Do you think there's a direct correlation between the DCNH system and the two subtype system? I suspect rational subtypes are usually D and N while irrational subtypes are C and H. I'm interested in counter examples.
Correlations between DCNH and 2 subtype systems
Do you think there's a direct correlation between the DCNH system and the two subtype system? I suspect rational subtypes are usually D and N while irrational subtypes are C and H. I'm interested in counter examples.
I don't think they define these things precisely enough that there's a definite answer, but I came up with what I think is a good way of using the theories.
The idea is that the original theory of psychological types proposed by Jung was about the interface of personal psychology with information processing types. The truth is that the 4 functions of Jung and the other 2 dichotomies rational-irrational and introvert-extravert have one main difference, in that it seems like the latter two admit interpretations that can either be closer to information-processing or much closer to personal psychological facts (facts about temperament and so on).
I think of the subtypes such as LII-Ti, LII-Ne, etc as more about marking information-processing focuses, whereas we could say the dcnh is closer to the latter. So e.g. Ns emphasis the pedantic, formal, etc aspects of what one might associate with i-j.
I certainly think there's an overlap between the two, but not enough that I can't easily imagine there being cases where the two differ.
Aint DCNH about temperament?
I was thinking something similar from the model G that which the type are divided in externalities/internalities. What if those are temperament subtypes, where if you are the subtype of intuition or sensing (of them them) that would be preference towards C or H and if you are the subtype of logic or ethic you would be preference towards D or N, in the DCNH temperament theory. Ya it could be so, both theories from the same theorist.
@Tigerfadder That's similar to my idea of subtypes, except mine has more to do with the position of the function relative to the lead (e.g. ESE with Fe emphasized would be dominating, with Si would be creative, then probably Ti would be normalizing and Ne harmonizing but I'm not sure) rather than a stand-alone function. I also think it would be possible for the individual functions to have more or less degrees of emphasis.
I do not see the value in hundreds of theories that does not make a whole, tbh. All serious socionics theories should be able to apply to all areas of socionics to falsify itself. Reinin, ITR and Model A.
No, DCNH isn't a temperament subtype theory. I guess Gulenko specifically said so. However, I've got a secondary subtype theory!Originally Posted by Tigerfadder
What is yours?
Hm. I thought I posted it on this forum, but now I can't find it. I'll make a separate topic.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote