing --> conflicting is something

Mwahahahahahaha

jajajajajajaja

[1981slater]

*End of anti-carla operations*

Let's get back to the thread:

[07490]

lolz Let's do it!

Show me your hands, we are not going to stop, just try not to look back.

[717495]

anyway, duality is not everything

anyway, since you can't come up with a more catchy theory . . .

polikujm, where is the sources?

I don't recall.

[717495]

Simple enough I guess.

[07490]

anyway, since you can't come up with a more catchy theory . . .





I don't recall.

Oh ok, because that if there is, it contradicts a lot of what it is not suppose to be when we talk about subtypes.

[Creepy-]

I have not read that anywhere. Usually I read that it's perceiving subtype with perceiving subtype and judging subtype with judging subtype. I find this to make more sense both in theory and from personal observations.

+1

This is what I've come to think as well, based on what I've read and seen irl.

[sigma]

if duality is not everything --> conflicting is not nothing --> conflicting is something

I agree. Theoretically speaking, some misguided IEI might become curious about how would he interact with a LSE girl and might end up smoking marijuana and having rather nice sex. Theoretically!

[717495]

I be keepin all my subtypes in one basket, if you know what I fuckin mean

[Jarno]

I thought I read this from a few areas, that in socionics, the most compatable dual relation (when subtype is given) is when one type is of leading subtype and their dual is of creative subtype, visa versa. I don't see how this idea is explained, but I've gotten it from a few sources and various vibes. What is the answer?

it's certainly not true.

We've had a thread on it, last month or so.

All the subscribers said they had clearly the best compatibility/magnetism between corresponding subtypes.

Which has been my experience also.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

In the past i've deliberated a little over which ones the best. In practice has shown me that judging function sub type goes better with judging function sub type, and perceiving subs go better together.

The theory behind it makes most sense to me as well.

[thePirate]

In this dualization article:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=34095

it states:

"Douala should "get used" to each other, learn recognize the signals given by different functions. Until that happens, there are inconsistencies and misunderstandings. dualization relations are most favorable for the types with different subtypes: if one is stronger rational function, then the other must be irrational subtype - more developed an irrational function (Sancho Panza and Don Quixote, Niels Bohr and Bohr, Margaret - "tight" and "slim" types: logical "Don Quixote" and touch "Dumas"). "

"It is the fact that the human psyche developed unevenly, forcing search Douala. After dualization mental balance is restored, disappears se "bias" which may give rise to conflicts, tensions between people. We must note one important fact. If the subtypes do not match (two rational or two irrational), then partners. seem more simple. Hence - the loss of interest in each other. In addition, value-cultural orientation, if they are different, can impede dualization. It plays the role of the law of psychology: innate qualities of individuals must be additional, and acquired education - similar. Gap adverse subtypes can leave their enemies, especially if it's political leaders (eg, ethical subtype of "Hamlet" - Trotsky and logical subtype of "Gorky" - Joseph Stalin, the political rivalry that escalated into severe hostility in Unlike the intuitive "Hamlet" - Molotov, Stalin, who took the program and unconditionally followed it all his life). I must say that man, finding the duality feels psychic protection, comfort and safety, which greatly facilitates his life. The fact that the problems are for most excruciating Pego, are the source of his mistakes, doubts and anxieties, it is best resolved its dual. Douala quickly soothe each other.
"

any thoughts on this?

[Words]

From the duals I know with subtypes, I agree that rational-irrational pairing works better.

[Creepy-female]

"until that happens, there are inconsistencies and misunderstandings. dualization relations are most favorable for the types with different subtypes: if one is stronger rational function, then the other must be irrational subtype - more developed an irrational function"

= Duality relations with Jx/Px subtypes is more beneficial than Jx/Jx or Px/Px?

"We must note one important fact. If the subtypes do not match (two rational or two irrational),

= (Jx/Jx or Px/Px I'm assuming)

then partners. seem more simple. Hence - the loss of interest in each other."

Isn't this a negative value judgment?

