Machintruc's model phi subtypes

[machintruc]

Subtypes don't exist. I hate subtypes. They aren't really subtypes, but rather "variants". I mean, cognitive pattern is the same. As long as aspects of reality are 16, types will remain 16.

There are many subtyping systems. The most popular is the Initial/Terminal subtype system.

Initial means "Judging subtype", and Terminal means "Percieving subtype".

Here are the preferred physiological configurations for each type. I'd use Model Phi, but here I'll use enneagram because it's simpler.


Alpha :

ILE-Ne : 7
ILE-Ti : 5
SEI-Si : 4
SEI-Fe : 9
ESE-Si : 2
ESE-Fe : 3
LII-Ne : 5 (intimate)
LII-Ti : 5 (social)

Beta :

EIE-Ni : 6
EIE-Fe : 2
LSI-Se : 8
LSI-Ti : 1
SLE-Se : 7
SLE-Ti : 8
IEI-Ni : 4
IEI-Fe : 9

Gamma :

SEE-Se : 7
SEE-Fi : 8
ILI-Ni : 4
ILI-Te : 5
LIE-Ni : 5
LIE-Te : 3
ESI-Se : 8
ESI-Fi : 6

Delta :

LSE-Si : 1
LSE-Te : 3
EII-Ne : 1
EII-Fi : 6
IEE-Ne : 7
IEE-Fi : 9
SLI-Si : 9
SLI-Te : 6


Besides, you can see the "extravert" subtype has usally a more "lively" type.

[Ezra]

What you've just described are essentially the same as subtypes. You're just giving them a different name. Anyway, subtypes are simply a way of showing which of the two ego functions is most evident externally.

[machintruc]

What you've just described are essentially the same as subtypes. You're just giving them a different name. Anyway, subtypes are simply a way of showing which of the two ego functions is most evident externally.

Elements may or may not be evident or not because of physiological correlations.

For example, an outgoing IEI may be mistyped as EIE. Subtypes are an attempt to be some kind of 'safeguard' against mistyping.

I've done research, and adding the neurotransmitter stuff, we can say :

"Extrovert" Etypes are : (or E-phitypes, or global + phitypes)
All Sevens
Social and Intimate Twos and Threes
Intimate Eights, Nines, and Ones

"Ambivert" Etypes are : (or A-phitypes, or global 0 phitypes)
Intimate Fives and Sixes
Social Eights, Nines, and Ones
Preservational Twos and Threes

"Introvert" Etypes are : (or I-phitypes, or global - phitypes)
All Fours
Preservational and Social Fives and Sixes
Preservational Eights, Nines, and Ones

High levels of neurotransmitters contribute to Socionic Extroversion
Low levels of neurotransmitters contribute to Socionic Introversion
High levels of dopamin and norepinephrin contribute to Myersian Extroversion
Low levels of dopamin and norepinephrin contribute to Myersian Introversion


An extrotim with an extrovert subtype is likely to be physiologically extroverted, and an introtim with an introvert subtype is likely to be physiologically introverted.

An introtim with an extrovert subtype, or an extrotim with an introvert subtype are likely to be physiologically 'neutral'.

**E-*e : E-Phitype
**I-*i : I-Phitype
**E-*i and **I-*e : A-Phitype

For example, what does mean ? High dopamin level ? Not necessarily. When a low or average dopamin type (i.e. 124569), the thing is more fine-motor-oriented. When an high dopamin type (i.e. 378), the thing is more gross-motor-oriented.

And what does mean ? Empathy ? At least, for the 279 group. But when dealing with the 468 group, it's not "let's be good friends, and be cool to each other", but rather "I know your motives, don't lie to me, retard !". The first is more stereotypical of , the second more of .

Are SEI's accomodating or hostile ? Nines or Fours ? Fe sub or Si sub ? Do SEI Fours look ? They lack liveliness, so they don't really seem that , but they still perceive the world as in the context of . They just don't really express because they aren't motivated for.

I have lots of examples like that.

The fact subtypes are a way to "describe clearly expressed traits", as Gulenko would say, doesn't mean a subtype system should be based on information elements.

But we should be wary with subtyping systems. As an extreme, wanting to find subdivisions of socionic types would make this :

http://informacionika.narod.ru/

This website explains a theory of 16'777'216 socionic types.

Whatever... I have a better idea. Let's have a fractal socion with an unlimited number of types.

[Phaedrus]

Your theory implies absurd and obviously false statements, machintruc. Therefore it is crap and should be abandoned as soon as possible. No need to dig into the details when the foundation is incorrect.

[machintruc]

Your theory implies absurd and obviously false statements, machintruc. Therefore it is crap and should be abandoned as soon as possible. No need to dig into the details when the foundation is incorrect.

Do you have a better idea !?

[Phaedrus]

Do you have a better idea !?

Of course I have. But I have already stated my general view on the Enneagram and the reasonable correlations between that model and Socionics.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Do you have a better idea !?

To start with, can you please explain to me the conclusive proof that ennegram and psychological type are the same? This is the initial part of your assumption. Then we may be in a position to examine the remainder.