Change of Basic Attitude

[Brilliand]

I don't understand this at all. How would focusing on the internal statics of objects help me to think or act like someone who focuses on the external statics of objects? Wouldn't it make more sense to actually focus on the external statics of objects?

I can see how Ne might help you perceive the inner structure of someone's mind, but in order to actually imitate that structure on your own, you would actually have to use the corresponding functions, would you not?

Remember that functions aren't behavior - you're going through certain motions, but for your own reasons; you aren't acting with the motivation that an SLE would have. Indeed, you're mimicking the actions of others - the thoughts behind the actions, that give those actions their strength, aren't even yours.

I was thinking of as forming a strong mental image of the role that you were about to take on.

This is a good point -- the idea that Creative subtype strengthens both Se and Ne is something Gulenko said; I'm not sure of his reasoning behind it. However, the traditional Accepting/Producing subtype system says the same thing: when one Producing element is strengthened (such as Ne in LII), they all are. Presumably, in DCNH theory, this would also hold true, except that strengthened Ne would result in slightly less strengthened Se, and even less strengthened Ni and Si.

I see no reason why both things could not be true, though. In an Ne-Creative LII, for example, you could see Ne strengthened the most, Se strengthened the second most, Fi strengthened the third most (from the effects of strengthening Ne), and Ti strengthened the least (from the lesser effects of strengthening Se). That seems to reflect my own experiences, anyway.

Strengthened compared to what? As an LII, you have superego functions of certain strengths, and a subtype in a certain range. Your subtype would have effects on your superego functions beyond what is part of your type, but claiming that both subtypes have both superego functions stronger (which you haven't said specifically, but follows intuitively from what you've said) seems to make the "natural" superego function strengths both weaker than anyone will ever actually have - hence they can't really be called natural.

[Krig the Viking]

Remember that functions aren't behavior - you're going through certain motions, but for your own reasons; you aren't acting with the motivation that an SLE would have. Indeed, you're mimicking the actions of others - the thoughts behind the actions, that give those actions their strength, aren't even yours.

I was thinking of as forming a strong mental image of the role that you were about to take on.

If we're just talking about imitating the physical actions and mannerisms of a person, then yeah, I could conceivably see different elements being used for that. However, I don't think that's really what we're talking about when we refer to "wearing a mask" or "changing one's basic attitude". It's kind of like the difference between doing an impression of someone, and actually acting. To do an impression of Christopher Walken, all you have to do is imitate his speech and mannerisms. To actually play the role of Christopher Walken in a movie about his life, an actor has to do more than that: he has to think like Christopher Walken; in a sense he has to become Christopher Walken.

It's the same thing when I go into "SLE mode". I'm not trying to imitate the actions or mannerisms of an SLE, I'm trying to think like an SLE. I'm trying to respond to stimuli in the same way, and accomplish goals in the same way. I don't see any way of doing that, on that level of interactivity with the surrounding environment, without using Se.

I suspect this is in fact what actors do when they "get in character," especially if the character is quite different from themselves. They're making their minds think in ways more like the characters than themselves; they're putting more emphasis on different functions from the ones they normally use.

Strengthened compared to what? As an LII, you have superego functions of certain strengths, and a subtype in a certain range. Your subtype would have effects on your superego functions beyond what is part of your type, but claiming that both subtypes have both superego functions stronger (which you haven't said specifically, but follows intuitively from what you've said) seems to make the "natural" superego function strengths both weaker than anyone will ever actually have - hence they can't really be called natural.

I thought this initially as well, but I think the key is that there's subtypes in the Vital Ring as well as in the Mental Ring. If one has a Mental subtype, then all his Mental Ring functions would indeed be strengthened to one degree or another, as you pointed out, but his Vital Ring functions would still be closer to the baseline strength. Likewise, if one has a Vital subtype, then his Vital Ring functions would all be strengthened to one degree or another, while his Mental Ring functions would remain closer to the baseline.

The one possible flaw with that idea is that, as I said earlier, according to some versions of the standard Accepting/Producing subtype theory, all Accepting functions are strengthened at the same time, or all Producing functions are strengthened at the same time. I don't know if that's true or not, as I don't know what evidence and reasoning was used to arrive at that conclusion. If it is true, I would expect that a Mental subtype's Vital Ring functions would be strengthened significantly less than his Mental Ring functions, but that still doesn't quite resolve the issue of the "where is the baseline?" question.

I think the answer may lie in the fact that this "strengthening" is a dynamic process, not a static state. Like a muscle being used to lift weights, a function being used to process information becomes stronger than it was before. Presumably, it also atrophies when it is not used (vigourous mental activity -- "exercising the brain" -- is said to be a factor in preventing dementia, for example). Since the dimensionality of functions would seem to put an upper limit on the possible strength of a given function, then it seems likely in this case that the entire psyche would continue to be strengthened until the upper limit of the subtype's base function was reached.

I'm still interested in Filatova's subtype system, if anyone knows where I can find more information on that.

[Joy]

Personally I don't believe that types change, but of course there's no definitive answer. For example, a depressed EIE is just a depressed EIE, not an EII or an IEI (no matter how "introverted" they act).