How do subtypes affect intertype relationships?

[sar]

So, a couple of things that got me to go about subtypes:

1) I've seen it posted that there are 2 subtypes for each type. No, rather 4. Never mind, 16...wtf? which one is it?! Can't we just say people are different?

2) If they DO exist, then should they not alter relations? If two people act completely differently, then how would their relations with others be exactly the same? Unless of coarse the differences within type are VERY small...

3) Will the 3rd Batman be better than the 2nd?

[EyeSeeCold]

1.) There are multiple theories. 2 subtype(acc/pro) is the current popular one.

2.) Socionics measures static traits, so in Socionics, types still react predictably with other types. Subtype extrapolations(and the resulting intertype effects) should only account for reproducible sociotype pecularities.

3.) No way.

[sar]

"Subtype extrapolations(and the resulting intertype effects) should only account for reproducible sociotype pecularities."

Can you elaborate on this?

[DirectorAbbie]

1: There are multiple theories. The 2-subtype one is the current popular one.

2: I consider subtypes to be minor in relationships, but more distinctive in differentiating between identicals.

3. It doesn't matter. Batman is stupid.

[717495]

1 - There are multiple theories. Currently the 2-subtype one is the most popular.

2 - Sometimes you can see the subtype through the grass as it goes out hunting in the morning, but usually gains speed and other drugs later on in the day to where there are no optical records of it even existing.

3 - Probably not, which means I won't waste my time on it.

[EyeSeeCold]

"Subtype extrapolations(and the resulting intertype effects) should only account for reproducible sociotype pecularities."

Can you elaborate on this?

Intertype relations don't officially consider subtypes, but if subtypes were accounted for, the gain should be explanations for recurring differences between relations. Creating hypotheses is misguided when we can compare the empirical data.

[Pa3s]

And btw: There are different subtype systems, but most people use the 2-subtype system.

Yay for redundancy!

[woofwoofl]

So, a couple of things that got me to go about subtypes:

1) I've seen it posted that there are 2 subtypes for each type. No, rather 4. Never mind, 16...wtf? which one is it?!

All of the above, though the 2 subtype Accepting/Producing system is the most common, and the one I use almost exclusively. Anything more specific doesn't leave the necessary breathing room for people to be people, and can often be wrong as a result...

Can't we just say people are different?

Yep, and subtype's one of many ways of doing this

2) If they DO exist, then should they not alter relations?

Subtly, yes; the easiest example that comes to mind is the difference in my relations with Ne-ILEs as opposed to Ti-ILEs, I generally get along much better with the former...

3) Will the 3rd Batman be better than the 2nd?

Not until they put the nipples back on the batsuit

[chip]

the socionics.com website has mentioned subtypes but with minimal effort. They do recognize the accepting/producing dicotomy. They have yet to actually produce an article that is meant to explain the difference.

http://www.socionics.com/advan/qa.htm?1122150578 - this is a link to the socionics.com website (copy and paste it). The admin briefly clarifies the difference and alludes to the publication of a subtype theory in english but they have yet to make good on their word. My comment is "november 2, 2009. can't wait" so ya its been awhile.

Subtypes differ in mannerisms, physical appearance, dress and social behaviour. They display distinctive behavioural traits in times when they are at their best and their worst. The wikionics.com website mentions a proficiency in either your dominant or auxiliary function (first or second function). In that regard you could notice slight differences when given similiar circumstances.

Basically identicals may not appear identical unless they have the same subtype. That is an ESE-Fe appears identical with an ESE-Fe but an ESE-Si may not come across as having the same basic personality unless with another ESE-Si. So on and so forth for all 16 types.

Personal example: I have two friends who are identical but different subtypes. I wouldn't consider them to be identical with one another. I actually find it difficult to consider them identical without resorting to subtype theory to explain the differences.

[Jarno]

So, a couple of things that got me to go about subtypes:

1) I've seen it posted that there are 2 subtypes for each type. No, rather 4. Never mind, 16...wtf? which one is it?! Can't we just say people are different?

2) If they DO exist, then should they not alter relations? If two people act completely differently, then how would their relations with others be exactly the same? Unless of coarse the differences within type are VERY small...

1) 2 subtypes system is most easely observable in behaviour. if I need to further explain just ask.

2) yes they alter relationship in a slightly way. It's general consensus that same subtype duality is better than differing subtype duality.

[DividedsGhost]

So, a couple of things that got me to go about subtypes:

1) I've seen it posted that there are 2 subtypes for each type. No, rather 4. Never mind, 16...wtf? which one is it?! Can't we just say people are different?

2) If they DO exist, then should they not alter relations? If two people act completely differently, then how would their relations with others be exactly the same? Unless of coarse the differences within type are VERY small...

3) Will the 3rd Batman be better than the 2nd?

4) does the second subtype make the polr more pronounced? Can these types be used to benchmark and explain polr?

[Morcheeba]

They do alter relations. My brother is an ISFj- and I get along better with him than a INTj. It's not so much that I just have a closer bond with him, but since I'm an intuitive subtype I feel that I help him with his hazardous ways.

[Nowisthetime]

"Subtype duality" (in DCNH) seems common in married couples: Dominant+Normalizing or Harmonizing+Creative

Like my parents: D-ESI and N-LSI

[Krig the Viking]

It's been my experience that subtype most strongly affects the more minor, short-term, day-to-day type interactions, whereas the base type primarily affects the major, long-term, deeper aspects of the relationship.

For example, one person you might find annoying, even aggravating, in their habits of behaviour, but despite the frustration at all these annoying little things, hidden underneath it all there is a deeper connection and a genuine affection. You see this in buddy comedies a lot. This likely indicates clashing subtypes with compatible base types.

With someone else, you might find their mannerisms largely pleasant and easy to handle, but you find that you can't really connect with that person on a deeper level; their views and way of thinking is just too foreign to relate to on a really intimate level. This might indicate compatible subtypes with clashing base types.

Of course, there are a lot of different variables once you get into the specifics of how each type and subtype manifests. This is something I've been studying a lot lately, and hopefully will produce a big long article on it one of these days.

[Cat King Cole]

Looking forward to it

[sar]

Krig the Viking, great job! I like your explanation. Particularly in that it doesn't contradict itself unlike some other explanations I've heard...