I'm not following the logic/language here. I thought it said Jx/Px is more beneficial, but then it says if you have Jx/Px you get a loss of interest, so I'm assuming they don't go together, unless you're in a universe where the subtypes do not match (beneficial) but they're..less interesting (non beneficial)? Ugh!

[Words]

Dolphin, I agree it's confusing. As I understand it, duals can pass each other by, if they're a better fit sub type then this is even easier, as it's or they are too 'simple' seeming at first. Don't know about you but people seem more attracted to those where there's some sort of challenge at first, which can make it initially exciting.

[Creepy-female]

Dolphin, I agree it's confusing. As I understand it, duals can pass each other by, if they're a better fit sub type then this is even easier, as it's or they are too 'simple' seeming at first. Don't know about you but people seem more attracted to those where there's some sort of challenge at first, which can make it initially exciting.

Okay that makes sense. So what this is saying is Jx/Px > Jx/Jx or Px/Px via actual compatibility but Jx/Jx or Px/Px > Jx/Px via beginning interest level?

[Words]

Yes

Except people being people JxPx might still be ... lucky enough to be initially interested in each other due to some damn fine sex-u-all chemistry

But all things being equal in the world of paper theory...

[ashlesha]

wow i thought the second paragraph was saying Jx/Jx or Px/Px "do not match" and thus seem simple to eachother. thats kind of ambiguously worded imo.

[thePirate]

if I understand this correctly "matching subtypes" in this article means =

Se-ESTp & Fe-INFp
Ti-ESTp & Ni-INFp

non-matching are these:

Ni-INFp & Se-ESTp
Fe-INFp & Ti-ESTp

non matching subtypes lead to a loss of interest as each seems more simple to the other. the article refers to matching subtypes as one irrational and one rational sub, its different from what we have traditionally come to believe are matching subtypes(which is both rational or irrational, literally matching in that sense); different meaning for the same term.

[golden]

if I understand this correctly "matching subtypes" in this article means =

Se-ESTp & Fe-INFp
Ti-ESTp & Ni-INFp

non-matching are these:

Ni-INFp & Se-ESTp
Fe-INFp & Ti-ESTp

non matching subtypes lead to a loss of interest as each seems more simple to the other. the article refers to matching subtypes as one irrational and one rational sub, its different from what we have traditionally come to believe are matching subtypes(which is both rational or irrational, literally matching in that sense); different meaning for the same term.

Pirate, I concur with your reading, and I noticed this, too. The article is saying--imo--that cross-subtypes are a better fit. Not what I've been led to believe 'round here.

I neither agree nor disagree with the idea at this point but am curious about the reasoning behind matching up subtypes, either way (rational/rational, irrational/rational).

If I consider the INFp/ESTp dual pairing per this article, just thinking ... Se-ESTp & Fe-INFp ...


Nonmatching, as you stated:

Ni-INFp & Se-ESTp
Fe-INFp & Ti-ESTp

Matching:

Se-ESTp & Fe-INFp
Ti-ESTp & Ni-INFp

So what would be the difference in blending Ni/Se or Fe/Ti, versus Se/Fe and Ti/Ni?

What I see with "my dual" so far (we could be Ni/Ti subtype pairing if the School of Ashton is correct) is that my Fe feeds his Se and vice versa. That's obvious to me, so it could stand to reason that Ni and Ti also feed each other readily.

I also see, within my own cognition, that Ni blends with Ti easily, and then it's harder for me to move from the intuiting and thinking realm into feeling, that I even struggle a bit to bridge from a sort of inner-imaging-and-analysis process to a "what do I feel about it" process, which comes second for me. (This is something I articulated about myself in the chatbox through conversation.)

So maybe the rationale here would be that the introverted functions easily blend and support each other, as do the extraverted functions?

[Words]

Yeah that's it actually with the same sub type thing.

Re general belief on forum, take it with a pinch of salt if you ask me, some people love to theorise more than try for experience.

[EyeSeeCold]

How can you make claims for Subtype dualization when subtypes themselves are not even precise and consistent?

