why aint it a 3 subtype system with
lead subtype
creative subtype
demonstrative subtype
Printable View
why aint it a 3 subtype system with
lead subtype
creative subtype
demonstrative subtype
Because the demonstrative is unvalued and the ego fxs should be the most easily observable. Why u ask
Running my daily business through demonstrative:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...62a92b111a.jpg
Putting conscious effort to it? Not going to happen. It happens when it is needed and then it is quite effortless.
Well there's the DCNH subtype system which sort of gets to the possibility of enhanced demonstrative function.
Take LII for example.
LII-D, strengthened Te/Fe (extroverted rational functions)
LII-C, strengthened Ne/Se (extroverted irrational functions)
LII-N, strengthened Ti/Fi (introverted rational functions)
LII-H, strengthened Ni/Si (introverted irrational functions)
So an LII-H, in this theory would have a stronger demonstrative (as well as mobilizing) function.
Sounds like OP is trying to describe subtypes by the strength of certain functions rather than by the orientation and rationality of the elements in those positions.
It's not too far from DCNH if the categories were organized differently.
Primary Type
Auxiliary Type
Demonstrative/Mobilizing Type
Suggestive/Ignoring Type?
I think regardless of what your subtype is in the two-subtype system, everyone has a preference for a certain function. For example, a LII-Ne will have enhaced the following positions: Role (-Fi/+Fe), Creative (+Ne/-Ni), HA (+Si/-Se) and Demonstrative (+Ni/-Ne). Out of these enhacements, the person will have a preference. I'm not sure if it will always be one of the DCNH enhacements that get selected. For example, a Creative LII-Ne would have enhaced either their +Ne Creative, their -Se in HA, or their -Ne in Demonstrative. Not sure which of them get enhaced (or if it's all of them).
I think DCNH just flies in the face of socionics theory. The lead excludes the role, and the creative excludes the PoLR. Saying that both the lead and the role, or the creative and PoLR, are strengthened together makes no sense, especially once you realize that it basically makes all static types typically creative-normalizing and all dynamic types typically dominant-harmonizing. My observation has been more of axial strengthening of functions (basically, rather than Pe, Pi, Je, Ji, it's Nx, Sx, Fx, Tx) which also makes more sense in almost every interpretation of the theory. Organizing DCNH differently might be enough to save it though, but I'm not sure it needs saving at all when there are so many more useful things that are also easier to work with.