Identifying DCNH Subtypes

[tcaudilllg]

DCNH does not work with functions but with elements. Dominant means strengthened Te and Fe, no matter in what position they are. The interesting thing is, the position of the strengthened functions seems to determine the shape of the face if my theory concerning Visual Identification of Subtypes is correct. That makes it much easier to work with DCNH subtypes. Unfortunately, nobody on this forum seems to be able to confirm that. The problem is that we don't have English descriptions except for the provisional ones which are not in all cases a good approximation...

Tcaudillg, during the last weeks I worked a lot with dual-types and some of the things you say actually make sense. What you still have to understand: Dual-type theory has to be logically consistent with the other subtype systems:
An INTj-INFp can only be a Ni-INTj if you want to use 8 subtypes.
A Ni-INTj can only be a H-INTj if you want to use 4 subtypes.
A Ni-INTj can only be a Ne-INTj if you want to use 2 subtypes.

Nope, nope, nope. Simply not the case.

You don't understand. This is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FACET OF PERSONALITY from subtype.

[JohnDo]

Nope, nope, nope. Simply not the case.

You don't understand. This is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FACET OF PERSONALITY from subtype.

Of course I understand that you think so. But where the hell is the difference? As long as you can't explain that, nobody will take your dual-type theory seriously...

You think the energy types determines what you are good at and what you are interested in. Well, that's what Gulenko tries to explain with subtypes, too. People of one and the same type can have different hobbies and very different jobs. That's the problem of intratype-differences. That's why it makes sense to use subtypes or dual-types. But where is the fundamental difference now?!

[krieger]

If there exist three different variations of type, the theory is so cumbersome and intractable that it is practically useless.

[tcaudilllg]

If there exist three different variations of type, the theory is so cumbersome and intractable that it is practically useless.

Well by my count there are 8 or more variations, so I guess the theory is useless to everyone except me. I love it though because it allows me to figure out what kind of person I'm dealing with despite minimal data.