So assuming that accepting/producing subtypes is a real phenomenon, an accepting subtype (leading function subtype) would get along better with their semi-dual?
So assuming that accepting/producing subtypes is a real phenomenon, an accepting subtype (leading function subtype) would get along better with their semi-dual?
Not sure which of these you're asking, but
Better with their semi dual than with their dual?
No.
Better with their semi dual than a producing subtype would be?
Yes, that would make sense. Accepting subtype would place less value on the creative function (semi dual's POLR).
ILE - Ti.
The idea of accepting/producing has little to do with subtypes imo. If an ENTp is a Ti subtype, Ti is his leading function. Obviously not under aushra's definitions, but in essence, in his mental awareness, Ti is his dominant function.
4w3-5w6-8w7
I don't think I'm really going to consider subtypes in my understanding of socionics. You say that having the producing subtype means you lead with your creative? So basically your type isn't your type.... your mirror is your type....
I think it's kind of a load. I agree with what rick said on his site about subtypes.... yeah, types have differences within themselves, but it's more than 2, it's like 40... lol
Also, I've noticed the more I interact with my dual, the more they start to get back to this "old school" version of ILI i have memorized in the back of my mind.....
This leads me to think that maybe the differences between the same type is just from lack of dualization and placing unnatural/uncomforatable emphasis on different functions due to external societal pressure?.....
I have incorporated multiple models into my experience, examining each of them, and expanding upon them. Also, I have neglected all models at times, attempting to isolate certain variables in functions/types/etc. That's hardly insular.Originally Posted by Expat
4w3-5w6-8w7
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Do I really have to explain it to you?
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
That's part of it
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
aahahaha, maybe I am a 3...*headdesk*
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Really? I thought that was kind of contrary to the nature of a 6...
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
How does that work?
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
The reactive harmonic style types have issues with trust and emotional abandonment. So, they fixate on the rescue/parent shit, to different degrees. The 4's, feeling defective, are waiting for someone to take care of them; the 6's, feeling insecure, want to temper this with a combination of support from others and being a support for others; the 8's, avoiding their weak side, want to be the one to help, or "parent", others. That's it in a nutshell.
4w3-5w6-8w7
Interesting.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Interesting.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
Interesting.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
thanks for derailing my thread homies
.
It's not so much about responding to him as such -- this forum has being going, recently, through a phase of mostly banality + a development of an atmosphere that some people have felt like complaining about - besides the old issues that never go away but nobody cares much about - like Phaedrus, tcaudilllg etc (Phaedrus seems to have essentially condemned himself to irrelevancy by just stating the same things in an increasingly crude 'you are an idiot' tone - actually from the little I catch of what he writes he has become a sort of cartoon of himself, I guess not even Jonathan would still bother to defend him now). Anyway, one of the few issues 'lying underneath' that could still generate some relevant discussion, especially as it was still emerging now and then, was the old 'Ni + model X' issue, which is why I brought it to the front with my 'On Ni' thread. Essentially an attempt to get some relevant discussion going. It has succeeded, up to a point, except that it's reaching a dead-end. But on the other hand, it has indirectly encouraged some other discussions and relevant threads, such as Diana's.
(by the way, Gilly, one of the most interesting and least banal things, recently, has been your blog).
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied