DCNH Subtypes: The Empirical Portrait by Vera Borisova

dcnh.jpeg

DCNH Subtypes: The Empirical Portrait by Vera Borisova

[Translator's Note: This is part of a longer article on the DCNH subtypes by Vera Borisova, which can be found here. The following is a description of the four DCNH subtypes.]

See also:
- Book: 64 DCNH Profiles for Each Socionics Type by V. Gulenko
- System of DCNH Subtypes by V. Gulenko
- Gulenko's blog entries on DCNH types
- Subtyping Systems in Socionics
- Contact and Inert Subtypes


1. Dominant Subtype



The brightest, most vivid subtype -- within the limits of a type, and in general.

This subtype has the most semblance with the description of its type. One nuance to this: the Dominant subtype introvert is typically more extraverted (especially not in a socionics understanding, but in Eysenck’s understanding, i.e. lively, sociable, and outgoing), but still displays pronounced characteristic features of his type. If a typical introvert getting tired of communication will just go "hide in a corner", the Dominant subtype will instead drive everyone away and then grumble loudly that "Some-such keep walking around here".

The Dominant subtype is the most self-realizing out of the subtypes, especially in socio-cultural sphere; in my opinion most famous people, i.e. well-known actors, writers, politicians, etc. fall into the Dominant category.

In a group he/she is also the most of the most (vivid, strong, smart - depending on the base type. With a logical type - he is "the most intelligent", with the ethical type - the most excitable, with a sensing type - one that occupies the most space, etc., that is, the main type determines the sphere of Dominant's "achievements" and the specific way in which he or she attracts attention and claims leading positions. Dominants take on leadership explicitly, especially if this person is of ethical, sensing, or extraverted type. Logical-intuitives don't always deliberately seek to lead, but assume it by necessity: "so that no idiot will order me around".

When a person of Dominant subtype leaves the room, an impression is created is that not only one person left but a substantial part of the group.

If several people of Dominant subtype are stuck in one group, strong competition arises between them, even if their socionics intertype relationships are quite comfortable and there is no serious "reason to fight".

The easiest way to say it is that the Dominant subtype, firstly, pulls attention to himself or herself, and secondly, will "act commanding" and try to give orders to others. In addition, this will be done straightforwardly and bluntly. If the Dominant subtype resorts to any manipulation, then they will be sufficiently crude. Usually he/she simply tells up front what he/she needs from you. This infuriates everyone around except Normalizers. In commanding and giving orders, the Dominant subtype not only hands out tasks, but with his own confidence he also gives energy to perform that task. One can "go a long way" on Dominant subtype's energy, by simply joining his initiatives and helping to implement them (but, of course, you'll be going only in that direction that Dominant subtype needs).

Strangely enough, the Dominant subtype responds calmly to minor quibbles and requests from Normalizing subtypes to adhere to certain norms and order. And they may even actually adhere to it! If there is no Normalizing subtype nearby, the mess gets sent into a furnace or into the trash, and that's that.

The leading function of the Dominant subtype works "at full steam" and even further. In the sense that it's not just quietly and calmly processing information somewhere -- in the Dominant subtype it is evident at all times. If this function is Te, then the Dominant subtype is not just busy all the time: he is working on three jobs, and in between he speaks and teaches others what they should do. If he isn't working, then he imagines and thinks over various actions in his mind, and then, once again, talks about it, aloud and loudly, with confidence and an air of authority. (To imagine this, you need to multiply the usual manifestations of base function by 3.)

If, say, the Dominant subtype is Hamlet [EIE], it is not just emotions, but emotions from which the whole group "get excited and rolling", while Hamlet seemingly isn't doing anything but sits there quietly.

Dominant Yesenin [IEI] manages to command what you do.

Dominant Balzac [ILI] is energetic and rudely sarcastic.

Dominant Dostoevsky [EII] is sort of "an iron fist in a velvet glove": after a demonstration of softness and ethics emerges an equally demonstrative condemnation and desire to "educate".


2. Creative Subtype



This subtype, conversely, is least similar to the canonical type descriptions. This is the most flexible subtype. There is a strong inclination towards its "mirror" type, as if the 1st and 2nd functions have switched places. The Creative subtype introvert is thus similar to its mirror extravert, and the creative extravert - to its mirror introverted type. And in general all type features of Creative subtype are watered down.

An impression also arises that even the intertype relationships have been "watered down" for Creative subtype -- because he conducts himself "outside the box" by the standards of his type.

In one way or another, Creative subtype finds himself in the sphere of ideas and creativity, and not necessarily artistic creativity -- it may well be scientific, or a hobby; generally a creative element is introduced into any pursuit, otherwise the Creative is uninterested. If someone else's product falls to into his hands, the Creative subtype will remake it, "upgrade it", rethink it.

For Creative it is easiest to demonstrate the 2nd function, but in principle variations are possible. Incidentally, if the produce of creative activity of Dominant subtype is immediately demonstrates, shown off, and even "hyped" -- the Creative subtype can easily create solely for himself, write without any hopes or intentions for his writing to get published, or for a narrow circle of people for whom this might be necessary or interesting.

The Creative subtype isn't really discerning of various social-relational games, but he doesn't protest if he is drawn into such a game.

Easy-going and easily moved, "a person with eccentricities", capable of an unusual or a completely alien act for his particular sociotype (for example, Robespierre, not only hitchhiked himself, but also sent his wife and children to stand alongside a road).

The Creative is not interested in anything besides that which is truly interesting to him -- in the sense that he ignores everything else (passively or actively). This includes people (for Creative logical types -- "people, electricity poles, no difference"). May actively renounce something if it hinders him or her personally. While at this, the Creative subtype often gets carried away, since he/she isn't really discerning and informed on the topic he's renouncing because, as topic lies outside of the scope of his interests.

Creative subtype's attitude to standards, in general, is negative or indifferent, which is displayed especially clearly in the aspect of role function: that is, Creative subtype does not strive to abide by "generally accepted" norms and standards. (During an attempt to wash fruit bought at a market, Julia ("ILI" Balzac) was genuinely surprised -- what for? At my explanations "So they are clean", and that "I may eat unwashed fruit, but it shouldn't be given to a small child unwashed," Julia just waved her hand dismissively.).

3. Normalizing Subtype



The Normalizing subtype truly tries to order and organize everything that is within his sphere of action or influence. "The handles on all the pots should point to one side" -- this quote from the autobiography of Khmelevskoy (about her husband) is ironic, but it certainly describes a Normalizing subtype. However, the sphere of his organization has a clear boundary: that which is inside the boundary is "my stuff", "that with which I can be identified". "My house," "my job," etc. "My stuff" must stay in a specific order, that the Normalizing subtype has determined. Additionally, this order may or may not be noticeable from the outside. Regardless of this, any violation of order the Normalizing subtype receives painfully, much like a pebble in the shoe.

Things which symbolize order -- compartment trays, carry bags with partitions (for screws, for example), sets of identical items (jars of spices, dinnerware), drawers, cabinets, holders, organizers -- bring enjoyment to the Normalizing subtype.

Any activity the Normalizing subtype begins with establishing order, structure, designation of boundaries, methods and times. He is very efficient and diligent. He is not afraid of monotonous work, "nit-picking", polishing and finishing work begun by someone else. It is difficult for him to start on something, but once he "gets into work" the process goes much better. It's much more enjoyable to work when "the end is in sight", when the main part has already been done.

If there is no opportunity to "create order", it is possible to get rid of the unsettling feeling over it by method of moving the "mess" beyond the borders of "my stuff". "Other people have the right to as much as much mess as they want, and that's none of my business." This happens when someone else has the right to the territory or activity, or when the activity is shared but the partner protests against organization. Then Normalizing subtype drops into "Whatever you say, I will do" mode, erasing the image of mass chaos from his awareness by the force of will.

In general, withdrawing from a situation is a common way for Normalizing subtype to resolve problems. This method of resistance and disagreement - passive denial and inaction - are aimed at the Dominant subtype; however, it may also be indicative of a lack of energy (interest, time, etc). In that case, the Dominant subtype adds more energy (pressure, motivation), and then the reason for Normalizing subtype's reaction will become clear -- either the Normalizing subtype will do what Dominant wants from him (lack of energy, resources, time), or he will completely leave the Dominant's influence and run away (a disagreement).

In comparison with other subtypes, the Normalizing subtype is dull, inexpressive, boring. But he is also balanced and "thick-skinned", as the Normalizing-Dominant pair is in general. He's difficult to offend and generally passive. His motto is: “Well, let's see how you'll show yourself.”

The Normalizing subtype analyzes, weighs things out, estimates pluses and minuses. By default, he/she leaves much in relationships to the discretion of the partner, though coming to his/her own conclusions on the type "business projects won't work out with this person”, “not to entrust them information”, etc. the Normalizing subtype formulates negative relationships by the way of: “Don't be connected to this person!”

Does not strive to participate in competitive struggle, not ambitious. This does not mean that the Normalizing does not develop and grow - he/she fully develops and improves, for example, in professional work; he is diligent, he strives to do his job as well as possible. However, for the most part the Normalizing subtype concedes the sphere of ambition to the Dominant subtype, not even trying to compete with him (or with anyone in general). He prefers to be second.

Cleaning and ordering for Normalizing subtype is a means of removing of discomfort. When “something is wrong”, he begins to clean up in his living space (the main thing here is not “to clean up dust and mud”, but “to arrange things in their places”).

With Normalizing logical types it is especially noticeable in their houses that each thing has its place, and by default it is put there. The "order” of ethical types is more difficult to track down; however, try to shift anything from place to place in their apartment or a house, and immediately - by the reaction of owner - it will become clear that these things haven't been placed there haphazardly. Moreover, the Normalizing subtype won't curse or scold but simply move everything “as it should be”, right then and there. Although he might perhaps frown.