[Galen]

Too hasty of a judgment. Sounds like whoever wrote this was trying to be too "X=Y" when the evidence to make such a claim simply isn't there. At least the evidence doesn't seem to be there from my perspective.

[Variant]

Anecdotal:

Dunno what I think, but if I am right to presume I am SEE-Se, I definitely find I get on more easily with the Te subtype of ILI. I find the Ni subtype to be far more interesting, at least from a distance, but relations with the Te sub comes quickly and naturally. Ni subtype tends to confuse me since most seem be highly expressionless when not engaged (and I notice they tend to wait to be engaged) and even when I think they want to be engaged, their complete lack of outward signal makes it very, very hard to engage them (at least for me even if I very much would like to) and most people leave them alone, feeling unsettled in their presence, feeling that they want to be left alone (whether it is true or not). And so I usually leave them alone though I have taken a few risks in trying to get to know them even though it felt weird as hell from my end, though usually they don't bite and so never got a 'who the fuck are you' reaction I had expected.

Te subtype is more vocal and responsive and more inclined to engage without waiting for someone to engage them, making it easier to respond to things they say and do and usually we come to realize we are very comfortable with each other and enjoy our rapport and so relations develop very quickly. The fact they are more obviously open and friendly in disposition helps, though they can suddenly snark at me, too, which can be off-putting and have had my feelings kind of hurt by that a number of times.

I also find misunderstandings happen more often with the Ni subtype, at least in past experiences, but that might have had more to do with my thoughtless nature in those times and saying thoughtless things in a thoughtless way. I also can never tell if they like me as a person or not and prefer to stay away than be nice and risk being pushed away (type of people where you initially never feel you know where you stand with them, prolly because of Fe PoLR). Those who are friends who are prolly Ni subtype are also those who I have less to say to, though enjoy being near them, nonetheless.

Point:
It's possible opposite subtypes make for ease of relations, but deep down, I feel the matching subtypes (same rationality subtype) have the potential to be more rewarding in the long run, but I could be totally wrong. I definitely find the matching subtype to be the most attractive, fwiw.

So if you were to choose, would you pick to "live your life" with a Ni sub or Te Sub ?

[Jarno]

same subtypes works better than different subtypes.
I'm 100% sure about this.

[Crispy]

Cross subtypes being better doesn't really make sense since without subtype theory the J types and the P types match. Very counter intuitive.

[jewels]

Isn't there quite a lot of debate whether subtypes even exist?

Let me make sure I have this right...

So before, the word on the street was that both rational subtypes were "YAY perfect match."

So Fi ENFp and Te ISTp = yay perfect.
Or Ne ENFp with Si ISTp = yay perfect.

And now it's saying one subtype should be rational and the other, irrational.

So, Fi ENFp with Si ISTp = yay perfect.
Or Ne ENFp with Te ISTp = yay perfect.

That's interesting because I'm pretty sure my hubby is an Si ISTp (I'm Fi ENFp). It used to bother me that we weren't "perfectly" matched with the subtypes. But I guess now we are.

I mean, he uses a lot of Te also, but if it's a choice between "lie in my comfy bed in fuzzy pjs and watch TV" and "use Te and think about business" he would always choose the former. Always.

Our horoscopes also recently changed to become better matched. So I guess if you wait long enough, the theory will change to fit your relationship. Lol

[blackburry]

I feel like my subtype changes with my mood.

Or it's changing as I get older, because honestly Idk which one I am.


I do see how matching subtypes could make for a smoother relationship.
However....nonmatching still offers a lot of growth...it just make take longer to become "dualized" and in sync?

[EyeSeeCold]

I feel like my subtype changes with my mood.

Or it's changing as I get older, because honestly Idk which one I am.

I agree with this. I accentuate or depending on my environment.

[redbaron]

hmm, interesting. I do find that things are initially smooth with non-matching subs. For example, assuming I am IEI-Ni, relations are easily started up and maintained with SLE-Ses. But Ti subs are more intriguing to me and hold my interest over the long run. But it could just be the ones I know since I haven't had experience with more than a small handful. (and this is assuming I'm IEI and not EIE...)