Normalizing subtype calls for compliance to the rules of his own role function (other types, of course, also adhere to norms in sphere of role function, but this is more noticeable with people of Normalizing subtypes, especially the demands of same from others). For example, Dumas [SEI] is adamant in his desire that the guests won't be running late, Balzac [ILI] - will make sure that everyone washes their hands before eating, and Jack [LIE] calls for control over emotions: “We've expressed our sympathies and worries - and this is enough!”

4. Harmonizing Subtype

Most important is the weather in the house…

The Harmonizing subtype is sufficiently lively and conspicuous; however, in comparison with the classical socionics type descriptions the person is “suspiciously” nice. It seems as if the negative features of his sociotype have no relation to the Harmonizing subtype.

The Harmonizing subtype is soft and delicate; although these qualities are somewhat limited by the capabilities of his type. That is, Harmonizing subtype of ethical type is truly a very ethical person. He always wants to make sure that all is well. Harmonizing subtype of logical type wishes for this also, but with logicals for some reason it often happens in the manner of: "He wished it turned out better, but it turned out as always."

In contrast to the Normalizing/Dominant pair, the Harmonizing and Creative subtypes are comrades with a "delicate structure of soul". Especially, of course, the Harmonizing subtype: sensitive, empathizing, touchy, altruistic, self-sacrificing.

Like the Dominant subtype, the Harmonizing subtype is a connector, that is, he actively establishes necessary connections with his environment. However, where the Dominant subtype does so crudely and directly, the Harmonizing subtype proceeds by careful manipulation (he's capable of multiple step manipulative combinations - for the purpose that the other person truly gets better, of course. )

The Harmonizing subtype monitors social desirability and tries to fit into it. (“The gentleman is that man who calls a cat a cat, even having stepped on it in darkness…” [i.e. a gentleman doesn't curse]) This is especially true of gender stereotypes. Moreover, if the Harmonizing subtype has armed himself with a gender stereotype, then he doesn't simply behave in accordance with it - he brings it to its ideal. This is the Ideal Man (“I've gone to earn money for my beloved!”) or the Ideal Woman.

For Harmonizing subtype to do something “for himself/herself” -- he/she doesn't really really want this. Now, if a deed needs to be done for a close or beloved person -- then it's whatever they want.

The Harmonizing subtype is always ready to help, already read to meet others halfway, thereby inconveniencing himself with this. In general, he frequently lives with feelings of discomfort and strain, for which he consciously signs up. That which happens easily, by itself, doesn't have sufficient value for him. But behold! If one performs an act for another that's not very pleasant - that will be a sufficiently valuable and ponderous Good Deed. Therefore, Harmonizers are often seen doing something with the painful function. When people mention using PoLR as “secondary creative”, this is about Harmonizing subtype.

The Harmonizing subtype can't stand it when someone is fighting and arguing. Here again he tries to help, to fix the situation, because the very instance of others fighting makes him feel uneasy.

The Harmonizing subtype has an idea of how he should behave, so that others around him won't feel badly. He also evaluates those around him from the point of ethics of their behavior, and seeks to educate them. He suffers greatly if he himself has committed an act which is not irreproachable.

The Harmonizing subtype finds it difficult to insult a person directly, to make accusations against a person "head on", even if this person has deserved it. He/she either tries to express displeasure and resentment delicately, somehow, or keep silent and sulk. Even when it is already obvious that he/she thinks poorly of someone, he/she comes across something like this: "I think poorly of you, but for the sake of our good relationship, I will not say anything about it". As a result, a "delicate hint" from the Harmonizing subtype can be taken as much more offensive and upsetting than a direct "insult/hit".

For example a Harmonizing subtype would say: "Thank you for lack of birthday congratulations. This was very nice, ladies and gentlemen.” while a Dominant subtype would say: "Today is my birthday! Quick, everybody congratulate me!” And then there is no problem…

Or here is another situation - a guest has walked in street shoes further than the home owner would like [in some countries and cultures it's typical to change shoes when entering a home]. The Dominant subtype puts a stop to this right away: you won't have time to enter, you'll immediately be told where to remove your boots. ("Where do you think you're going?" the Dominant subtype would say.) The Normalizing subtype will mutter to the side: "And why is it that everyone walks in their boots past my wonderful green custom bristly rug, that itself is the size of the entire lobby?” (he himself will rearrange all the shoes). The Creative subtype is not at all certain that he/she will notice anything; or if he will notice, he won't consider it unimportant to say anything about it. But the Harmonizing subtype will keep silent out of delicacy, but will remember: how could this guest enter his home in street shoes, the bastard!!?



Related discussions:

DCNH subtypes Empirical Portraits discussion thread
Identifying DCNH subtypes
Observations and comments on DCNH subtyping system
How each DCNH types dominates the other - DCNH benefit relations
How do u even go about finding someone's DCNH type?
DCNH Creatives and discussion of other subtypes
Subtype Inconsistencies
Best Subtype System
Inert-Contact / Vertical / Club Subtypes
Hidden Agenda and Subtypes
Subtypes and PoLR
Subtypes and the PoLR 2
Do subtypes affect functions?
Do people change types or subtypes?
Subtypes...Do they exist?
If subtypes exist, then shouldn't they alter "relations"?

.